Partisan and political crusader that he is, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg sued Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) for daring to conduct congressional oversight by subpoenaing Mark Pomerantz, who previously worked for the DA. Bragg faced a loss of epic proportions on Wednesday when Trump-appointed Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil blew the lid off on how political his political crusade against former and potentially future President Donald Trump. Bragg was soon after granted an appeal by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and oral arguments would have been heard on Tuesday. Bragg is backing down, though, and dropped his appeal, as was announced on Friday night.
B) Manhattan DA spokesman: Our successful stay of this subpoena blocked the immediate deposition and afforded us the time necessary to coordinate with the House Judiciary Committee on an agreement that protects the District Attorney’s privileges and interests.
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) April 22, 2023
C) Manhattan DA spokesman: We are pleased with this resolution, which ensures any questioning of our former employee will take place in the presence of our General Counsel on a reasonable, agreed upon timeframe.
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) April 22, 2023
Jordan spox Dye: This evening, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office withdrew its appeal in Bragg v. Jordan. Mr. Pomerantz’s deposition will go forward on May 12, and we look forward to his appearance.
— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) April 22, 2023
Pomerantz was subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee for the insider knowledge he had working in the DA's office. He resigned in 2022 in protest over disagreements about whether to bring charges against Trump. Bragg ultimately brought 34 felony charges in an unprecedented move to indict a former president. Such charges are being brought using an untested legal theory, despite an expired statute of limitations, and when charges could have been brought as misdemeanors.
There was disagreement between Pomerantz and Bragg, and Pomerantz resigned in protest. He even wrote a book. As Jazz Shaw pointed out, with original emphasis, at our sister site of Hot Air:
The true reason Bragg doesn’t want Pomerantz to testify is that the ex-prosecutor has already written a book admitting that his office had done precisely what he’s accused of doing. He even went on 60 Minutes and said as much. Bragg’s office had begun digging into all Trump’s records from the moment he took office, seeking to make good on a campaign promise to “get Trump.” It was a prosecutor in search of a crime – any crime – rather than a case of a DA investigating a criminal complaint.
Pomerantz will appear before the committee on May 12, as the Associated Press reported, and he can have his lawyer present. Committee lawyer Matthew Berry is mentioned as providing some insight about the process:
House Republicans, Berry said, want to protect the sovereignty and autonomy of the presidency, envisioning a scenario where the commander in chief could feel obligated to make certain decisions to avoid having local prosecutors in politically unfavorable jurisdictions charge them with crimes after they leave office.
For those reasons, Berry argued, Congress is immune from judicial intervention, citing the speech and debate clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Pomerantz could refuse to answer certain questions, citing legal privilege and ethical obligations, and Jordan would rule on those assertions on a case-by-case basis, Berry said, but he shouldn’t be exempt from showing up. If Jordan were to overrule Pomerantz and he still refused to answer, he could then face a criminal referral to the Justice Department for contempt of Congress, but that wouldn’t happen immediately, Berry said.
Here's hoping for him that Pomerantz's book deal was worth it.
