The Soros-backed Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg isn’t known for his intellectual dexterity.  The NY DA’s made-up crimes against President Trump look more like an Andrew Weissmann special. 

The Manhattan DA doesn’t have the ability to come up with the comingled mess of a case that his office is attempting against the President of the United States, Donald Trump. He’s just not too bright.  So he needed lots of help.

Reports are that his Chief Assistant DA Meg Reiss is the mastermind but was this really her insane and sadistic idea?

This looks and smells like an Andrew Weissmann special.  Weissmann, a little man with a secret personal life, was behind numerous prosecutorial crimes in large cases since his early days in New York in the 1990s.  He has a horrible track record of prosecutorial abuse.

Andrew Weissmann was intimately involved in some of the most egregious corruption scandals in US history. Weissmann was involved in FBI activities with the mob in New York in the 1990s.  He was a key member of the Enron Task Force in the early 2000s and also was involved in the sale of Uranium One under Obama.  After all of his corrupt acts, he then led the corrupt Mueller Special Counsel. 

In all of these scandals, Weissmann’s actions have been consistently corrupt and abhorrent. 

Attorney Sidney Powell shared the following with Joe Hoft at The Gateway Pundit about Andrew Weissmann:

The hallmark of the Department of Justice for decades has been to seek justice not convictions and if that meant letting a guilty person go free to make sure the government did it all right, then that was supposed to happen.

But Mr. Weissman, he couldn’t spell the word “ethics” despite the fact somebody actually had him teach a course in it one time, I think over in England.  His mantra is ‘the end justifies the means’… he targets people, individuals. And you’re right, I had no doubt from the moment he was picked for the Mueller Special Counsel operation, that he would have filed RICO charges against President Trump and seized every asset he ever had, if there had been any way he could do that.

He’s just filled with hatred for apparently most Americans and certainly anybody affiliated with President Trump.  And he’s willing to do anything to destroy them. 

Attorney David Schoen shared on Weissmann:

I have said, from my personal experience at least with this case, I consider Andrew Weissmann to be the most ethically bankrupt prosecutor I have ever encountered, and that’s a pretty broad spectrum of prosecutors over the course of my career…

Roger Stone says about Weissmann:

I believe what the bible says in Hebrews 10: Vengence is served for the Lord – but there is a special place in hell for Andrew Weissmann.”

Rudy Giuliani, former New York prosecutor, America’s mayor, and President Trump’s friend and attorney, has much to say about Weissmann’s corruption.

Andrew is a desecration of a prosecutor.  He is, he is a person who has disgraced every single ethical tenet that prosecutors hold dear.

I personnally went through…the things that he did to [Paul] Manafort which was psychologial torture that he wouldn’t be allowed to do in a prison camp.

He indicts people for crimes that don’t exist.  He makes them up.  He’s been reversed by the Supreme Court for doing that unanimously.  The only reason he’s kept in the Justice Department is he’s a convenient tool for the Democrats who want to criminalize politics.

Weissmann withheld the identities of his witness in a mob case in the 1990s and put at least one innocent man away for life.  His witness was the suspected murderer in the incident the alleged was being prosecuted for.  Weissmann withheld this from the court.

In the 2000s Weissman made up a law that led to the indictment of Arthur Andersen, the top five accounting firm at the time.  His case was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court but it was too late, 80,000 Andersen employees had already lost their jobs after the company dissolved after Weissmann’s indictment.

During the Mueller exam, Weissmann led a gang of corrupt prosecutors and agents in going after President Trump whose made-up crime was “Russia collusion”.  This non-crime was used for years to dig into the President’s entire life in an effort to remove him from office.  They found nothing.  They had hoped that the President would commit an act during the coup that they could pin on President Trump but this never happened.

Now we are hearing that the inept and ignorant Manhattan DA, Alvin Brag, has made up crimes against President Trump again.

Mike Davis writes:

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is hellbent on charging Mr. Trump. In fact, the New York City District Attorney’s office has been searching for any way to charge the former president since 2017. The investigation has poured over President Trump’s personal and business life. They’ve reportedly settled on charging Donald Trump for the non-crime of his attorney Michael Cohen paying Stormy Daniels settlement money.

The New York Times reports (emphasis added):

When pleading guilty in federal court, Cohen pointed the finger at his boss. It was Trump, he said, who directed him to pay off Daniels, a contention that prosecutors later corroborated.

The prosecutors also said that Trump’s company “falsely accounted” for the monthly payments as legal expenses and that company records cited a retainer agreement with Cohen. Although Cohen was a lawyer, and became Trump’s personal attorney after he took office, there was no such retainer agreement and the reimbursement was unrelated to any legal services Cohen performed.

Cohen has said that Trump knew about the phony retainer agreement, an accusation that could form the basis of the case against the former president.

In New York, falsifying business records can amount to a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. To elevate the crime to a felony charge, Bragg’s prosecutors must show that Trump’s “intent to defraud” included an intent to commit or conceal a second crime.

In this case, that second crime could be a violation of New York state election law. While hush money is not inherently illegal, the prosecutors could argue that the $130,000 payout effectively became an improper donation to Trump’s campaign, under the theory that it benefited his candidacy because it silenced Daniels.

Will it be a tough case to prove?

Even if Trump is indicted, convicting him or sending him to prison will be challenging. For one thing, Trump’s lawyers are sure to attack Cohen’s credibility by citing his criminal record.

The case against the former president also likely hinges on an untested and therefore risky legal theory involving a complex interplay of laws.

Combining the falsifying business records charge with a violation of state election law would be a novel legal theory for any criminal case, let alone one against the former president, raising the possibility that a judge or appellate court could throw it out or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor.

And even if the felony charge remains, it amounts to a low-level felony. If Trump were ultimately convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of four years, though prison time would not be mandatory.

This smells rotten like another Weissmann special.