MISTRIAL! Soros-Funded DA Alvin Bragg May Have Hidden Exculpatory Evidence in Trump Case

PJ Media ^ | 03/22/2023 | Matt Margolis

[SeekAndFind]

It has been reported that Trump could be indicted as early as Wednesday, but it’s anyone’s guess when and if it will actually happen. However, it is becoming more apparent that the case, which legal experts believe is very weak, has been rigged against Trump.

On Monday night, during an interview with Tucker Carlson on Fox News, Robert Costello, the surprise witness in the case, discussed his testimony before the Manhattan Grand Jury earlier in the day. Costello stated that he testified for two hours in front of Soros-funded DA Bragg’s grand jury and claimed that during that time, he came to the conclusion that the DA’s office was not interested in discovering the truth.

“I just spent two hours or so testifying before the grand jury in downtown Manhattan, and I got my point across,” Costello said. “Although it was clear to me that the Manhattan DA’s office did not want to get to the truth. I need to explain that a little bit. I called them up after I saw Michael Cohen on TV, stating things that he said he was going to tell the grand jury and had told the grand jury that were contrary to what he told us when we first represented him in April of 2018. So I’m sitting at home watching these lies, and I said I’ve got to do something about it. I don’t represent Donald Trump, but I do stand for justice. And I think I have a legal obligation to inform both sides. So that’s what I did.”

The situation is alarming but not entirely surprising, given what we already know about DA Alvin Bragg. However, things might actually be even worse than previously thought, because Bragg may have deliberately hidden exculpatory evidence from the grand jury.

[isthisnickcool]

Weak case? No case.

Costello nuked them.

[Manuel OKelley]

Malicious prosecution is extraordinarily hard to prove as the perpetrator of said prosecution can usually use being incompetent as a defense, however in a situation like this it seems within the realm of possibilities should a venue where any semblance of justice exists

[thegagline]

“United States v. Williams 504 U.S. 36 (1992) “Respondent Williams was indicted by a federal grand jury for alleged violations of 18 U.S.C. 1014. On his motion, the District Court ordered the indictment dismissed without prejudice because the Government had failed to fulfill its obligation under Circuit precedent to present “substantial exculpatory evidence” to the grand jury. Following that precedent, the Court of Appeals affirmed.”

You omitted that fact that the Supreme Court REVERSED the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

A lie by omission is still a lie.

[Mr. K]

Whether or not Bragg goes ahead, the damage is done.

He can even go on TV and say “We could not get enough people to testify the way we wanted” and the sheeple will say “Oh, so he’s guilty, but they won’t testify for you...??”

Trump needs to go on the offensive and sue the crap out out Bragg AND New York State.

[oldernittany]

Well apparently falsifying evidence to a FISA court and pleading guilty to lying to a Federal Judge does not get you disbarred. Rather it gets you a lucrative consulting gig at MSNBC.

[avital2]

i think this is like every other Dem move: grab the headlines with the brazen accusation, then drag out the proof phase. by the time people figure out there is no ‘there’ there the damage has been done. people believe the accusation and never check back to see if it was ever proven. this ‘hoax’ approach is a proven strategy for them and it always drags many down the road of disinformation.

[chuckee]

Much of the reason the phrase “a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich” exists is because the exculpatory rules only apply AFTER the defendant is indicted during the trial phase. Under the law, prosecutors need only present witnesses and evidence favorable to their case before the grand jury and need not share anything with the subject of the investigation. It is what it is and that is why these Dem urban prosecutors are able to have their media political show trials where they can unfairly ruin the reputation of the subject. Even when they lose the case, the damage had already been done.

[blueunicorn6]

Nations hostile to The United States control Soros/Clintons/Obama/Bidens who control the Democrat party which controls Democrats.

This isn’t a crosstown high school basketball rivalry.

This is foreign dictators trying to weaken and destroy The United States.

[V_TWIN]

GOOD!

[Mouton]

Not sure about ny state rules of criminal procedure. Your cite is a fed case. Fed rules require substantial exculpatory evidence to be admitted if known.

[discostu]

It’s the grand jury. Usually defense isn’t even there, exculpatory evidence doesn’t matter. That’s for the real trial. The grand jury is just for prosecution to convince them they “have a case”. That’s it.

[Sacajaweau]

I think Bragg should be working on his resume. The party is about to throw him under the bus.

[j.havenfarm]

I’m a constant voice on this forum urging people not to think of lawsuits as magic. Manuel is correct that malicious prosecution is difficult to prove, and the cause of action doesn’t even come into being until they pull the trigger and bring the indictment. Trumps play, if this fizzles, now or alter, is a political one: these cowards came after me and don’t have the nerve )or ability) to follow through. A lawsuit that would end years from now is worthless

[StAnDeliver]

"The situation is alarming but not entirely surprising, given what we already know about DA Alvin Bragg. However, things might actually be even worse than previously thought, because Bragg may have deliberately hidden exculpatory evidence from the grand jury."

[Boogieman]

Yeah, there’s no requirement to present exculpatory evidence to a grand jury, and since there is no defense in a grand jury, there is no requirement to provide it to the defense either.

Only if they exclude that when there is an actual trial would it become an issue.

[Eleutheria5]

If it’s still in front of a grand jury, it isn’t time for discovery yet. Plenty of time to deliver the exculpatory material.

[Spacetrucker]

You have just described lawfare.

[bayouranger]

KeK.

[curious7]

It would seem that changes to such a procedure need to be made so the DA in such a case has skin in the game. If the exculpatory evidence present at the time of the Grand Jury presentation isn’t included, and the accused is declared innocent in a trial jury, the DA ought to be publicly hanged as a warning to other bureaucrats who want to abuse their position and authority.

[kvanbrunt2]

In the days when Grand Juries and the rest of the judicial system was still constitutional, maybe 100 years ago. The Grand Jury was run by citizens and there were knowledgeable people on it. their job was to investigate grand crimes. The grand jury technically isn’t run by a prosecutor. It is run that way now because people don’t know how the law works. Its purpose was to protect citizens when there were grand crimes that needed investigation and all information that the grand jury wanted to uncover concerning the crime was available to them.