Anti-Trump Commentator Changes Course, Calls For New York To Toss ‘Convictions’

One of the loudest anti-Trump voices on the airwaves expressed a change of heart Wednesday, telling his millions of listeners that it’s time for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to throw in the towel against the president-elect.

Charlamagne Tha God, host of the popular “Breakfast Club” radio program, expounded on his past statements that President-elect Trump has voiced legitimate concerns about being treated unequally under the law. Now that Trump has won a second term, the host said, Bragg doesn’t have a hope of seeing the Republican punished in his hush money case. “New York City, just throw the whole thing away, alright? Cut it out. Who are we fooling? Who are we fooling? Nothing’s going to happen to Trump, and nobody wants that retribution that he may deliver hanging over their head. Just — he won the election. It is what it is,” Charlamagne said. “Cut ties, sever your losses, throw the whole case away. Come on. Who are we fooling, y’all? Who are you fooling, like seriously?”

(POLL: Should Pelosi Be Banned From Trading Stocks?)

Charlamagne, whose given name is Lenard McKelvey, added: “And if you push it back for four years, that might give him more reason to stay, okay?… He is the same person who told his voting base, ‘Just vote one more time, you’ll never have to vote again.’ All right, wink wink. Okay? Come on.”

WATCH:

Charlamagne’s remarks come one day after Bragg asked Judge Juan Merchan to delay sentencing until after Trump leaves the White House, a far-fetched scenario that left other observers scratching their heads. Merchan, a frequent foil of Trump in the courtroom, has twice delayed a sentencing hearing where he could either broom the case, sentence Trump and wait to see if his decision is overturned on appeal, or grant a sentence of unconditional discharge, leaving the guilty verdict intact while absolving Trump of any practical punishment.

The popular radio host has been vocal about his disappointment with Democrats, none more so than President Joe Biden whom he recently argued should have announced years ago that he wouldn’t seek reelection, affording Vice President Kamala Harris and the party a longer runway to nominate a more formidable candidate. Before the election he encouraged Harris to keep calling Trump a “fascist” but afterward questioned whether Democrats were correct in framing Trump as a “threat” to democracy, betraying his own recommendation.

“But don’t ya’ll find it strange that now that he’s won, they’re not calling him a threat to Democracy? They’re not calling him a fascist. I mean damn, on Monday –,” Charlamagne added, at which point his co-host claimed they “can’t” because Trump is now “the most powerful person in the world.”

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, a conservative pro-Trump legal observer, cast Bragg’s recommendation as slanted prosecution in a justice system that’s intent on targeting Trump even after his win and a landmark Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. “The worst possible scenario, in my view, is to keep this matter pending during the four years of the administration. You cannot have a local district attorney treat a sitting president like a freak on a leash, where he just is able to say that, ‘I will finish this once you’re out of office,’” Turley said. “It elevates the district attorney to a grotesque level. It also leaves this local judge as determining the ultimate outcome of the president of the United States. It doesn’t serve the nation or justice to have that type of lingering question for the next four years.”

Earlier this month Judge Merchan postponed a November 12th hearing in the case where Trump was convicted on 34 felony counts related to a hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. The president-elect’s attorneys have argued the payment was made as an official act from the Oval Office while prosecutors, despite disagreeing, conceded in a filing that their case is all but finished. “The People deeply respect the Office of the President, are mindful of the demands and obligations of the presidency and acknowledge that Defendant’s inauguration will raise unprecedented legal questions,” prosecutors wrote. “We also deeply respect the fundamental role of the jury in our constitutional system. No current law establishes that a president’s temporary immunity from prosecution requires dismissal of a post-trial criminal proceeding that was initiated at a time when the defendant was not immune from criminal prosecution and that is based on unofficial conduct for which the defendant is also not immune,” the filing continues.

(FREE GUIDE: Trump’s Secret New “IRS Loophole” Has Democrats Panicking)