House Republicans Demand Testimony From Former Prosecutor Who Called for Trump Charges

Jim Jordan, head of the House Judiciary Committee, demanded answers from a previous special assistant district attorney in New York who was in charge of an investigation into Donald Trump’s financial dealings.

Jordan asked Mark Pomerantz for help in the agency’s investigation into the alleged prosecution of the former chairman of New York County District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who has not yet been charged in court. A similar text was allegedly sent to previous counsel Carey Dunne, according to the committee.

According to reports, Bragg intends to charge Trump with” quiet money” that was paid to adult television actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election in order to cover up claims of an event. Trump refutes the alleged incident.

Three years after accusing Democrat Bragg of abusing his judicial authority in what he called a politically motivated trial of the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president in 2024, Jordan writes to Pomerantz.

Jordan has asked Pomerantz to give a transcribed meeting and hand over documents and connections” as soon as possible” in order to broaden the scope of the House Republicans investigation. Jordan remarked on the former lawyer’s position as an special” special assistant district attorney” who oversaw an inquiry scouring Trumps’ finances” looking for some formal theory on which to provide charges.”

The House Judiciary Committee is interested in learning whether Pomerantz coerced Bragg into reviving a dead case based on an” tenuous and untested legal theory ,” according to the letter.

Jordan used what he called Pomerantz’s attempts to humiliate Bragg over the city attorneys’ initial reluctance to file charges as the basis for his summons. He pointed out that Pomerantz wrote a” scathing” resignation letter, which was leaked and widely reported, and that he later wrote the book” excoriating” Bragg and published it this month.

We ask for your cooperation in overseeing this diplomatically motivated legal choice, Jordan wrote,” based on your unique purpose in this issue and your subsequent people statements prejudicing the impartiality of any prosecution.”

The papers to Pomerantz and Dunne follow Bragg’s recent call to speak after Trump announced his arrest for March 21 on March 18.

Shame Campaign

Jordan argued that even the Department of Justice decided not to prosecute after looking into the details at the heart of Bragg’s inspection in 2019. He claimed that these facts had been known since 2018.

Jordan referred to Bragg’s renewed evaluation as a” zombie” case, which was reportedly sparked by Trump running for office in 2024, despite the investigation turning up no fresh witnesses or different information since 2018.

In his letter, Jordan also expressed doubts about the veracity of Michael Cohen, the main witness, whom he referred to as” Trump’s disgraced former lawyer” and a former fraudster.

Jordan emphasized Pomerantz’s attempts to pressure Bragg through a pity campaign after observing his earlier reservations. This included writing” a withering resignation letter in which you falsely accused President Trump of” many criminal violations” and claimed that if Bragg did not file charges,” it would be a grave loss of justice.”

Jordan continued,” You urged Bragg to have President Trump fully responsible for his crimes, claiming that the decision will destiny any future hopes for trial. Word-for-word of your resignation letter made it into the New York Times, and your accusations of Bragg’s analysis were widely reported by news sources.

Jordan continued,” Pomerantz already” published a book excoriating Bragg for neither sharply prosecuting President Trump, laying bare the office’s about deliberations about the investigation and your personal animosity toward Mr. Trump.”

Jordan argued that Pomerantz’s things as a special counsel and since resigning from his position as district attorney seriously questioned the leadership of fair and impartial justice in this case.

According to Jordan,” It now appears that your efforts to pity Bragg have succeeded as he is officially reviving a so-called” zombie” case against President Trump using an flimsy and unproven legal concept.” Even the Washington Post cited” legal experts” as saying that Bragg’s actions were” unusual” because” lawyers have repeatedly examined the long-established features but decided not to pursue charges.”

Pomerantz had until March 27 to answer, according to Jordan.