> Sure if there’s an actual crime, but what exactly is worth of charging here?

... because there is a law on the books that says "it's a crime to do this thing" and this person pretty clearly did that thing.

Like, from a political perspective, I'm in the boat of "uggggh, I wish it wasn't this thing that is the first thing he is charged for". But from a legal perspective ... this is a thing you're not allowed to do ... which he did ... so ...

It seems wild to make this argument before the indictment has been unsealed. Shouldn’t we wait to see the allegations before we declare them baseless?

His personal lawyer went to prison for 2 years on charges related to this crime, and was the primary witness against Trump in this Grand Jury investigation.

Whatever he told them, along with whatever other evidence was presented, it was sufficient for them to indict.

The Grand Jury indicted Trump, not Alvin Bragg.

Remember John Edwards, former Democratic nominee for vice-President, was essentially indicted for the same thing Trump is now, that is using political contributions as hush money. Edwards was facing 30 years for all the charges arraigned against him.

We still don't know the specifics or the extent of Trump's legal issues, as the Grand jury is still ongoing for this case and others.

Do you have access to the case including evidence? The jury did and voted to indict, how can you be sure that this is legal gymnastics?

Keep in mind we don’t know the charges yet, or details of the case, like what evidence there is.

If you pronounce it a joke or predict the disbarment of Bragg now, you aren’t doing it based on the merits of the case.

I’m pretty sure that George Bush Jr. qualifies for way more charges solely based on the fact that there were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. But no, hush payments to porn stars is a lot more important. Welcome to clown world!

How can you know this? The indictment hasn’t even been unsealed.

Even if it’s a conviction I hope the sentencing is appropriate. Wealthy men making sex workers wealthier in order to not disrupt their ostensibly conservative social values is pretty low on my own criminal punishment tier list (especially compared to something that happened during the presidency like the burglary of election-connected properties by Nixon, or more favourable to Clinton’s consensual acts vs his credibility destroying behaviour after). The social/civil consequences of the reveal are often good enough and mostly a pure self-own. If it really is about a misappropriation of some campaign funds/laws then sure I hope there’s an adequate punishment scaled to the crime.

It’s often difficult to disconnect the actual crimes from wanting Justice generally for a person’s net life behaviour… which isn’t how this works IRL nor how it should work. Whether other crimes and social taboos should be better enforced is another matter entirely.