As the controversy continues over Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg‘s politically motivated indictment of former President Donald Trump in a case that no sane prosecutor would bring against anyone not named Donald Trump, House Republicans are about to introduce multiple bills that would restrict state and local prosecutors from prosecuting current or former presidents.
Any such cases could instead be moved to federal court, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan told Just the News on Thursday. Jordan said the lead bill would give current and former presidents the option to change venues.
The lead bill is slated to be introduced early next week at the latest. Jordan explained its significance:
If you have someone, a local DA, going to take on a former president and a current candidate and they go indict them, then that case automatically gets bumped to federal court, not some local or state court.
The bill is being sponsored by Judiciary Committee member Rep. Russell Fry (R-S.C.), whose office told Just the News his legislation will be called the No More Political Prosecutions Act (NMPPA) and would offer former and current presidents and vice presidents the option to move their own civil or criminal cases from a state court to a federal court:
Presidents and vice presidents are among the most visible politicians in the United States government — making them a target for rogue prosecutors looking to build up their profile and make a name for themselves on the political stage.
Because of that threat, it’s important for presidents and vice presidents to have the option to move their case to a federal court — where judges are confirmed by the U.S. Senate, serve in their role for life, and don’t need to win an election to keep their position.
Democrats can thank Alvin Bragg for the GOP-controlled House’s pending legislation, which, if passed by the House, would likely die in the Senate or on the desk of the addled puppet (Joe Biden) in the Oval Office. Still, Democrats have a history of later being bitten by laws and precedents they either approve for their own benefit or reject to “punish” the GOP.
Bragg’s overreach has been clear as a bell from the beginning: the TDS-riddled mockery of prosecutorial conduct first decided to go after Trump, then desperately searched for a “crime” for which to indict the former president.
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) is scheduled to introduce a second bill, which would ban prosecutors from using federal asset forfeiture funds to investigate presidents, which Bragg and his fellow Manhattan admitted they used in their pursuit of Trump.
According to Biggs, the NMPPA prohibits state or local law enforcement agencies from using funds or property seized through asset forfeiture “to investigate or prosecute the president, vice president, or a candidate for the office of president in a criminal case.”
Jordan said of Bragg’s indictment of Trump:
We think this is federal election interference in the most important election we have, which is [the] election for president of the United States.
Thing is, as some argue, Bragg’s indictment could galvanize the GOP vote beyond MAGA loyalists and propel Trump back to the White House in 2024. On the other side of the coin, there’s a strong argument to be made that the arraignment of Trump has also galvanized anti-Trump sentiment, as more drama surrounds the already drama-laden former president. The reality is no one yet knows, despite the pontification from keyboard jockeys on both sides of the issue.
In related news, Bragg sued Jordan earlier this week in federal court, seeking to block a subpoena Jordan issued to Mark Pomerantz, a former senior prosecutor in Bragg’s office in an effort to gain access to “confidential documents and testimony from the district attorney himself as well as his current and former employees and officials” as part of the Judiciary Committee’s investigation into Bragg’s (mis)handling of the Trump case.
Needless to say, Jordan vehemently disagrees with Bragg’s suit. Here’s more, via Just the News:
Jordan told the John Solomon Reports podcast he believes Congress absolutely has [the] authority to investigate Bragg’s prosecution, in part because a key to the underlying rationale for the New York charges against Trump for record-keeping violations was the allegation that the violations were designed to hide hush-money payments from the Federal Election Commission back in 2016. The FEC, however, declined to bring action against Trump when it vetted the allegations years ago.
Jordan told Solomon:
It’s all about, supposedly, this campaign benefit [Trump] got by this nondisclosure agreement. So if he uses campaign funds for it, then the FEC would go after him. But if he doesn’t use campaign funds, the local DA goes after him. He couldn’t win either way. So when you have that kind of conflict in place, of course, it’s a federal concern.
Double jeopardy? It’s tough to disagree with Jordan’s argument.
Briggs went straight to the bottom line, telling Just the News:
District Attorney Alvin Bragg ran on a campaign pledge to indict President Trump. Bragg took the unprecedented action of converting alleged minor business misdemeanors to 34 individual felonies in an attempt to put President Trump behind bars and humiliate him and his supporters.
This weaponized prosecutor’s office has spent thousands of federal taxpayer dollars to subsidize this political indictment and is demanding millions more in federal grants. It’s disturbing to see District Attorney Bragg waste federal resources for political purposes rather than addressing the serious crime in his city.
Bingo.
The Bottom Line
Trump Derangement Syndrome is a vicious mental disease [sarc, barely]. From Hillary Clinton to Nancy Pelosi to Joe Biden, Adam Schiff, Maxine Watters, and a host of other stage-4 Democrat victims of TDS, it’s only a matter of time before a leftist’s brain becomes riddled beyond a point of no return.
We can safely add Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg to the pathetic list.