Nice try, Jim Jordan told Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg on Monday. Then, he proceeded to steamroll right over the panicked prosecutor. Bragg thought he could get cute by filing a federal lawsuit to block Jordan’s subpoena. The committee filed a response. [Late breaking update:] Judge tossed the suit because Bragg didn’t even do his job writing his lawsuit properly and forgot to include the disputed subpoena.
Chairman Jordan undaunted
On Monday, April 17, Jim Jordan responded to a federal lawsuit filed by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. The court simply doesn’t have the authority to block a congressional subpoena. Especially when the subpoena isn’t even for Bragg or any of his current staff.
The committee wants to hear from “a former prosecutor who worked on the DA’s investigation of former President Donald Trump.” Bragg can kiss the Ohio lawmaker’s backside.
Lawyers working for the House Judiciary Committee argued fiercely in their motion that “lawmakers have a right to probe whether ex-presidents are being subjected to ‘politically motivated state investigations and prosecutions.‘”
On February 7th, a #ManhattanProsecutor named Mark Pomerantz published a book titled: “People vs. Donald Trump”.
He detailed both his investigation into the Trump Organization, as well as the decision of the Manhattan District Attorney to not indict.https://t.co/lQzH6kCcoN
— Facts Matter (@FactsMatterRB) April 14, 2023
Specifically, the committee chaired by Jordan wants “deposition testimony from former assistant district attorney Mark Pomerantz.” He quit last year when Bragg initially “decided not to prosecute Trump.”
The reason Alvin Bragg is kicking and screaming is because once he takes the stand, Pomerantz is likely to spill his guts and tell everything he knows. If he tries to lie and gets caught, they call it “perjury.” That’s a crime which generally leads to solid prison terms.
Just the threat of sending one of those deposition requests to Janet Yellen was enough to break the Biden suspicious activity reports free from the evil clutches of the Treasury Department. Jim Jordan and James Comer also have a couple hanging over the heads of Christopher Wray and Merrick Garland.
Unconstitutional attack
Bragg didn’t have a legal leg to stand on when he sued Jordan and the committee last week. He based his case to block the testimony and record requests on the theory the congressional subpoena is an “unprecedently brazen and unconstitutional attack by members of Congress on an ongoing New York State criminal prosecution and investigation of former President Donald J. Trump.”
That’s a legal load of high nitrogen fertilizer, committee lawyers respond back.
Attorneys for the House of Representatives “argued in their response that the congressional probe is proper.” It’s clear to them that “the prospect of a politically motivated prosecution of a former President could give rise to issues of substantial federal concern.” It’s not an option for Jim Jordan to dig into it, that’s his job. Congress “has a substantial interest in the welfare of former Presidents.”
“Expert” lawyer Alvin Bragg sued Jim Jordan to stop Jordan’s subpoena of Mark Pomerantz.
The only problem? Bragg forgot to include the subpoena in the suit.
Judge in the case calls him out. Yikes. 😂https://t.co/mXQk08B4x0
— Jenna Ellis 🐊🇺🇸 (@JennaEllisEsq) April 12, 2023
That’s why they’re allowed to “examine whether former Presidents are being subject to politically motivated state investigations and prosecutions due to the policies they advanced as President.” Once they figure out what happened, they can figure out “what legislative remedies may be appropriate.”
If that isn’t enough to convince the judge to dismiss Bragg’s feeble attempt at evading justice, “Jordan and other lawmakers are immune from lawsuits such as Bragg’s under the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause.” Throw it in the trash so America can move on to discover the truth.
While that was pending, the Ohio lawmaker had a busy day in a field hearing. One that was held in Manhattan. That one heard from residents of Bragg’s city on how good a job he’s doing as prosecutor. Overall, they weren’t happy with him. They weren’t real happy with Adam Schiff or Jerrold Nadler either. Just for bonus points, one protester had a really good rant against Ralph Nader, too. After everyone quit laughing, they made sure to explain he really meant Nadler.
