Manhattan prosecutor Alvin Bragg agrees to testify in Congress

NEW YORK (AP) — Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg agreed Friday to testify before a possible hostile, Republican-controlled congressional subcommittee, but likely only after former President Donald Trump is convicted in July.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, wrote to Bragg in late May after Trump’s conviction in the key money trial, accusing him of conducting a “political prosecution” and asking him to testify on the June 13 hearing.

In response, Manhattan District Attorney General Counsel Leslie Dubeck stated that the prosecutor’s office is “committed to voluntary cooperation.”

She added that this cooperation includes making Bragg, a Democrat, available to testify “at an agreed upon date.” However, the letter said that Jordan’s chosen date “creates various scheduling conflicts.”

She noted that the proceedings against Trump haven’t yet been concluded. Trump, convicted of falsifying documents to conceal hidden money paid to a porn actor throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, is scheduled to be sentenced on July 11. Before that, prosecutors will make recommendations to the judge in regards to the sentence Trump deserves.

“The trial court and appellate courts have issued numerous orders to protect the fair administration of justice in People v. Trump, and attending a public hearing at this time could potentially harm those efforts,” the letter reads. .

Bragg’s office asked for a possibility to discuss another date with the subcommittee and acquire more information in regards to the “scope and purpose of the proposed hearing.”

Jordan also asked for testimony from Matthew Colangelo, one among the lead prosecutors in the Trump case. Bragg’s office didn’t rule out the chance, but said in the letter that it could “evaluate the appropriateness” of allowing the assistant district attorney to testify publicly in regards to the energetic prosecution.

Featured Stories

Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, has proposed withholding federal funding from any entity that tries to prosecute the previous president. He also complained about what he described because the “weaponization of the federal government.”

His committee had previously successfully fought to obtain testimony from former prosecutor who worked on the Trump case, Mark Pomerantz, despite Bragg’s initial reservations. This testimony amounted to little, nonetheless, as Pomerantz refused to answer many questions, claiming that doing so could potentially expose him to criminal prosecution for leaking secret grand jury testimony.