Jesse Watters Explains How Alvin Bragg Is Putting Trump’s Life in Danger

Is Manhattan District Attorney 🏛️Alvin Bragg putting the life of a presidential candidate at risk? 📺Fox News host 📺Jesse Watters says yes.

On Tuesday evening’s edition of “The Five,” Watters said putting former President 👤Donald Trump — who’s seeking the office again in 2024 — in a specific place at a specific date for his arraignment gave any number of crazies who want to take a shot at him the opportunity to do so.

In the meantime, Watters said, the money required to have the requisite security in New York City for a former president and current candidate is insane — all for charges that are dubious at best.

Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree Tuesday in Manhattan Criminal Court.

This would normally be a misdemeanor in the state of New York, which means the charges — which relate to how nondisclosure agreement payments were made to three individuals, including porn star Stormy Daniels, during the 2016 campaign — would be long past the two-year statute of limitations that misdemeanors carry in the state.

Bragg’s argument is the alleged violations are a felony because the falsifications were to conceal another crime: federal elections violations. The issue, of course, is that Bragg doesn’t have federal jurisdiction.

That’ll be for the courts to work out. In the meantime, there’s the “circus” to contend with, Watters noted.

“He’s spending how many millions of dollars on this circus?” the 📺Fox News host said. “He’s shutting down the FDR Drive. He’s hiring how many police officers? How much manpower is going into the DA’s office on this case alone?

“Meanwhile, you’ve got a crime wave out here, and he has the nerve to come out and say he doesn’t want to normalize crime. C’mon, man!”

Watters was referring to remarks made by Bragg in the wake of the indictment being unsealed.

“Under New York state law is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about. 34 false statements made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg said, according to Fox News.

“These are felony crimes in New York State. No matter who you are, we cannot and will not normalize serious criminal conduct.”

Ironic, of course, given that Bragg was the man who briefly stopped charging certain armed robberies as felonies until public outcry led to a reversal. But I digress.

Trump’s next scheduled appearance is on Dec. 4 — which, to Watters, creates a security threat.

“And I’ve got to tell you: You’re putting 👤Donald Trump’s life in danger. You’re setting him up and advertising to the entire world, ‘The former president of the United States, the Republican nominee for the presidency, is gonna be at this location, at this time, on this date,'” he said.

The 📺Fox News host misspoke: Trump isn’t the 2024 GOP nominee. However, he is the front-runner right now.

“And you’ve got towers, and you’ve got windows,” Watters continued. “You think that’s good for this country? To put a man like that in a certain location Dec. 4? And then, what if it goes to trial? He has to be there every day. You think the Secret Service wants that?

“That is dangerous. And he is playing a dangerous game.”

📺Fox News federal law enforcement producer Jake Gibson said in a segment Tuesday that Trump’s legal team “hinted that maybe they didn’t want him to come to that hearing.”

“The judge said it was good if he would come to these hearings, the jury, if there eventually is a trial, would want to see him,” Gibson continued.

“And the defense said, right, but think of all the money that is spent — with this, today, and how much of the burden is put on the city,” he said.

Gibson said Judge Juan Merchan “seemed to agree that it was a serious burden, but that he still thought Mr. Trump should attend, and he denied their request that maybe if he didn’t want to attend the Dec. 4 hearing. He said maybe in the future, we’d let him out of one, but this — I’d like to see him at the Dec. 4 hearing.”

Watters’ concerns about Trump’s safety garnered mockery from left-wing Twitter:

But the 📺Fox News host has a point. Federal courtrooms, while indeed designed to handle high-profile cases, are not designed to handle former presidents or current presidential candidates.

Furthermore, they aren’t intended to handle them day after day, as a trial would indeed necessitate.

Presidential rallies, which are far more controlled environments, are announced with much less lead time and at venues where securing a president or presidential candidate is of the utmost importance.

Think, for instance, if the next Lee Harvey Oswald or Sirhan Sirhan was given eight months lead time — far longer than most rallies or presidential visits — to plan for an assassination attempt in a venue or area not necessarily designed for the high level of security normally afforded politicians.

And then think that this is in one of the most liberal cities in the country.

Do you think that doesn’t lower the odds for a nutcase would-be assassin? It certainly doesn’t make it more difficult for them, and I’d argue it becomes a whole lot easier for a psychopath with a political cause.

Or, look at it another way: If leftists think Watters’ point is ludicrous, surely they can’t argue lawmakers in the Capitol were in any danger on Jan. 6, 2021. After all, they were in a building specifically designed for the security of high-profile politicians on a day when people knew the Electoral College was to be certified. There was no danger at all, then, was there?

And thus I expect to see these very same people sardonically correcting New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez the next time she starts weeping about how she was almost killed that day.

Whatever the case, Watters is unquestionably right about one thing: Securing Trump if this goes to trial will take boatloads of money, all over a trivial case that’s about raising 🏛️Alvin Bragg’s profile and tying up Democratic enemy No. 1, not enforcing the law.

After all, if this were about law enforcement, Bragg would be nowhere to be found. Now, suddenly, the prosecutorial version of Abbie Hoffman has turned into a regular Joe Friday.

It’s not hard to imagine why, and it’s not hard to imagine how much it’s going to cost to keep the defendant safe.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.