This is a problem of Alvin Bragg’s own making: Sol Wisenberg

IT COULD BE DIFFICULT TO PREPARE WHAT HE'S GOING TO SAY. DAVID: AND DONALD TRUMP'S SENTENCING IN THE NEW YORK TRIAL WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A WEEK AFTER THE DEBATE. AND THAT CHANGED AFTER JUDGE MARCHAN PUNTED TO AFTER THE ELECTION. AND WHAT IS MADE ON THAT MOVE. SAUL, GOOD TO SEE YOU. AND THE JUDGE SAID, I'M QUOTING HIM, HE'S A FAIR, IMPARTIAL AND APOLITICAL. DID HE RUN THIS TRIAL AS THOUGH HE WAS FAIR AND IMPARTIAL? >> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT HE DID FROM WHAT I READ. I WASN'T THERE IN THE COURTROOM, BUT IT'S AN EASY THING FOR HIM TO DO AT THIS STAGE. THE MOST BLATANTLY POLITICAL TRIAL THAT WE'VE SEEN IN DECADES IN THIS COUNTRY WAS ALLOWED TO GO FORWARD. IT WAS THE FAULT OF ALVIN BRAGG AND I DON'T THINK THE JUDGE PARTICULARLY CONDUCTED HIMSELF WELL AT THE TRIAL. SO WHAT DOES IT HURT NOW. HE'S ALREADY GOT THE GUILTY VERDICT. THE DEMOCRATS CAN ALREADY TALK ABOUT THE GUILTY VERDICT. DELAYING SENTENCING DOES NOTHING FOR DONALD TRUMP. IT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE THE JUDGE IS MAGNANIMOUS, BUT WE KNOW THAT HE DONATED TO A CAMPAIGN AND HIS DAUGHTER. AND HE SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HIMSELF. DAVID: THE FACT THAT IT WAS AN UNCHARGED OUTDATED MISDEMEANOR THAT KIND OF MAGICALLY TURNED INTO 34 FELONY COUNTS BY BRAGG HIMSELF, BUT THEN YOU HAVE THE SUPREME COURT DECISION TALKING ABOUT IMMUNITY, PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, SAYING, YOU KNOW, THERE IS PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY. IT MIGHT HAVE AFFECTED-- THEY DIDN'T SAY SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS CASE, BUT IT COULD AFFECT THE CASE. THAT'S WHAT JUDGE MERCHAN IS GOING TO BE DECIDING WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT DECISION ON PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY WILL AFFECT THIS CASE. WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT MERCHAN IS GOING TO DECIDE ON THAT? >> WELL, I THINK IF YOU MADE ME BET, I THINK HE'S GOING TO COME OUT AND SAY THAT THERE WAS ERROR, WHICH THERE CLEARLY WAS, IN LIGHT OF THE SUPREME COURT'S OPINION, BUT THAT IT WAS HARMLESS BECAUSE IT WAS OUTWEIGHED BY A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP. THAT'S WHAT HE WILL SAY, I THINK. THIS IS A PROBLEM ENTIRELY OF ALVIN BRAGG'S OWN MAKING BECAUSE HE DID NOT HAVE TO PUT FORMER PRESIDENTIAL ADVISORS ON THE STAND TO TALK ABOUT THEIR CONVERSATIONS WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT. THAT WAS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY FOR HIM TO WANE HIS CASE, BUT HE PUT THEM ON AND HERE IS THE PROBLEM FROM HIS PERSPECTIVE. HIS PROSECUTORS MADE A BIG DEAL ABOUT IT IN THEIR CLOSING STATEMENTS. OBVIOUSLY BRAGG HIMSELF WAS NOT TRYING THE CASE, BUT THEY MADE THE DECISION TO MAKE A BIG DEAL ABOUT THAT TESTIMONY IN THEIR CLOSING ARGUMENTS SO I THINK IT'S A REAL ISSUE. IT'S NOT A FRIVOLOUS ISSUE AT ALL FOR TRUMP AND HIS ATTORNEYS TO RAISE. DAVID: AND BY THE WAY, FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN, THE LEAD PROSECUTOR IN THE CASE WAS NUMBER THREE MAN AT THE BIDEN'S JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. THE FACT THAT THAT HAPPENED, HE TOOK A STEP DOWN IN ORDER TO TRY THIS CASE MAKES IT LOOK EVEN MORE POLITICAL. WITH REGARD TO IMMUNITY AND THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION ON IT. ANDY MCCARTHY, IT'S A RATHER LONG QUOTE, BUT IMMUNITY HOW IT MIGHT AFFECT SENTENCING. >> IMMUNITY IS AMONG THE CRIMINALS LAWS THE DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO AN IMMEDIATE APPEAL, PARTICULARLY A FORMER PRESIDENT WITH POTENTIAL CRIMINALIZATION OF ACTS AND WHETHER IT IS OR WAS PROPER TO HAVE A TRIAL IN THE FIRST PLACE. IMMUNITY QUESTIONS THEN SHOULD BE DECIDED BEFORE THE IMMUNE DEFENDANT IS SUBJECTED TO FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. SHOULD HE GET AN IMMEDIATE APPEAL BASED ON THIS IMMUNITY? >> OH, ON THE IMMUNITY ARGUMENT, ABSOLUTELY. AND JUDGE CHUTKIN IN D.C. RECOGNIZED THAT WHEN SHE DID HER SCHEDULING ORDER THE OTHER DAY, SHE SAID IT'S GOING TO BE APPEALED IMMEDIATELY. THERE'S A NARROW CATEGORY OF ISSUES IN CRIMINAL CASES THAT CAN BE IMMEDIATELY APPEALED. ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS DOUBLE-JEOPARDY. THE WHOLE POINT OF THE DOUBLE-JEOPARDY CLAUSE IS THAT YOU NOT BE SUBJECTED TWICE TO A TRIAL. SO THE DAMAGE IS ALREADY DONE IF YOU GO THROUGH THAT SECOND TRIAL SO YOU'RE ALLOWED TO APPEAL IMMEDIATELY AND I THINK THE SAME THING IS TRUE WITH PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY. DAVID: VERY QUICKLY ON HUNTER BIDEN AND HIS DECISION OR HIS ATTORNEY'S DECISION OR HOWEVER IT WAS DECIDED TO PLEAD GUILTY AFTER MONTHS AND MONTHS OF CLAIMING INNOCENCE. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF IT AND DO YOU THINK THERE WILL BE A PARDON? >> WHAT I HAVE TO MAKE AGAINST IT, THE CASE AGAINST HIM WAS VERY, VERY STRONG. THE INDICTMENT AND NOW THE PLEA VINDICATES THE WHISTLEBLOWERS AND OBVIOUSLY, IT WAS GOING TO BE INCREDIBLY POLITICALLY DAMAGING IF HE WENT TO TRIAL. DAVID WEISS WAS SIGNALING THAT, WHEN HE WAS SIGNALING THE KIND OF EVIDENCE THAT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET IN UNDER WHAT THEY CALL OTHER CRIMES OR OTHER ACTS. AND SO, I THINK THAT HE WILL BE PARDONED. I HAVE NO INSIDE KNOWLEDGE ON THAT, BUT I THINK HE'LL BE PARDONED AND I THINK HE'LL BE PARDONED ON JANUARY 20TH OR 19TH. DAVID: AT THIS POINT IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A CONCERN FOR PRESIDENT BIDEN THAT THERE WOULD BE A CONTRADICTION WITH