Connect with us

Published

on

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) is facing the biggest political test of his career: the possible indictment of former President Trump.

It’s a consequential moment that could end with Bragg becoming the first in history to prosecute an indicted former president.  

As the possibility rises, Bragg is facing questions about the strength of his case, about his motives for going forward and even over whether he’ll pull back from the brink.

“Alvin Bragg is caught between a rock and a hard spot,” said Susan Del Percio, a longtime New York-based Republican strategist who has opposed Trump. “He had to bring the charges forward because of public pressure, but he isn’t sure if they’ll stick.” 

Bragg is probing Trump’s involvement in a hush payment that his fixer, Michael Cohen, made to adult film star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election. Trump predicted an arrest on Tuesday, but that did not come to fruition. It now appears that an indictment from the grand jury could come as soon as next week.

Since Trump’s surprise posts on Truth Social that he expected to be arrested, Bragg’s profile has gone national.

Republicans in Congress have promised an investigation, with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) saying an indictment would “blow up the country.” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) went further, saying that Bragg should be “put in jail.”

A trio of Republican House chairmen, led by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), earlier this week demanded the district attorney turn over all documents and communications about the case.

“He should be disbarred,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said of Bragg. “If he’s going to be using his position to target the Republican Party’s top primary presidential candidate just for politics, that’s not what a DA should be doing. He should be prosecuting crime. That’s what people pay taxes for there.”

Bragg’s office hit back on Republicans’ request in a letter on Thursday, saying the request would interfere with ongoing law enforcement duties and violate state sovereignty.

The move “is an unprecedent[ed] inquiry into a pending local prosecution,” his office wrote. “The letter only came after Donald Trump created a false expectation that he would be arrested the next day and his lawyers reportedly urged you to intervene. Neither fact is a legitimate basis for congressional inquiry.”

Bragg, 49, was at least already used to criticism and conflict from the race to succeed Cyrus Vance Jr. (D) and his short tenure after taking the job on Jan. 1, 2022.

After a grueling, eight-way primary for the job, the district attorney — during his first days in office — took partisan fire from Republicans.

A progressive who ran on balancing public safety with justice, Bragg issued a “Day One” memo instructing his office to reserve jail time for only the most serious crimes and to not prosecute certain low-level offenses.

The list included misdemeanors related to resisting arrest for noncriminal offenses, marijuana possession and trespassing.

It led to searing criticism from New York City’s police commissioner — appointed by a Democratic mayor — and Republicans, who accused Bragg of being soft on crime. 

Bragg ultimately revised the policies the next month, but the attacks from the right haven’t stopped. 

Basil Smikle, a consultant who served as the executive director of the New York State Democratic Party, said Bragg has been a longtime target of those on the right since he was sworn into the job.

In the New York gubernatorial race against now-Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) last year, Republican Lee Zeldin repeatedly campaigned on removing Bragg if he was elected. 

“He’s handled the pressure and fended off criticism well but will be heavily scrutinized no matter the outcome,” said Smikle.

Bragg has also taken criticism from Democrats and members of his own prosecutorial team after he last year opted against moving forward in a different investigative prong involving Trump.

A grand jury empaneled before Bragg took office was hearing evidence about whether Trump’s businesses improperly manipulated property values for tax and loan benefits. Bragg’s decision to not seek an indictment from that jury compelled two top prosecutors in the probe — Mark Pomerantz and Carey Dunne — to resign.

“The team that has been investigating Mr. Trump harbors no doubt about whether he committed crimes — he did,” Pomerantz wrote in his resignation letter, which The New York Times first published last March.

Liberals were enraged at the revelation, and Bragg started taking criticism from many in his own party as the investigation stalled.

Now, Bragg appears to be moving toward an indictment of Trump after all. He convened a new grand jury earlier this year to hear evidence in the hush money probe, and a series of recent steps suggest an indictment could come as soon as next week.

“In some ways, I think he felt some pressure to bring something forward because of all of this to help wipe his slate clean,” one strategist said. “This would be his chance to redefine himself and have a bit of redemption.”

“It was such an utter mess,” the strategist said.  

Some of Bragg’s earlier detractors are now cheering him on. But it is Republicans who have now again gone on the attack, accusing Bragg of weaponizing the legal system. 

Trump called Bragg “a danger to our country” and called for his removal on Thursday.

“He sort of can’t win. In many ways, I feel a lot of empathy for him,” said Catherine Christian,  a former financial fraud prosecutor in Bragg’s office who was not involved in the Trump investigation.

Despite the rising tensions, the probe has yet to turn up an indictment. For reasons unclear, the grand jury did not meet about the case on either Wednesday or Thursday.

Some have speculated that Bragg could change course again.

“I think that the heat is on this DA, I think he’s going to make a very sober decision and I would not be surprised if he doesn’t step back from the brink,” CNN political commentator Van Jones said on CNN Monday night. ‘Bear huggers’ wanted: Potential dream job now open Asteroid expected to pass close to Earth on Saturday

But Christian said the lack of grand jury meetings late this week is no sign Bragg is backing away.

“I’ll be blunt: if he does that, he might as well just hang it up. All of this, and then say nevermind? Are you kidding me?” said Christian.

Mychael Schnell contributed.

Continue Reading

Politics

Andy Burnham: ‘Nigel Farage could become PM – this is how Labour can stop him’

Published

on

By

Andy Burnham: 'Nigel Farage could become PM - this is how Labour can stop him'

Nigel Farage could be the next prime minister – but Labour could beat him by connecting with voters more, Greater Manchester’s Labour mayor has told Sky News.

Andy Burnham, talking to Beth Rigby on the Electoral Dysfunction podcast, said the Reform UK leader winning the next election “is in the realms of possibility”.

“But we’ve got to make sure that it doesn’t become a reality,” he said.

“I don’t ever demonstrate complacency as a politician, I will always say it like it is.

“He’s connected with people, maybe not everybody, but he’s connected.”

Asked if he thinks Labour are not connecting with voters at the moment, he said he does not think his party is speaking enough about “working class ambition”.

Mr Burnham said there are “hundreds of thousands” of people in Greater Manchester who are being “held back by their housing situation”.

More on Andy Burnham

He said previous generations would have had council housing to “propel them to do amazing things” and if the government can follow up with its promise to build 1.5 million homes “they will really connect with people”.

The mayor said his party has not “spoken properly for quite some time now” to young people and their parents who want alternatives to the university route.

He said Labour has only seemed to care “in some people’s minds” about the university route, which “leaves a disconnect”.

To really come up strong against Mr Farage, Mr Burnham said Labour have “got to really speak to that working class ambition”.

He added: “I think Starmer has got to respond to the changing world that we’re in.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election: Polls open as public cast votes to replace late MSP

Published

on

By

Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election: Polls open as public cast votes to replace late MSP

The polls are now open in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election.

It comes following the death of SNP government minister Christina McKelvie.

The MSP died in March at the age of 57, having last year taken medical leave to undergo treatment for secondary breast cancer.

Ms McKelvie, the minister for drugs and alcohol policy, had been an MSP since 2007 and represented the Central Scotland region up to 2011 before going on to serve Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse.

Christina McKelvie
Pic: Scottish Government
Image:
The late SNP MSP Christina McKelvie. Pic: Scottish government

There are 10 candidates standing in the Holyrood by-election:

• Collette Bradley, Scottish Socialist Party
• Andy Brady, Scottish Family Party
• Ross Lambie, Reform UK
• Katy Loudon, Scottish National Party (SNP)
• Janice MacKay, UK Independence Party (UKIP)
• Ann McGuinness, Scottish Green Party
• Aisha Mir, Scottish Liberal Democrats
• Richard Nelson, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party
• Davy Russell, Scottish Labour Party
• Marc Wilkinson, Independent

The contest takes place less than a year before the Scottish parliament election, with the result potentially offering a snapshot of how the political landscape north of the border will look in 2026.

More on Scotland

Polls will close at 10pm on Thursday, with the votes set to be verified and manually counted at South Lanarkshire Council headquarters in Hamilton.

Sky News will be covering the count and result.

Continue Reading

Sports

Oilers win a thriller in Game 1: Grades for both teams, what to watch in Game 2

Published

on

By

Oilers win a thriller in Game 1: Grades for both teams, what to watch in Game 2

Before we go any further, maybe it’s fair to establish some ground rules for how to assess this particular Stanley Cup final.

Specifically, unless the Edmonton Oilers or Florida Panthers gain such a large lead to put the game out of reach, everything could be decided within the final 10 minutes of regulation or whenever the game-winning goal in overtime (or even double overtime) is scored.

OK. Now that we’re all on the same page, here’s a look at how the Oilers took Game 1 with a 4-3 overtime win, and what it all means going forward for both parties ahead of Game 2.

Winning the third period in the manner in which the Oilers did was crucial. Not only because it led to overtime, but because it was arguably their most consistent frame in Game 1.

They had the shots in the first period, but still trailed. They struggled to gain possession and generate shots in the second, which played a role in why they were down by a goal. Getting a goal from Mattias Ekholm early in the third gave the Oilers their 20th different scorer this postseason. They also outshot the Panthers 14-2, while having a 58.3% shot share, providing them with a sense of control they had been lacking to start.

Although they began overtime on the defensive, their constant ability to apply pressure for the final 15 minutes paid off with Leon Draisaitl scoring the game-winner off the power play with 1:06 remaining.

They survived the Kasperi Kapanen mini-breakaway. They survived the point-blank chance from Trent Frederic at the faceoff circle. They survived when the Oilers had a 5-on-5 sequence they treated like a power play. They survived the Evan Bouchard scoring chance in which he slipped behind the defense for another point-blank opportunity that Sergei Bobrovsky stopped.

Even Destiny’s Child, for those familiar, thought the Panthers survived a bit too much.

In the end, they could not survive the Oilers going on a late overtime power play, during which Draisaitl scored the goal that led to the Panthers falling in Game 1.

Every game comes with an inflection point — especially if a team loses. The Panthers had a few. Will it be the second period, which saw them have a 65.2% shot share while breaking through to launch 17 shots on goal — only to come away with one goal largely due to Stuart Skinner‘s solid play in net? Is it the third period that saw them get just two shots on goal? Or will it be how they couldn’t make the most of their dominant start in overtime?


Arda Öcal’s Three Stars of Game 1

Draisaitl didn’t have a single goal in the 2024 Cup Final. He scored 66 seconds into Game 1, then scored the overtime game-winner. A sublime start to this year’s championship series. Draisaitl has scored or assisted on five of the Oilers’ six OT goals over the last two postseasons.

play

0:35

Leon Draisaitl scores 66 seconds into Game 1 for Oilers

Leon Draisaitl nets the first goal of the Stanley Cup Final just over a minute into the game for the Oilers vs. the Panthers.

The veteran defenseman scored his first goal of this postseason in his second game back from injury. He became the 20th Oiler to score in these playoffs, which is tied for the second most in a single postseason in NHL history (the 1987 Flyers and 2019 Blues both had 21 different goal scorers).

A two-goal effort in a losing cause. Bennett now has 12 goals this postseason, which is the most in a single playoffs in franchise history. Eleven of those goals have been on the road, which is tied with Mark Scheifele (2018) for most road goals in a single postseason in NHL history.


Players to watch in Game 2

Remember: This man was on waivers in November. The Oilers’ claim of him was initially viewed as a chance to add depth on the cheap, only for it to turn into something greater. His game-winning goal in the series-clinching Game 5 overtime victory in the Western Conference finals opened the door for more playing time. He almost did it again in Game 1 in overtime too, but he did get an assist on the game-winning goal.

He’s been part of the solution for how the Oilers would fare without Zach Hyman, who sustained an injury in the Western Conference finals that will keep him out for the rest of the postseason. Kapanen did his part by having three assists, while his five hits allowed the Oilers to maintain the physical edge they’ve used as part of their identity to reach a consecutive Cup Final.

There are two ways to look at what Bennett did in Game 1. The first being that his two-point effort once again reinforced what has made him a serious candidate to win the Conn Smythe Trophy as playoff MVP. Bennett was already atop the leaderboard prior to the game, as he has scored a postseason-high 10 goals. Collecting two more now gives him 18 points, which is tied with Oilers center Ryan Nugent-Hopkins for fourth place.

The second is that he’s going to get paid this offseason. Earlier in the day, the Colorado Avalanche re-signed Brock Nelson to a three-year deal worth $7.5 million annually to avoid him hitting the open market. What Bennett did to help the Panthers reach three consecutive Stanley Cup Finals — and be in a position to claim at least a second title — is only going to increase what he could command come July 1.

play

0:41

Sam Bennett’s 2nd goal gives Florida a 3-1 lead

Sam Bennett tallies his second goal of the game to give the Panthers a 3-1 lead over the Oilers.


Big questions for Game 2

Did the third period and overtime give the Oilers a defensive road map against the Panthers?

The Oilers’ path back to the Stanley Cup Final was based on how their defensive structure made life hellish for the Dallas Stars and Vegas Golden Knights, two teams that were in the top five in goals per game in the regular season — and which struggled in the playoffs.

The Oilers had a few challenges in the first period, with Skinner getting partially shielded on the first two goals before having a breakdown in the second period that left their goalie on an island.

From there, the Oilers gave up a combined eight shots over the final frames, with the largest concentration coming in the first five minutes of overtime.

Of course, the Panthers have found breakthroughs against teams with constricting defensive structures, like the Carolina Hurricanes in the Eastern Conference finals. Are the Panthers about to find another in Game 2? Or could the Oilers be onto something that could see them find even more success within their defensive identity?

What is the major takeaway going forward: Their start or their finish?

Here’s where it gets complicated — and it goes back to the earlier statement about teams having inflection points. In the second period, the Panthers were aggressive in a way that hardly anyone has been against the Oilers. That resulted in five high-danger scoring chances, along with an overall sense of control.

That’s what made coming away with just one goal — especially in a one-goal game — something that could pose questions about how they make the most of those opportunities going forward.

But at the same time, the notion they were forced to survive in an overtime that saw them split the shot share with the Oilers, have more high-danger scoring chances but fail to provide that consistent threat?

That could also give the Panthers even more to think about in the coming days … or maybe they won’t question the process, given the Panthers had won their last 31 playoff games in which they held a second-period lead.

Continue Reading

Trending