On “Hannity” Wednesday evening, Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett argued that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has violated former President Donald Trump’s Sixth Amendment rights by failing to denote the specific crime Trump has allegedly committed in the unprecedented indictment.
Bragg has claimed in recent statements that the law does not require him to state the underlying crime; in response to a reporter’s question asking him to specify what the crime is, Bragg said, “The indictment doesn’t specify it because the law does not so require.”
But the Sixth Amendment does state that a defendant has the right to “be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.”
“He does [have to name it, via] the Sixth Amendment,” Jarrett said.
“[The indictment] is therefore facially defective. It is deficient on its face and it would be susceptible to a motion-to-dismiss.”
Jarrett’s opinion that Bragg’s case is susceptible to a motion to dismiss coincides with those of Trump’s legal team, who believe that the case could be thrown out due to its extraordinarily flimsy basis.
Others have argued the broad case gives Bragg a deeper bag of tricks.
The Washington Times’ Charlie Hurt also ripped Bragg’s charges against Trump, noting that Trump’s potential prison sentence — 136 years — is much longer than the sentence served by disgraced Ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff.
“[T]his is such a circus — it’s so absurd. It’s so ridiculous. Alvin Bragg has so embarrassed himself, embarrassed to the legal profession that it really is going to, I think, set the tone for anything else any of these wacko, crazed, lunatic, left-wing, politicized Democrat DA’s want to do to try to destroy Trump,” Hurt said.