GOP Responds to Manhattan DA’s Resistance to Testify: ‘Substantial Federal Interest’ in Possible Trump Indictment

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg participates in a news conference in New York, Tuesday, Feb. 7, 2023. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)
AP Photo/Seth Wenig

Reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH), James Comer (R-KY), and Bryan Steil (R-WI) replied to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg on Saturday, stating that their prior requests for testimony and documents from Bragg related to the possible forthcoming indictment of former President Donald Trump still stand after Bragg objected to most of them.

The three powerful committee chairmen contended in a letter obtained by Breitbart News that there existed a “substantial federal interest” in Congress probing Bragg’s investigation of Trump after Bragg disputed most of their initial requests on Thursday.

“Contrary to the central argument set forth in your letter, this matter does not simply involve local or state interests,” they wrote.

Read a copy of their letter below:

The Republicans reasoned that “if state or local prosecutors are able to engage in politically motivated prosecutions of Presidents of the United States (former or current) for personal acts, this could have a profound impact on how Presidents choose to exercise their powers while in office.”

The correspondence represents what has now become a back-and-forth between the three congressmen and Bragg, which could prolong the Republicans resorting to subpoenaing Bragg because of his willingness to communicate with them.

A source familiar confirmed to Breitbart News a New York Post story stating that congressional staff had called Bragg’s office ahead of Thursday because they had not yet received Bragg’s reply to their first letter and that they had been prepared to issue a subpoena if Bragg had not ended up responding to them.

While Bragg argued that the congressmen’s initial requests would interfere with an ongoing investigation and that they were an “unlawful incursion into New York’s sovereignty,” he did offer to “meet and confer” with congressional staff to understand if their requests had “any legitimate legislative purpose.”

Jordan, Comer, and Steil also pointed out that Bragg did not address the case at hand, which is related to a years-old hush money scheme involving porn star Stormy Daniels and Trump’s formal personal attorney Michael Cohen, a convicted felon.

They wrote:

Notably, your reply letter did not dispute the central allegations at issue—that you, under political pressure from left-wing activists and former prosecutors in your office, are reportedly planning to use an alleged federal campaign finance violation, previously declined by federal prosecutors, as a vehicle to extend the statute of limitations on an otherwise misdemeanor offense and indict for the first time in history a former President of the United States. Moreover, you are apparently attempting to upgrade a misdemeanor charge to a felony using an untested legal theory at the same time when you are simultaneously downgrading felony charges to misdemeanors in a majority of other cases in your jurisdiction.

The Republicans reiterated their requests that Bragg contact them to arrange a transcribed interview and provide numerous documents and communication. They gave Bragg until March 31 to comply.

Write to Ashley Oliver at Follow her on Twitter at @asholiver.


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.