ALVIN BRAGG AND THE TRUMP TRIAL THAT NEVER HAPPENED. There was a curious moment in New York City politics a few nights ago, but you might have missed it because of all the attention being paid to the mayor’s race.
It happened during a debate in the contest for district attorney of Manhattan. The only reason most non-New Yorkers would care is that current Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, whose claim to fame is being the first and only prosecutor ever to charge and convict an ex-president — Donald Trump — is running for reelection.
Here’s the curious thing. In the entire debate, which was Bragg against Republican Maud Maron and independent Diana Florence, moderated by NY1’s Errol Louis — in the entire debate, nobody said the name “Donald Trump.” With the exception of one brief aside by Louis, nobody mentioned the Trump prosecution at all.
The trial is the biggest professional accomplishment of Bragg’s life. He is now running for reelection. He is running on his record. And he never said a word about it. Nor did Maron or Florence bring it up. It was like Bragg’s central role in history never happened at all.
Bragg had plenty of opportunities. At one point, he boasted about the political figures he had prosecuted. “These are cases I did directly, some I oversaw, prosecuted two mayors, a Senate majority leader, a council member, and an FBI agent without regard to their political party … without fear or favor,” Bragg said. Then he stopped.
“I think there was an ex-president in there, too,” Louis said before asking Maron if she would like to comment. “I noticed that Mr. Bragg skipped that one when he was running through the politicians that he prosecuted,” Maron said. Then she moved on.
That was it. One of the most consequential cases in U.S. history, and the man who conducted it, and his opponents, didn’t want to talk about it. What is going on?
A few things. First, the debate started, and largely focused on, the street crime that diminishes New York’s quality of life. That is an absolutely critical issue, and both Maron and Florence ripped into Bragg’s record. Maron pointed out that Bragg dismisses more than 60% of the cases his office brings and convicts on just 35%. Felony assaults on the subway are up.
Florence focused on a single case — a man named Justin Washington, who in 2022 was accused of raping a teenage relative. Bragg let him off easy with a plea bargain under which he would serve just 30 days in jail. But then: “Before he would spend one moment in jail, weeks later, Washington went to the Bronx and assaulted five more New Yorkers sexually,” Florence said.
Maron promised that if elected, “The first thing I would do is rip up Alvin Bragg’s day-one memo, because it is a memo from a prosecutor talking about all the ways in which he will not prosecute crime in this city.” That was a reference to a memo Bragg sent to his staff on his first day in office in January 2022. In the letter, Bragg, in the words of a Manhattan Institute analysis, “set out a number of controversial directives, such as non-prosecution of crimes including resisting arrest, trespassing, fare evasion, and prostitution. Bragg’s office would broadly reduce charges for crimes including knifepoint robbery, commercial and some residential burglaries, weapons possession, and ‘low-level’ drug dealing. There will be a presumption of no jail time for almost any crime, and sentences of life without parole will be banned even for cop killers, barring ‘exceptional circumstances.’”
Bragg’s defense when Maron brought up the memo was to say it was “overridden within days.” Indeed, it was, because it caused an uproar among New Yorkers who had a fit of buyer’s remorse as the new Manhattan DA took office. Bragg quickly amended the memo, but he fundamentally stayed the same soft-on-prosecutor he was before.
Of course, Bragg was a very, very tough prosecutor when it came to one defendant: Trump. There’s no need to go through the whole story of Bragg’s 34-count indictment of Trump. It charged Trump with committing bookkeeping offenses as part of a conspiracy to corrupt the 2016 presidential election; the specific crime was said to be labeling a nondisclosure agreement negotiated by Trump’s lawyer as a “legal expense” in Trump Organization books. For that, Bragg charged Trump with 34 felonies — enough to theoretically send the former president to jail for 136 years.
It was crazy, of course. But very, very tough. And since prosecuting a former president on so many counts is a big undertaking, it was quite expensive. But remember — no one is above the law in Alvin Bragg’s world.
Here is what is amazing about the lack of any discussion of the Trump case during the debate. Prosecutors in New York, as elsewhere, have to focus. They have to go after big crimes, but also the smaller crimes that eat away at New Yorkers’ quality of life. Why would Bragg pledge to go easy on petty crime when drug stores were locking up their toothpaste and shampoo, and customers had to ask a clerk to unlock a cabinet so they could buy something?
And why, when civic disorder descends, did Bragg devote so many resources to pursuing Trump for a “crime” that few analysts, much less ordinary citizens, could really understand? (The New York Times politely wrote that “the intricate theory underpinning the charges drew skepticism from many in the legal world.”) Yes, Bragg got a conviction, only to see the whole thing go away after Trump was elected president. But Bragg had revealed his priorities.
And now, as he runs for reelection, he doesn’t want to talk about his great achievement. On the campaign trail, he has avoided the subject so assiduously that people have noticed. Last week, the Times ran a story headlined, “Alvin Bragg, Seeking Re-election, Is Not Mentioning His Best-Known Case.” If you want to get Bragg talking, the paper said, you better not mention the Trump prosecution. Some voters bring it up at events — they like it, of course — but Bragg says nothing.
And what about his opponents? Well, they know that exactly 17.6% of Manhattan voters voted for Trump in 2024, versus 82.4% who voted for Kamala Harris. What is in it for Maron and Florence to tear into Bragg for prosecuting a president so unpopular in Manhattan?
On the other hand, what about noting that, while some serious types of crime rose and theft-weary stores put toothpaste under lock and key, Bragg was pushing his office into a case against Trump that even experts on his side thought was weak and poorly conceived. Shouldn’t that be something voters consider when deciding whether to reelect him?
There was a final telling moment near the end of the debate, when moderator Errol Louis brought up white collar crime. “I think what we’ve seen out of Alvin Bragg … is too little focus on corruption cases and too much focus on prosecuting political enemies,” Maud Maron said.
Would that have been a good time to mention one particular case? Of course it would have been. But Maron moved on, as did Florence. And of course Bragg said nothing about Trump — the trial that, apparently, never happened.