House Republicans present proof of bias in Trump prosecution by Manhattan district attorney
The House Judiciary Committee outlined the early stages of the Manhattan district attorney’s case against Donald Trump. They accused a retired attorney of pushing a prosecution for political reasons. The report highlighted the perceived bias of Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg and detailed findings from media reports and depositions. The committee criticized the case as politically motivated. The House Judiciary Committee uncovered details of the Manhattan DA’s case against Donald Trump. Allegations were made against a former attorney for politically driving the prosecution. They exposed perceived bias by Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, citing media findings and depositions. The committee condemned the case as politically influenced.
The House Judiciary Committee mapped out the early stages of the Manhattan district attorney’s hush money case against Donald Trump in a report on Thursday, accusing a retired attorney of forcing a prosecution against the former president for political purposes.
The committee claimed that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, an elected Democrat, brought a weak case against Trump because he succumbed to pressure from former special prosecutor Mark Pomerantz. Its findings were based on media reports, Pomerantz’s book, and his deposition last year with the committee.
“The story behind the [district attorney of New York’s] investigation into President Trump and the people involved illustrate the clear partisan aim of this case,” committee members said.
🚨 #BREAKING: Judiciary Republicans Release Report on the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s Political Vendetta Against President Donald J. Trump
Read it here: https://t.co/tFMfOKo4Rg
— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) April 25, 2024
The report itself was relatively short, but it contained 266 pages of appendices, including a transcript of Pomerantz’s deposition, during which he declined to answer most of lawmakers’ questions.
“When Pomerantz appeared before the Judiciary Committee to discuss his book and politically motivated investigation, he was unusually silent—refusing to answer even the most basic of questions,” committee members stated.
Pomerantz declined to answer more than 200 questions by invoking the Fifth Amendment or stating that, under Bragg’s instruction, he could not provide privileged information.
Questions Pomerantz opted not to answer included whether he had his own desk in Bragg’s office and how long he had known Cy Vance, Bragg’s predecessor.
The report also laid out details from Pomerantz’s 2023 book, People vs. Donald Trump: An Inside Account, in which Pomerantz discussed the pro bono special prosecutor role he took on in the Manhattan district attorney’s office under Vance.
Pomerantz joined the office in February 2021 specifically for the purpose of leading an inquiry into Trump that stemmed from the Department of Justice’s prosecution of Michael Cohen, Trump’s former attorney and fixer. The New York Times reported that Vance’s office began pursuing Trump as early as 2018, the same year Cohen pleaded guilty to tax evasion and campaign finance violations.
“Pomerantz’s book, described as a ‘300-page exercise in score-settling and scorn,’ revealed the extent to which the DANY’s investigation of President Trump was politically motivated,” committee members wrote. “Pomerantz described his eagerness to investigate President Trump, writing that he was ‘delighted’ to join an unpaid group of lawyers advising on the Trump investigation, and joking that salary negotiations had gone ‘great’ because he would have paid to join the investigation.”
In his book, Pomerantz dove into great detail about his grievances with Trump and attempts to build a case against him related to payments Cohen arranged to porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election. He likened Trump to a mob boss and said the former president did not know the difference “between bull**** and reality.”
The committee contended that Pomerantz’s legal pursuit against Trump stemmed from an “overwhelming contempt” he had for the former president.
The committee also showcased the sacrifices Pomerantz has said he made to prosecute Trump. Pomerantz, for instance, said in his book that he lost money by foregoing a trip to Sonoma because of mounting work to prepare a Trump indictment, and he painted a panicked visual of him and his wife frantically attempting to save Trump-related documents, rather than personal items, as water was rising around their home during Hurricane Ida.
“These are the actions of a rogue, overzealous prosecutor acting with political motivations,” committee members wrote. “And that motivation infected the investigation from the start.”
Pomerantz left the district attorney’s office in early 2022, when Bragg took over, because Bragg was reluctant at the time to continue the office’s Trump inquiry. Pomerantz detailed his concerns in his resignation letter, which appeared that year in the New York Times. In the letter, Pomerantz alleged that Trump was “guilty of numerous felony violations.”
Committee members said the timing of Bragg’s decision to charge Trump “raises considerable suspicion.”
“Bragg’s decision to bring forth this case following Pomerantz’s public pressure campaign—and after essentially abandoning the DANY’s previous Trump investigations at the beginning of his tenure—raises considerable suspicion as to whether political pressure played a role in his decision,” committee members wrote.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The committee also recommended numerous legislative proposals to address what it described as “politically motivated local prosecutions,” noting that the proposals would also apply to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s prosecution of Trump in Georgia related to the 2020 election.
The Washington Examiner reached out to Pomerantz for comment on the committee’s report.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
