'Political theater': Ex-prosecutor who probed Trump blasts Jim Jordan’s 'cynical histrionics'

Mark Pomerantz made clear Friday that he will show up but he’s not going to say much to Republican House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan.

Pomerantz is one of two former prosecutors for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office who investigated Donald Trump under Cyrus Vance’s leadership, but resigned in protest after Alvin Bragg was elected and seemed to have shut down the investigation into Trump’s alleged porn star hush money payoff and alleged alterations of the valuations of his properties.

Chairman Jordan subpoenaed Pomerantz, a subpoena Pomerantz fought on several grounds including Congress has no constitutional authority over a state or local official or their criminal investigation. Many legal experts agree that Jordan is interfering in Bragg’s investigation, and now prosecution, of Trump, who has since been charged by Bragg with 34 felony violations.

Pomerantz has said not only does he strongly believe Donald Trump committed crimes, he strongly believes it would not be hard to convict the ex-president of those crimes. In his resignation letter to Bragg Pomerantz wrote he believed Trump was “guilty of numerous felony violations” and it was “a grave failure of justice” to not prosecute him for them.

But Pomerantz sat down Friday for a closed-door deposition, and in a prepared statement blasted Jordan.

“I am here because I respect the rule of law. I spent my working life in service to the rule of law, and the rule of law requires a witness to appear for testimony in response to a subpoena. So, I am present as required,” a defiant Pomerantz wrote (see statement below). He may have been referencing that Jordan himself, possibly unlawfully, refused to cooperate with a lawful subpoena issued by the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack.

“What I do not respect is the use of the Committee’s subpoena power to compel me to participate in an act of political theater.”

“This deposition is for show,” he added. “I do not believe for a moment that I am here to assist a genuine effort to enact legislation or conduct legislative ‘oversight.'”

“We are gathered here because Donald Trump’s supporters would like to use these proceedings to attempt to obstruct and undermine the criminal case pending against him, and to harass, intimidate, and discredit anyone who investigates or charges him. Fortunately, I do not have to cooperate with the cynical histrionics that this deposition represents. Although the rule of law compels me to be here, it does not
require that I play a substantive role in your theatrical production. Under the law, I can decline to answer your questions for several reasons.”

He went on to explain he is required by law to maintain “claims of privilege and confidentiality in order to protect the integrity of the pending prosecution and continuing investigation of Donald Trump.”

He tells Jordan, “the rule of law is best served if the merits of the case against Mr. Trump are litigated before the court that is hearing that case. This is neither the time nor the place for me to answer questions about the investigation or the pending indictment over the objection of the prosecutors. The charges against Mr. Trump should be heard and decided by a judge and a jury before politicians second-guess their merits or the decision to bring them. That’s how our system works. Those who claim that they respect the rule of law should wait for the courts to do their work.”

After explaining additional reasons he is invoking his Fifth Amendment rights, Pomerantz says: “It gives me no joy to invoke my legal rights, but I am glad that the law allows me not to cooperate with this performance of political theater. As an American, I am privileged to have the legal rights that I assert today, and I am hopeful that I live in a country that will continue to respect them.”

CNN’s Annie Grayer posted a copy of Pomerantz’s letter. Read it below or at this link.