This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Alvin Bragg, the leftist, George Soros-funded prosecutor in Manhattan who is trying to bring a case against President Trump over a payment made years ago by his former lawyer to a stripper, could be disbarred if he makes the wrong step in the case, according to legal expert and Harvard professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz.
There was speculation Bragg would release an indictment last week, but it didn't happen, and progress for this week appears to be uncertain.
Dershowitz was on Fox News to respond to questions about the case, and said, "Well, I don’t think an indictment can actually come forward now after the comments made by [witness Robert] Costello. He has proved that the main witness is going to be a perjuring liar on the witness stand. And that puts the district attorney in a terrible position.
"If he uses [former Trump lawyer Michael] Cohen as a witness, he could actually lose his bar license. It’s unethical to put a witness on the stand who you know is lying, and he has to know that Cohen will be lying. Or he tries the case without Cohen, which is very difficult. Or he does the right thing. He drops the case," Dershowitz explained.
He wrote a book called "Get Trump," and explained, "I went through each of the four cases against Donald Trump and I proved, by precedent and evidence, that none of the four cases has any basis in law. All four of them are politically motivated. And I think the worst and the weakest case is the one in New York, which is based on a sworn, admitted perjurer, who lied to his own lawyers."
He continued, "You know, recently a court said if you lie to your lawyer, you lose the privilege because that’s so bad. But we know that he lied to his lawyers. His lawyers have essentially broken the privilege and said that the he lied to us. He told us he was the only one involved in this payment, and that nobody else was involved.
"How is he going to explain on the witness stand – did you lie now, did you lie then? — Nobody’s going to believe him.
"This is the worst possible case to bring against Trump, and I would hope that maybe grand jurors finally would wake up and say, we’re not ham sandwiches here. We’re going to stand up for the law, and the law says don’t indict under these circumstances."
The claim being created by Bragg is that Cohen paid a stripper, Stormy Daniels, money to keep quiet about an affair with Trump, which Trump denies.
Bragg claims that payment somehow created a campaign donation to Trump's 2016 presidential race.
Dershowitz told the Fox interviewers, "This is the worst example of prosecutorial abuse of discretion I have seen in my 60 years of practicing criminal law. That’s why I wrote ‘Get Trump.’ It’s not about Trump, it’s about us. Because today it’s Trump, tomorrow it’s a Democrat. The day after tomorrow it’s your Uncle Charlie and your nephew and your niece. This is one of the most dangerous precedents that any prosecutor has ever tried to establish in the United States."
A commentary at The Right Scoop said, "George Soros must pay really REALLY well to get people to take on such risk to their careers and reputations."
Another report, in the Washington Examiner, explained U.S. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is defending the call by GOP members in the House for Bragg to testify before Congress regarding his scheming against Trump.
"Comer said Bragg's investigation into Trump allegedly falsifying business records for a hush money payment is not a 'local investigation,' saying instead that Bragg's probe is a federal investigation that 'has no business being litigated in a local district attorney’s office,' while speaking on CNN's State of the Union," the report said.
"Well, what the DA is trying to say is what you just quoted, he said, stay out of local investigations. The problem with that is this is not a local investigation. This is a federal investigation. He’s investigating a presidential candidate, not to mention the former president of the United States for a federal election crime that has no business being litigated in a local district attorney’s office," Comer said.
Congress had called for Bragg to testify and he refused.
"And when he says he’s not going to cooperate with Congress, unfortunately for Mr. Bragg, he doesn’t have the luxury of determining whether or not he can comply with congressional requests because he crossed over two levels of government from the local level to the federal level to try to prosecute something that clearly if there was a reason for prosecution, it should be done by the Department of Justice on the federal level," Comer continued.
The House Oversight Committee chairman also warned about the bad precedent that prosecution against Trump could set up, saying it could open up other federal office candidates to frivolous charges.
"If you open a can of worms here. Here’s what’s gonna happen. You’re going to have county attorneys in red areas, in parts of Kentucky, rural Kentucky, where I am, that are going to start trying to overreach into the federal elections. This is something that if it needs to be investigated or prosecuted. It should be done on the federal level by the Department of Justice. This is a presidential candidate," Comer said.