Former President Donald Trump's attorney Joe Tacopina declared the American rule of law institutionally dead Thursday after New York County DA Alvin Bragg brought forward an indictment relating to the Stormy Daniels NDA case.
Tacopina told "Hannity" he has never been more incensed in his legal career, during which he noted he has been on both sides of indictments.
"I've never been more angry about a charge because today the rule of law in the United States of America died. It's dead. And it's something that I never thought I'd see. I have goosebumps even saying it because I don't feel good about saying it," Tacopina said.
Tacopina warned that Bragg "stretched" the law against a rival individual in a way that makes for a precedent that will be hard to undo for future cases.
Trump was "shocked" by the indictment — which reports said could tally as many as 34 counts — Tacopina said, adding that what has happened to his client is reminiscent of the Soviet custom of "you pick the target — the person you don't like… and then you find the crime."
"It never was that way in the United States. It's not supposed to be that way, and when we start doing that, we're no better than those other horrific, horrific dictatorships and governments that abused rule of law."
Even "unpopular" American citizens over the years have benefited from the rule of law, while Bragg has flipped that custom on its head, he added.
"There is no crime," he said, later adding that he would almost "pay" his client to be the one to cross-examine star prosecution witness Michael Cohen, the mogul's former "fixer," describing the convicted counsel as a pathological liar who has contradicted himself many times.
"There is no one that could ever convince me that this man was not just charged to affect the elections… and that's scary to me," Tacopina concluded.
Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz also analyzed the indictment on "Hannity," echoing critiques of Bragg as being a politically motivated prosecutor who "deliberately violated the statute of limitation" in Trump's case.
Bragg had seven years to indict Trump, but waited and then did so when the defendant was out of state — in this case, Florida — which the professor said proves New York County could have indicted him any time.
"Also, when you're a Democratic-elected prosecutor who ran on the campaign pledge of getting Trump and you're going to indict… the man who may become the future president if he beats the incumbent, who is the head of your political party, prosecutor — you better have the strongest case imaginable," Dershowitz said.
"… Not a case that depends on stitching together two inapplicable statutes and using Michael Cohen."
Dershowitz said that no matter the flimsiness of Bragg's case, given Cohen's potential as the star witness, he would recommend filing for a change in venue to neighboring Richmond County, N.Y., to give both sides a fair shake.
Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett later opined that Tacopina might be right in his prediction to "humiliate Alvin Bragg" in court, calling up Bragg's "convoluted legal theory [he] has simply dreamed up [in] taking a misdemeanor and supercharging it into a felony."
"The law doesn't support that, and I would predict that Tacopina and his co-counsel will immediately file a motion to dismiss because the law doesn't support the charge, and the alleged facts don't support a crime recognized by the law."
Jarrett noted the Federal Election Commission did not view Trump's actions in the case as a crime, and that other levels of the judiciary have punted on prosecuting Trump, including Bragg's predecessor Cy Vance Jr.
"This is a DA who has disgracefully abused his power and decided to criminalize politics, and it is a serious breach of his ethical duty to see that justice is done fairly and equitably. In this case, it is not."
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley pointed out that former Bragg prosecutor Mark Pomerantz wrote a book — "People vs. Donald Trump" — about the investigation. Pomerantz reportedly originally resigned over Bragg's reluctance to prosecute the former president.
"[O]ne of [the two resigned prosecutors] did something that I think is deeply unprofessional: He wrote a book about a person who wasn't even charged, let alone convicted, who is still under investigation," he said.
"[He] had this public campaign to force Bragg to indict him. I thought it was a breathtakingly unprofessional thing to do, but that's what has characterized this case from the outset."
