It is unusual for Congress to subpoena a line attorney — Jordan, in his Thursday letter, alleged that Bragg’s office directed Pomerantz not to cooperate with the oversight. The Prague office and Pomerantz did not immediately respond to questions about the request.
But Pomerantz has also written a book in which he details the New York investigation into Trump and the Trump Organization, which could make it harder to resist a subpoena.
Jan. The select committee on the 6th used a similar argument against the subpoena of former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, arguing that he waived potential privileges by publishing a book detailing some of his interactions with the former president. Meadows was later held in contempt of Congress for refusing to testify, although the Justice Department declined to prosecute him.
However, another committee witness — Peter Navarro — who wrote a book before refusing to appear on Jan. 6 is now being sued for contempt of Congress.
Jordan Pomerantz said, “There is no basis for you to refuse to testify before the panel about matters that you have already discussed in your book and/or on a prime-time television show with millions of viewers. There is no duty of confidentiality or privileged interest.”
The subpoena comes days after Trump appeared in court in New York and pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of “falsifying business records.” Prosecutors allege that Trump, the first former president to be impeached, falsified company records and tried to first bury and then cover up damaging allegations of an extramarital affair.
It comes as Republicans weigh the next steps in the investigation into Bragg’s office.
They have returned several rounds of volleys demanding testimony and official documents from Bragg’s general counsel, Leslie Dubec. Dubec responded to Jordan, chairman of the oversight committee James Comer (R-K.) and Executive Committee Chairman Brian Steele (R-Wis.) last week requested a list of questions they want to ask Bragg and any documents they think they can get that don’t reveal the personal details of the investigation.
Dubec also offered a blistering critique of the investigation in his letter, calling their allegations of political harassment “baseless and inflammatory” while urging Republicans to negotiate before Bragg’s possible subpoena.
“Please refrain from these inflammatory allegations, withdraw your request for information and let the criminal justice process proceed without illegal political interference,” he added.
Bragg’s office argued that congressional Republicans lacked a “legitimate legal motive” behind the DA’s investigation into the Trump investigation. But Jordan has argued that the investigation has more to do with the national implications of prosecuting a former president — from conflicts between state and federal laws to the Secret Service’s role in protecting the former president as a criminal defendant.
Republicans have yet to respond to Dubec’s latest letter, but Jordan supported the investigation in a letter to Pomerantz — reiterating that Republicans could use findings from it to craft bills to use federal forfeiture funds.
That includes a potential ban on using those funds to investigate a current or former president or presidential candidate, Jordan said. (The Manhattan DA’s office disclosed that it used federal forfeiture funds for expenses related to investigations of Trump or the Trump Organization.)
Jordan has insisted in a series of television interviews this week that Prague’s subpoena is on the table. He left the door open for the DA to voluntarily or even Republicans to focus first on other individuals in Bragg’s orbit.
Pomerantz and Carey Dunne are of particular interest to House Republicans because both resigned from Bragg’s office earlier this year — reportedly because of Bragg’s skepticism about moving forward with the Trump case. Thursday’s subpoena comes after Jordan sent letters to both Pomerantz and Dunne last month, but did not serve Dunne with a similar subpoena.
Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.