Manhattan DA’s Office Hits Back at House Republicans
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
After House Judiciary chairman Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) and two other GOP leaders demanded testimony from district attorney Alvin Bragg regarding what they say is his “politically motivated prosecutorial decision” to indict former President Trump shortly, the Manhattan DA’s office has responded.
In the letter to Jordan and company, general counsel Leslie Dubeck said the request from House Republicans constituted “an unprecedented inquiry into a pending local prosecution.”
The Manhattan DA is looking closely at a hush-money payment to porn actress Stormy Daniels made on Trump’s behalf. The grand jury did not meet Wednesday, further delaying any possible indictment.
“The Letter only came after Donald Trump created a false expectation that he would be arrested the next day and his lawyers reportedly urged you to intervene. Neither fact is a legitimate basis for congressional inquiry,” continued Dubeck, referring to the former president’s claim he would be arrested Tuesday, which did not come to pass.
The general counsel added that the Manhattan DA is obliged by the federal and state constitution to protect state law enforcement functions from federal interference.
“The Letter seeks non-public information about a pending criminal investigation, which is confidential under state law,” Dubeck wrote, adding that “the Letter’s requests are an unlawful incursion into New York’s sovereignty.”
Dubeck continued by stating that Congress is not the appropriate branch to review pending criminal matters. She added that federal funding is an insufficient basis to justify what she regards as unconstitutional requests from Jordan and his colleagues.
“The Letter indicates that its requests may be related to a review of federal public safety funds. But the Letter does not suggest any way in which either the District Attorney’s testimony about his prosecutorial decisions or the documents and communications of former Assistant District Attorneys on a pending criminal investigation would shed light on that review,” she wrote.
To Jordan and his colleagues, the main reason they demanded testimony from Bragg was because they believed the prosecution would “erode confidence in the evenhanded application of justice and unalterably interfere in the course of the 2024 presidential election.”
Jordan doubled down on his Monday letter this morning by demanding testimony from Carey Dunne and Mark Pomerantz, Bragg’s ex-colleagues at the Manhattan DA’s office who resigned in protest after Bragg initially expressed doubts about prosecuting Trump, suspending the investigation. Dunne and Pomerantz were tasked with leading the investigation into every aspect of Trump’s finances.
“Your unrelenting pursuit of President Trump has followed you into the private sector. Following your resignation from Bragg’s office, you and Pomerantz started a law firm dedicated to ‘weighing ways’ to bar President Trump from holding future office,” Jordan wrote to Dunne.
Jordan also pointed to Pomerantz’s recent book “excoriating Bragg for not aggressively prosecuting President Trump.” He added that Bragg had been deeply stung by the criticism from the pair.
The House Judiciary chairman is accusing the Manhattan ex-prosecutors of shaming Bragg into bringing the indictment now. According to him, the facts of the case have not changed since previous prosecutors declined to bring charges and the credibility of the lead witness, former Trump personal attorney and “fixer” Michael Cohen, remains shot.
“The only intervening factor, it appears, was President Trump’s announcement that he would be a candidate for President in 2024,” Jordan wrote.
“Your actions, both as a special prosecutor and since leaving the District Attorney’s office, cast serious doubt on the administration of fair and impartial justice in this matter. Your words in the New York Times have unfairly disparaged President Trump, an innocent and uncharged man, as a felon to millions of Times readers. Your book again unfairly disparaged President Trump, and now opens the door to examination about the District Attorney’s office commitment to evenhanded justice,” the congressman wrote to Pomerantz.
Jordan also set out justifications for Congress’s interest in the matter.
In the Wednesday letter, he argued that Congress has a keen interest in increasing oversight on Bragg’s office because it will inform potential legislation to reform the criminal-justice system and to better delineate prosecutorial authority between federal and local officials. Because the circumstances in this case may also stem from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to Russia, Jordan said Congress may consider legislative reforms to the authorities of special counsels.
Last Saturday, the Manhattan DA responded internally to the increased pressure on his office. He said in a memo to staff obtained by Politico: “We do not tolerate attempts to intimidate our office or threaten the rule of law in New York.”
