Skip to content

Catching ire

https://twitter.com/NewDay/status/1479438878629154820?s=20&t=QmbvkXvfMn2qK1suBvvhIg

When Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg in January halted his office’s investigation of the Trump Organization and its namesake, he might have thought that after some blowback the stink would blow over.

Think again, say former Manhattan prosecutor Robert C. Gottlieb and Gerald B. Lefcourt, past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and past president of the Foundation for Criminal Justice. They write in a New York Daily News opinion piece this morning:

It is time for recently elected Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to publicly explain why he suspended the grand jury presentation that focused on whether criminal charges should be brought against Donald Trump for financial irregularities. The abrupt resignation of Mark Pomerantz and Carey Dunne, who headed the DA’s investigation of Trump under former DA Cy Vance, has raised serious questions that serve to undermine the public’s confidence in the integrity of the district attorney’s investigation. Pomerantz’s extraordinary resignation letter, which detailed his reasons for leaving, and the recent reports that prosecutors are now returning documents to people who turned over information about Trump’s business hardly support the new DA’s claim that “the investigation continues.”

Gottlieb and Lefcourt follow several other attorneys, Norman Eisen, E. Danya Perry and Joshua Perry, who days ago demanded an explanation in the Washington Post:

Pomerantz’s resignation letter makes clear that Bragg made the decision to end a long-standing investigation over the objections of line prosecutors. Pomerantz is a prosecutor with formidable expertise in complicated cases, like the one the office was reportedly building against Trump, and the veteran litigator is not known for hyperbole or grandstanding. The letter stated his belief that “we have evidence sufficient to establish Mr. Trump’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” Although we do not have access to all the evidence prosecutors reviewed, both exculpatory and inculpatory, the public record betrays a strong case for bringing an indictment. Two of us explained why in a lengthy report last year, concluding that Trump faced liability for offenses including falsifying business records.

But let’s be clear that the disagreement is on the merits: We reject any insinuation that Trump somehow got to Bragg. Part of the reason to hold Trump accountable is the principle that our public life deserves better than conspiracy theories that corrode our civic institutions. The people who rightly seek accountability for Trump shouldn’t contribute to the degradation of our public life by making evidence-free insinuations about Bragg.

Still, the case appears now to be closed, or on life support at best. If that’s the situation, Bragg could do the public a service by leveling with us about his decision-making and the status of his investigation.

Mr. Pomerantz’s Feb. 23 resignation letter published in the New York Times puts Bragg in a vice, former Los Angeles County prosecutor and criminal defense attorney Josh Ritter told Newsweek (3/25):

“What Mr. Pomerantz is describing cannot be characterized as a simple difference in opinion between prosecutors. The letter is nothing short of a scathing rebuke on Mr. Bragg’s refusal to bring charges against Trump for what Mr. Pomerantz describes as clear-cut criminal behavior,” Ritter said.

“This letter places Mr. Bragg in a completely untenable position. If Mr. Bragg were to now reverse course and pursue an indictment against Trump, he will no doubt be excoriated for bowing to political pressure. Conversely, if Mr. Bragg maintains his current position the letter raises questions about Mr. Trump’s potential crimes that cannot remain unanswered.”

Also from Newsweek (3/24):

“No question anymore. Bragg stopped indictment of Trump. He must explain. And, I want to hear from Pomerantz,” tweeted MSNBC legal analyst Jill Wine-Banks.

Richard Signorelli, a former assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, wrote in a series of tweets: “From his first day in office, [Bragg] has made one mistake after another, literally jeopardizing public safety. His incompetence in office has made him unreasonably risk adverse & cowardly w/ regard to holding Trump accountable for his career of criminality. Shameful.

“We ended up electing as Manhattan DA the absolute worst candidate of all. Cowardly, incompetent, & a danger to public safety. I apologize again for having supported him.”

It’s been like this for Bragg since Day 1. Sucks to be him. It should suck to be Trump.

Marcy Wheeler’s analysis of progress on the Jan. 6 investigation nothwithstanding, after the House Select Committee Monday night voted “to refer former Trump aides Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino to the Justice Department for criminal contempt of Congress charges,” it could suck to be U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland soon enough:

As part of last night’s proceedings, members made little effort to hide their frustrations with federal prosecutors. Reporting on last night’s committee actions, Politico noted that lawmakers “repeatedly urged the Justice Department to take more-aggressive action.”

Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff argued last night, “The Department of Justice has a duty to act on this referral and others that we have sent. Without enforcement of congressional subpoenas, there is no oversight, and without oversight, no accountability — for the former president, or any other president, past, present, or future. Without enforcement of its lawful process, Congress ceases to be a co-equal branch of government.”

Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria added, “Attorney General Garland, do your job so we can do ours.”

The timing of the rhetoric was of particular interest: Just hours before the committee convened, a federal judge released a ruling that said Donald Trump “likely attempted to obstruct the joint session of Congress” on Jan. 6, which would be a crime.

Yes, due process runs on a different timetable than public patience. Bragg and Garland must wonder why they took their jobs. So do many of us.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 4th Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

Published inUncategorized