mark pomerantz's attack on alvin bragg was about mark pomerantz's eagerness to prosecute donald trump o evidence in a case that alvi bragg believed was insufficient. and this book was greeted in many venues is an importan work of whistleblowing this book was from the start a obvious gift to donald trump it is now a gift to jim jordan because it is this book that makes mark pomerantz legally vulnerable to a congressiona subpoena, uniquely legally vulnerable the judge ordering mar pomerantz to comply with a subpoena, the opinion is reall not an outrageous decision o the merits at all. it's not terribly unreasonable especially after mark pomerant published this book. the judge loves mark pomerantz's book so much tha she quotes it at great lengt in her opinion and in detail and she shockingly distorts it in don trump's favor the judge falsely presents thi from mark pomerantz's book ultimately in march 2023 bragged it, of course, indic president trump, bringing th zombie theory back from th dead once again. notice that bracket, changin the chance of that word. there is a federal judge in w

pomerantz: we had plenty beyond that. i would not have wanted to go forward if the only evidence connecting donald trump to the falsification of the financial statements was michael cohen's testimony. but i get into some of it in the book. some of it i could not get into because it was protected by grand jury secrecy. but in my judgment, there was plenty of evidence that would tie donald trump to the preparation of a financial statement. and if you do buy the book, you can look at a paragraph on page 223 that talks about one of the things that -- some of the things that i might have said to a jury if i were trying to convince a jury that donald trump was in fact responsible for these financial. >> i hope it's more than 223. it could go on. mr. pomerantz: that was a summary paragraph. host: in the final minute or two here, help us understand your perspective on all of the lingering investigations of former president donald trump. there is the civil lawsuit in new york. there is the ongoing manhattan district attorney inves

pomerantz. mr. bragg saying that he can't ever see a world where he woul use michael cohen fo testimony. >> and michael cohen is, o course, a star witness of th d.a.'s office -- >> so, the judge put those excerpts in the decision she also said the first 35 pages of the complaint, was public relations tirade, against former president trump so, she put a lot into the decision, the judge, that wa very critical of d.a. bragg an the decision to try to prevent mr. pomerantz from testifying. in fact she even said, there i a book, and the d. a.'s office did write a letter to hi publisher, and ask them not to do it, but they never sued they never took any othe action, and the judge wa careful of that. they had an opportunity to prevent book from bein published, which actuall would've probably lost, becaus that would be prior restraint. but they didn't take tha opportunity, according to this decision by the judge. >> it sounds like the fact tha mr. pomerantz went public by the, book was so much of his experie

how much can he get from pomerantz that's not in th book >> if pomerantz is going to be forced to testify or is willin to testify, the interest the answer is a lot. he was the person along with carey dunn who was running thi investigation for at least a year although it was much broader than the charges that were brought. it encompass those charges a well so he no doubt knows a tremendous amount of information about the district attorney's concerns about th case they're assessment th internal deliberative proces in order to bring the proces or not so they want him to testify. this lawsuit seems designed to prevent that >> they're also asking for communications between the da' office and the doj as it pertains to donald trump now presumably that's becaus they are seeing this house investigation has to deal with we want to see what the deal i saying to the da's office. but what could they glean from those communications beyon whether or not federal dollars were used correctly? >> we know the u.s. attorney's office in the southern distric did not pursue these charges we don't really know why

look, i don't think, i pomerantz were alvin bragg again for this committee, yo are not going to see aome out that is not already out, you are going to have a lot of speech-ifying from the members of congress on both sides of the aisle, lot of speech-ifying and then the witnesses are going to him, and, ha dodged a little bit because they can't answer al of those questions and i think that is one of the things that disagreement i going to do. i think it is going to protect the investigation itself that was alvin bragg's biggest issue was protecting the investigation going forward. so i think that that is par fo the course of trying to ge this resolved to let everybody move on, have their show >> let me ask, you senator about another issue that i trump related. another probe. a federal judge denied trump's request for a four-week dela in the civil rape an defamation trial on the e jean carroll case that trial is set to begin thi tuesday. it is going to trial after years of back and forth. talk to me about this stat here it is probably a case that i not gone as much attention a it probabl

pomerantz for his part, he has put in this impossible situation. has asked hi to come before the committee and he violated -- alvin bragg has sued him int not testifying so the court is basicall giving everyone a little bit o breathing room giving mark pomerantz a little bit of breathing room, while ultimately deciding whether or not jim jordan has a legitimat legislative purpose for callin pomerantz as a witness now keep in mind, th interesting twist is pomerantz did not work on the case often by alternately charged also - hush money payment to stormy daniels. instead he worked on a ver different case around whethe or not trump lied on his tax forms. so that is something that think the judges will also weigh and then look at whether or not to mark pomerantz is an appropriate witness for ji jordan's purported legislative bill >> senator jones, it is always projection with th republicans. i mean, you cannot make this up you've got republicans like ji jordan claiming to be the part of law and order but what leg do they have to stand on when they are

we are going to turn to will pomerantz. this is a great way of getting into it by quoting president putin himself. we are here to talk about causes and consequences. i would love to see your framing of what was the causes? and now the consequences. mr. pomerantz: in terms of the causes of this war, there are many, but i think vladimir putin telegraphed with the aspirations and objectives of this war are in his 2022 constitutional amendments. in these amendments he advocates and said russia could not give away any of its territory, further, he emphasized the russian federation had an obligation to defend ethnic russians abroad. i think these two principles have been guiding prudent during this war -- putting during this war -- putin during this work. if he wants to ignore the constitution he can and he has done during his career but one of the things putin did after the invasion was to make sure the four new regions were put in the russian constitution. i think this has tremendous consequences for putin and how he wants to c

after the agreement for former prosecutor mark pomerantz testify was announced, alvin bragg said thisuccessful stay of thi subpoena blocked the immediate deposition and fortress th time necessary to coordinate with the house judiciary committee on an agreement that protects the d. a.'s privilege and interests. we are pleased with this resolution, which ensures an questioning of our forme employee will take place in th presence of our general counse on a reasonable agreed upo timeline let's bring back kate benner and former alabama senator dou jones. katie, what do you make of thi deal between alvin bragg and jordan on having mark pomerant testify? it seems each side here ha claimed a little bit of victory, what do you think of it? >> well each side has claime victory because no ultimat decision has been made what is interesting as you see first of, all looking at jim jordan he has done something interesting here, he has claimed that there is legitimate congressional reaso of oversight in order to speak with mark pomerantz, because h has decided that he wants to introduce an incredibl

pomerantz seek confidential information that belongs to the office of the district attorney and people of new york. basic principles of federalism and common sense and binding supreme court precedent forbid congress from demanding it. his law soothe comes after house republicans announce they are holding a hearing in manhattan this monday to interview victims of violent crime who have suffered, they say, under d.a. bragg's progressive policies. bragg's office says it is a stunt, something that jordan disputes. >> the witnesses we will have on monday won't call this a stunt. they know what happened to their families, communities and businesses in manhattan. >> a federal judge will hear arguments wednesday whether or not to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent pomerantz from testifying the following day on thursday. >> harris: wow, we're down to t.r.o. restraining orders. jason chaffetz. fox new contributor and former republican congressman for utah. great to see you if "focus", jason. i mention the words making it personal because it feels this way with alvin bragg. the indict

since then, pomerantz has said he was essentially obsessed with nailing donald trump. now alvin bragg takes over as the d a. about a year ago and early 2022 pomerantz brings alvin bragg a half baked case relating to donald trump's valuation of assets and brag, says it's not ready yet. what is pomerance do ? he doesn't do more work he quits and he goes on a publicity tour, and he writes a book giving away all sorts of stuff that's happening inside the d. a s office now. alvin bragg, many other former prosecutors, prosecutors associations came out and said pomerantz is undermining the investigation. he's giving away inside secrets . his book is called an inside account. and now sure enough, as a result of that jim jordans, attention has been piqued. and so now jim jordan's going to be questioning mark pomerantz trying to dig up dirt in front of the public. and so what are the house republicans on the judiciary committee, hoping to learn from mark pomerantz? does it? is it going to have any kind of effect on the indictment? yeah, it shouldn't. but it will be an interestin

pomerantz wrote a book about the goings on at the d.a.'york city, over the objections of the district attorney. that does open the door a bit to the fact that he's already made these allegations public and as jim jordan has noted, you've already said these things publicly, so why won't you come and talk to us about them now. if the d.a.'s office wants to come in and object to a formal appearance, which this would be a formal appearance by mark pomerantz in front of congress, it can do that this will then set up a sort of court battle, i think, about whether a congressional subpoena can be enforced in these kinds of circumstances, and we're just going to have to see the way the courts rule on that. this is not -- this is not a situation that has arisen before >> kacarol, we've also learned that judge juan merchan who presided over trump's new york arraignment, made a campaign donation to president biden's 2020 presidential campaign it was for $15 are the optics problematic here? >> i think the optics are a bit problematic. to be clear, the

pomerantz, see highly sensitive and confidential local prosecuto earlier information that belongs to the office of the district attorney and th people of new york basic principles of federalism and common sense, as well as binding supreme court precedent, forbid congress from demanding it a new filing today, former manhattan date a, cy vance alvin bragg's predecessor. he's thrown his support by theba in amicus brief today advanced into the group of attorneys an former members of congress quote, congress has no authority to interfere with an ongoing criminal prosecution particularly one brought by state prosecutor that calculus does not chang just because the defendant whom a grand jury indicted happens to be a former president of the united states nor does it change when member of congress attempt to characterize their unlawfu interference as oversight. joining us now, andrew weissmann, former fbi genera counsel and former chief of th criminal division in the eastern district of new york he's a professor of practice a nyu law school an msnbc legal asset give us your read on wednesday

jordan subpoenaed pomerantz to testify about the district attorney's investigation.suing jordan and committee saying the subpoena is not constitutional. pomerantz himself agrees saying the committee is trying to interfere with the district attorney's offices ongoing work. assist mr. trump in his defense, probe my political views and harass me because i was the author of a book that mr. trump and some of his supporters did not like. we're here. the next move is jim jordan needing to file a response to this stay by tomorrow at 3:00 p.m.enter about 24 hours to go for him. >> bill: thank you. gillian turner in washington. nice to see you. >> dana: republicans turning their 2024 focus to west virginia senator joe manchin as they work to regain the majority in the upper chamber. they are trying to tie manchin to president biden's spending sprees including the passage of an inflation reduction act. new ad reminding voters of the true cost. >> 100,000 west virginia jobs are in jeopardy. >> dana: he could face another challenge. west virginia's governor jim justice could ente

an attorney can be present wit pomerantz when he sets befor that committee in a closed deposition on anythin like a public hearing or anything like that a committee spokesperson telling me that depositions ar usually almost always done in closed setting but nonetheless, this come after jim jordan, the chair of the panel subpoenaed mar pomerantz the former prosecutor alvin bragg pushed back agains this notion saying that this was still alive investigation, jordan saying that pomerantz was perhaps politicall motivated. so, in any case this just goes to show you that they ar pressing on and investigatin the investigators. jordan, one of the forme presidents versus allies her on capitol hill now before his republican led committee pomerantz will have to decid and answer some toug questions. but, again, only in closed-door setting. and this is just i out wha many months we expect to come. not just from this committee but also from the other tw committee chairs who vowed t investigate this all under the direction of speaker mccarthy. >> all right, julie tsirki for. us thank, you julie. we

s office advise that pomerantz not cooperate with this.ing policy, federally and locally, to not divulge details about an ongoing investigation, which is why this subpoena is unprecedented. although, not as unprecedented and escalatory as if the subpoena went to alvin bragg obviously, pomerantz no longer works for the district attorney's office, but there is a tricky case. he has spoken publicly about the investigation. he divulged details in an unauthorized book about the investigation. that's the argument i think you're going to hear republicans beat the drum on going forward pomerantz has no reason to flout the subpoena, though it is coming from a chairman who he, himself, flouted a subpoena from the january 6th committee just last year. >> "the washington post"'s jackie alemany, thank you for being on. >> thank you. >> sam stein, thank you, as well good to have you >>> there's more news. the chair of the senate judiciary committee is promising the panel will take action following a damning report on supreme court justice clarence thoma

he just didn't want to bring it at that moment that mark pomerantz thought it was ready. he wanted to continue to develop the case and investigate the case and mark pomerantz than left and wrote a book and the judgment of someone who would write a book about a case. impacting the future of that case. i think we have to take with a grain of salt. what what he says about the particular case, and he also doesn't know what alvin bragg has developed over the last year and a half. i mean, mark pomerantz wrote this book, and now he's being called before the judiciary committee. i mean, that's its again. he sort of brought that on himself. yeah and this committee threatened to subpoena brag before we even saw this indictment indictment unsealed. this has been something they had been planning to do brag isn't going to talk about an open investigation, but pomeranz decided to let me get to michael for this final question. michael, i know you believe the next charge trump is likely to face is coming out of fulton county, georgia. i've heard others say the same, obviously this relati

i am honored to introduce mark pomerantz to all of you. mark received a b.a. from harvard college and a j.d. from the university of michigan law school. he worked as a federal prosecutor in the u.s. attorney's office for the southern of new york. he has also been on the faculty of columbia law school and has lectured on criminal procedure and white collar law at harvard and stanford law school's. and from february. 2021 to february 2022, he worked pro-bono a special assistant district attorney in the office of the new york district attorney cyrus vance, to assist with that office's criminal investigation into the personal and business finances of former president donald trump. this evening will talk about his new book, the people versus donald trump and this riveting work of nonfiction. pomeranz tells the story of his unprecedented investigation, why he believes donald trump should be prosecuted, and what we can learn about the nature of justice in america from extraordinary case. mark will be in conversation session with robert costa. robert is the chief elec

i think that narrative i entirely wrong putting aside whether it was proper from mike pomerantz t put that book into the publi domain, i think what happene was alvin bragg came int office he had not been in the manhattan da's offic previously, in fact he had a long career as a prosecutor an federal domain and then the ne york attorney generals offic and said wait one second i just got here. i need some time to familiariz my staff and senior leadership with your investigation. i need to wrap my arms aroun this and by all accounts including according to a new york times story, that's exactly what he did but donald trump is going to seize on the pomerantz book as exemplar's o prosecutorial misconduct selective prosecution and he i going to run with that book al the way through pretrial motio practice with new york state court which is much more robus in the federal system. >> thanks to both of you thi morning, as always lisa thanks again all week wrapping up t understand this much mor clearly than i would've on m own. margaret is the former unite states attorney, nbc legal analyst. lisa

mark pomerantz.jordan is claiming that th investigation has been politically motivated, putting aside the rank apoxsee that we all know here. do you think jim jordan ha been off more than he can chew by trying to compel somebody like mike pomerantz, who clearly thinks trump's guilty, trying to get pomerantz in front of congress? >> you know, sometimes when yo ask questions, you don't necessarily want to hear the answer, that's likely to be th case here. pomerantz, longtime prosecutor again, in both the federal and state system, not someone wh will be towed by jim jordan' tactics, he will tell the trut as he sees it, and it's very clear that he believes from hi book and from his work that th former president's criminall responsible for his misconduct in manhattan >> glenn kirschner, joyce vance, i have to tell, you guys are more than just brilliant legal minds, you're also friends, an you get up early, and you've done it from day one on the one year anniversary of the katie phang show, i want t say th

think hous republicans are up to here do you think mark pomerantz is gonna show up? to hear catherine's thought on the mark pomerant pete as well, monk pomerantz should not have written a book he should not have engaged i public conversations about the work of the district attorney' office he, quite frankly, should be held accountable by th appropriate ortiz. having said that, simone, i' from the south, so tell me there's -- >> strong words. two colloquial, two wrongs don't make a right on the other side of the coin, you have jim jordan, who is actually doing what he is accusing democrats of doing, which is weaponizing the government the key thing to remember here about this case, alvin bragg has one charge that is to uphold the rule o law, what i mean by that it means, at its core, treatin like cases alike this is important, there is deep and abiding sense i america that there are two systems of justice, one for th rich and the powerful and th privileged, and another fo everyone else. and i want to live in a worl in a justice system wher everyone is held accountable

a federal judge ordere yesterday saying that th former assistant distric attorney, mark pomerantz, wh briefly worked for alvin bragg needs to testify to the hous judiciary committee in accordance with a subpoena issued by the chairman republican, jim jordan we report on that case her last night, the appeals cour has given alvin bragg unti tomorrow to file his appeals briefing and jim jordan will have double line next day, and saturday, to respond to that brief and that case in the cas at the appeals court could achieve a decision on th matter this will be sunday or monda paving the way for possibl testimony. as early as next week or, wh knows. federal special prosecutor jack smith, is closing in on another one of donald trump' lawyers. boris apstein, may, in fact, b a lawyer in name only. when it comes to donald trum -- although he's license to practice law he has served primarily as a political adviser to donald trump. jack smith reportedly schedule a meeting with force epstein and the special prosecutor's office for today there isn't any reporting on whether that meeting took place,

pomerantz and bragg both want to get trump, something happened when pomerantz was in that office alvin didn't want the world to know about, that is why we need to hear about it. mayor eric adams taking another shot at president biden over the migrant crisis saying that the president and white house have failed new york city. what do you make of that comment? >> joe: finally. he's now starting to sound like more reasonable people in new york, who are telling him and explaining to him and you can see on paper that this crisis is costing too much money. we have progressive laws like right to shelter, which never were meant to turn us into the world's refugee center. we are spending more money than we spend on the sanitation department cleaning up garbage in the entire city, this is real implication in the city budget and for the city taxpayer, i'm glad he is coming around to call out the biden administration for failing this problem where it started on the border and now on the back end, failing to accommodate people the biden administration let in with no rhyme or reason. >> ashley: you

bragg is doing is he is trying to keep this fellow by the name of mark pomerantz from appearing beforetee. because he will say that i investigated donald trump. and then i was steamed that when bragg came in, he dropped the case. of course then he started it all over. the problem for the republicans though is that apparently mr. pomerantz says he saw activities that were plainly criminal committed on behalf donald trump and by donald trump inflating properties and stuff like that. it's kind of a double edged sword for republicans. >> it really is, steve. you don't know what he is going to say or anyone is going to stay when they testify that's always the question before grand juries, trials or hearings is what is the person going to say. it's important regardless of what he is going to say, for the republicans to understand why someone is indicted. a candidate for the presidency, which has never happened before in our history. >> ainsley: well, i think we know why. i mean, it's new york city. but, bragg is asking the judge to invalidate the subpoenas. will that happen? who is this judg

the other angle that i think is really important is mr pomerantz because mr pomerantz is the guy who wrote the book. he's the da who was out to get president trump. he has left the d. he's no longer employed there. he's written a book. he has lectured on this. he's talked on this. he's one on tv and talked about it. we think we'd like to talk to him and start to get some answers that maybe an easier route to pursue initially that mr bragg, but everything is on the table. so, fred. all of these. all this outreach in these requests are really part of republicans on jim jordan's efforts to paint this investigation against donald trump as politically motivated. of course, that's something that they did long before the indictment was unsealed, and they saw the charges against the former president. and as for brags, but he's been arguing very critical of jim jordan and this outreach effort and has argued so far that he thinks this is their attempt to meddle in his investigation. fred all right. atlanta train thanks so much from d. c alright. the road to the white house grew even more compl

last but not least, our colleague also well pomerantz, the doctor pomerantz's director of the wilson center kennan institute. he's an expert guide to the complexities of political and economic developments in russia. particularly, and i think this is unique and very interesting through the prism of law. he's an extensive hands on experience in international russian jurisprudence, in a wide range of legal issues from development of the russian constitution, to human rights law, to foreign investment and sanctions. and he's also i will put your book, it's a really excellent. law and the russian state, russia's legal evolution from peter the great to vladimir putin. let's start with our discussion, again, our reminder questions can come in through email kennan at wilson center.org. twitter at kennan institute or facebook. and your name, rank and serial number. your identification when you're asking those questions. literally tell this is a broad subject, i thought about this i can literally tell you at 3:30 a.m., how, i was thinking how do we encapsulate this. i think all of us looking

house judiciary chairman jim jordan authorized the subpoena, saying pomerantz is uniquely situated to answer the committee's questions. palmer and says he resigned from the manhattan d a s office in 2020 22. soon after brag, informed him he was not prepared to move forward with a criminal charges at that point, focusing on trump's business practices overall, brag himself has responded to this new subpoena for mark pomerantz, saying the house gop continues to attempt to undermine an active investigation and ongoing new york criminal case with an unprecedented campaign of harassment and intimidation. joining us now, with perspective on this is former attorney general barto gonzalez, who prior to serving at the department of justice was commissioned as the white house counsel to president george w. bush and now serves at the dean of belmont at the belmont university college of law lot to get to this morning, but i do wonder what you make of the fact that this this subpoena went to mark pomerance, not alvin bragg himself. yeah i think, um, i worry about it, quite frankly, because it reall

mark pomerantz formerly led the trump case, but reportedly resigned in protest because district attorney alvin bragg initially refused to prosecute. but since then mr trump has been indicted on 34 felony counts related to alleged hush money payments. the defendant repeatedly made false statements on new york business records, republicans say prosecutor pomerantz added pressure to bring those charges, noting in his own memoir and eagerness to investigate trump in a letter jordan's wrote to pomerantz. you have no basis to decline to testify about matters before the committee that you have already discussed in your book and or on subpoena writing repeated efforts to weaken state and enfs are an abuse of power and will not deter us from our duty to uphold the law trumps indictment , meanwhile, is not deterring him from his 2024 ambitions. i will say every candidate running against president trump has said they think this is an overreach. i think this is unifying our party. 30 against the woke democrat. trump's campaign raised four million in the 1st 24 hours following his indictment, and he'

. >> one of them is that he's trying to stop the former assistant d.a., mark pomerantz, who resignedtestifying, but pomerantz has already written a book, within on "meet the press", talked publicly about the case, the details of the case, what he would have done, so isn't it difficult for bragg to argue that his testifying to house judiciary would undermine the evidence that he has assembled against mr. trump? >> precisely right, and i suspect that when we see the committees' legal response, their filing on monday, we're going to see that very argument. additionally, andrea, what alvin bragg is asking for here, and again, is understandable, but difficult to achieve, is that the court rule all future subpoenas that might call for evidence relating to mr. bragg or his current and former assistant district attorneys, if those subpoenas, future subpoenas be ruled invalid as well again, a significant hurdle because the courts like to have an actual subpoena in hand they can have facts that are in front of them, and they are very reluctant to rule on at an event that might take place in th

bragg's attorneys also asked the court to quash the subpoen sent to former assistant dea mark pomerantz, whose testimony, they say will cause, quote imminent irreparable harm to brags investigation. the judge in the case, a troubled pointy, declined to block enforcement of tha subpoena she did, however, orde jordan's lawyer to respond t the lawyer by this monday, april 17th and she put hearing on the books for april 19th, two days later. look, it is unclear whether ji jordan is going to respond i time, because, quite frankly he might be preoccupied with a field hearing his committee is holding that very same day right here in manhattan. yes, the circus is coming to town on monday, republicans wil hold cote a puddle hearing called victims of violent crim in manhattan, which will examine how alvin bragg's pr crime, anti victim policies -- >> it is no surprise, new york city has been the target o republican ire for decades according to the gop, blue cities like new york are jus overflowing with george soro black prosecutors who ar pushing soft on crime policies that put their citizens in d

the other angle that i think is really important is mr pomerantz because mr pomerantz is the guy who wrote the book. he's the da who was out to get president trump. he has left the d. he's no longer employed there. he's written a book. he's election on this. he's talked on this. he's one on tv and talked about it. we think we'd like to talk to him and start to get some answers that maybe an easier route to pursue initially that mr bragg, but everything is on the table. so all of these investigations in these outreach is really to try and paint the new york attorney general's office or the manhattan attorney district attorney's office. excuse me as politically motivated, and that's something that republicans have long already argued even before trump was arraigned in court on tuesday, and the indictment was unsealed. alvin bragg for the matter, though, says that he thinks that this is them trying to meddle in their investigations and does not want to participate in what the committees are doing. elena train with details, force. thank you so much. ahead. play is back underway at the ma

brags attorneys also asked the court to quash the subpoen sent to former assistant dea mark pomerantz whose testimony they say will cause quote, imminent irreparable harm to brags investigation. the judge in the case, mary ka viscous l, a trump appointee declined to block th enforcement of that subpoena she did however order drouin's lure to respond to the lawsuit by this monday, april 17th she put a hearing on the books for april 19th, two days later look, it is unclear whether ji jordan is going to respond i time, because quite frankly, h may be preoccupied with a fiel hearing his committee is holding that very same day right here in manhattan. yes, the circus is coming to town on monday, republicans wil hold a hearing titled of victims of violent crime i manhattan, which they clai will expose how quote alvi bragg's pro crime anti-victi policies have led to a increase in violent crime and dangerous community for ne york residents now, it is no surprise in ne york city has been the targe of republican ire for decades. according to the gop, blue cities like new york are jus overflowin

pomerantz is going to say when i was i was in the d.a. office you i uncovered a lot of criminal crimes committed by donald trump and the trump organization. if he gets on the stand and start saying that why did we call this guy in again? oh, i remember, it was to say alvin bragg dropped the case double edged soared freans hakes said. >> ainsley: pomerantz is not a friend of crump. he left the d.a. to write that book about why trump should be indicted. jim jordan was on last night. and he was responding to alvin bragg's allegations that he is obstructing trump probe. >> , our investigation bret we have duty to get to the facts particularly when you have a district attorney interfering with the most important election we have which is election of the commander-in-chief. the president of the united states. and understand what happened here, alvin bragg used federal funds to indict a former president for no crime. and then when we asked questions about it. when we want to investigate. he takes us to court. and he takes us to court because we

jordan now wanting pomerantz to come in for testimony, he said in april 20th deadline, and pomerantz is declining comment tonight. but we should note that previously, when jordan asked for this voluntary interview, pomerance told them that the district attorney's office directed him to not cooperate with their investigation. alex in new york. thank you so much care for all your terrific reporting. let's get analysis now from our legal and political experts. andrew mccabe, i want to start with you and the judges contributions to president biden and democrats. it is as carrie and i were saying a minimal amount $35, but it's still not a good look for a judge to have made these donations, is it. it's not a great look, alex, but let's be honest. do we? are we at a place in american political life? where if you have participated in the in the political system at all, is a voter or supporter of candidates. you're now excluded from executing any sort of judgment or responsibility over somewhere from the other party. that seems absurd. um you know, we have seen many appeals of donald pushed b

mark pomerantz and bite brag is trying to block that subpoena blocked the efforts to get primaries to come, testify and for those documents that jordan has demanded. they say this in this lawsuit, congress lacks any valid legislative purpose to engage in a free ranging campaign of harassment and retaliation for the district attorney's investigation and prosecution of mr trump under the laws of new york. can campaigns, a direct threat to federalism and the sovereign interests of the state of new york? the court should enjoying the subpoena and put an end to this constitutionally destructive fishing expedition. now jim jordans pushing back in a tweet, saying, firstly, indicted present for no crime. then they sued to block and congressional oversight. when we ask about the federal funds, they say they used to do it that werewolf about $5000 in funds that brags offices were used for a different trump investigation , but jordan's still pushing ahead and plans to have a field hearing in manhattan next week to try to discredit brag in his record prosecuting a crime in new york. all right, ma

. >> ashley: and he subpoenaed pomerantz pomerantz, an ex-attorney who worked for bragg. alvin bragg didn't want to pursue a case against trump, he resigned and laid out a case for charging trump and jordan subpoenaed him last week. jordan plans to subpoena dunn, the other ex-prosecutor and alvin bragg is stonewalling and not providing information. is this unprecedented for a district attorney to sue congress? >> todd: i've never heard of anything like this, anybody can sue anybody for anything, never as public as this. it is going to a trump judge, it shouldn't matter what judge it goes to, i think it tosses, there is no jurisdiction thachl is like me suing the president, i can't do that, there is immunity on this stuff. >> ashley: if bragg is so confident in this indictment, what is there to hide? why not testify and answer all the questions? >> brooke: right. the american people probably have questions. i have questions, as a reporter, you have questions, we all do. there were alleged hush money payments made before the 2016 presidential election. federal prosecutors f

don't make mark pomerantz come testify and stay out of a new york state criminal prosecution. you know what's so striking to me? just reading the lawsuit? um well, first of all they cite, you know, some constitutional you know the state's ability to prosecute these cases, but also just common sense, and i think that that's that's you know, i'm not a lawyer, so i'm going to go with the common sense part of this, which is that you read jim jordans tweet and he says, you're prosecuting a former president for no crime, and i think it's right there. in plain text. republicans have determined how they feel about this issue, and they want to stop it from happening. and i do think that that kind of crosses a line and on top of that the legislative purpose purpose that republicans are saying they have is that they want to pursue theoretically, legislation that would force state prosecutors whenever they're looking into a former president, or i guess the current president to move those cases into federal court. which i don't know, karen, you tell me. i mean, that sounds, uh, that sounds

mark pomerantz. with brad claiming that republicans are harassing and obstructing the obstructing the prosecution of the former president. jordan has not yet responded to this or to cnn's request for comments he did tweet earlier today. initially after this, saying firstly indicted president for no crime, then they sued to block congressional oversight. we ask questions about the federal funds that they say they used to do it. joining our table tonight is sarah fisher and cnn legal analyst and former manhattan chief assistant district attorney karen friedman . agnes. evening flow very good , like nailed it since you've been like such an expert on all of this since last week, as you were closely watching trump go into that courthouse with us. are you surprised by this lawsuit from alvin bragg? it was a major fight back. hard lawsuit in federal court. don't forget alvin bragg as a state court prosecutor who's prosecuting donald trump. criminally this is a federal court in the southern district of new y

pomerantz, he wrote a book, we want to talk to him, bragg said no we'll take you to court, while he is this crime happening there in new york city, harming families and communities and harming small business owners. >> we love, that new york. city i grew up, we had these famous walking tours you look at architectures they call them running tours now because you are getting chased. let me ask you -- >> for casual consumer, when we hear that you want to interview former prosecutor prosecute pomerantz andbragg is suing you because he does not want to you see the carfax. >> we're concerned, was there a cord coordination with biden white house with district attorney bragg in his office. they hired mr. angelo, we would like to know that after all, federal funds were used this is most important federal election we have. and think about position that president trump of put in federal election commission said if he used cause campaign of funds he would have been in violation of federal law, but alvin bragg said you are in violation of a misdemeanor and a federal statute and local p prosecuting

the prosecutors are mark pomerantz and carrie dunn. bragg suspended the case leaving pomerantz and dunn to resign. now a "new york post" report is revealing the charges against trump are rarely pursued as top counts in new york. bragg filed 117 falsifying business record charges since he became district attorney, eight times has falsifying business records been used as a top count like it is for the former president. this leading to slam him for prosecutorial bias. he will go down as a disgraced da and will hurt his political and he is politically motivated, his democratic party. that's it, bottom line, period, the end. >> brooke: on tuesday, president biden asked if trump's indictment is politically divisive to the country and the white house continued to brush off the story dominating the news cycle. watch. >> does it bug president biden when former presidents suck up all the oxygen? >> what is important to the president is to continue to focus on the american people, that is important to the president. >> he's good to lay low for a