'We Will Not Be Intimidated': Alvin Bragg Hits Back at House Republicans Demanding He Testify Over T

[Ohio Joe]

‘We Will Not Be Intimidated’: Alvin Bragg Hits Back at House Republicans Demanding He Testify Over Trump Indictment

The office for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg responded to House Republicans demanding he answer to them over his potential indictment of former President Donald Trump.

On Monday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) released a letter co-signed by other top Republicans demanding Bragg testify before Congress over his office’s investigation into Trump. In the letter, Jordan slammed the potential indictment of Trump in connection with the Stormy Daniels hush money scandal as a “politically motivated prosecutorial decision.”

Fox News Digital received a defiant response from Bragg’s office on Tuesday — in which they returned fire on accusations of conducting a political attack.

“We will not be intimidated by attempts to undermine the justice process, nor will we let baseless accusations deter us from fairly applying the law,” the statement said. “In every prosecution, we follow the law without fear or favor to uncover the truth. Our skilled, honest and dedicated lawyers remain hard at work.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/we-will-not-be-intimidated-alvin-bragg-hits-back-at-house-republicans-demanding-he-testify-over-trump-indictment/ar-AA18U3ug?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6c53d6d9885b40ce9187ce1b40fd6a8c&ei=188

Yeah... Fuck you Gym.

[Lovie777]

1. The House GQPs are a bunch of bullies.......................

fuck them.

[Iwasthere]

2. Frankly I think he should have added:

"What the house is doing is illegal".

[Mr.Bill]

11. How about:

"We want to get the Trump investigation behind us so we can investigate the people who signed this letter."

[MiHale]

19. You made me smile with that 👍👍

[Joinfortmill]

34. ROFL

[Walleye]

3. "Skilled, honest, and dedicated" no wonder Jordan is baffled

[ShazzieB]

12. No kidding!

Jordan is completely unfamiliar with all of those concepts!

[whathehell]

4. Go on with your bad self, Alvin Bragg!

[tinrobot]

5. This is getting very close to obstruction of justice or intimidation.

If a governor (or president) told an attorney general to investigate his enemies, that's what it would be.

John Mitchell (Watergate) was one AG who went to jail for obstruction and witness intimidation.

[orangecrush]

15. +1

[artemesia23X]

31. I remember John Mitchell going to prison for obstruction, witness intimidation.

It seems that McCartney, Jordan, Rand Paul are doing there best tp repeat history. Its very clear they never learned from the past.

[deelee]

37. McCartney would wisely "Let it be"

....now, McCarthy on the other hand....

[czarjak]

6. Neither will they. Hence.

[republianmushroom]

7. Bragg, tell them to sit on it.

[niyad]

20. He just did.

[Cha]

8. This is so good to

See.. remember when Bragg was persona non grata around here?

[Beastly Boy]

26. That's an understatement

I remember when he was called a traitor and a collaborator, among other insults.

[Cha]

27. Yeah, the internet does go

overboard occasionally.. another understatement.

[MyOwnPeace]

30. While things have 'changed'.........

I've not seen any explanation or reason for Mr. Bragg to have been so quick to stop the investigations of tRump that had been on-going within the department, let alone any explanation regarding the departures of two prominent attorneys who had been leading the investigations of the Orange Buffoon prior to Mr. Bragg's arrival.

So, really, what DID change? Why did DA Bragg 'finally' decide to go after IQ45?

Serious people intent on understanding actions taken by public authorities charged with defending our country really want to know....

[Beastly Boy]

32. I have not seen any evidence to justify the attacks on Bragg to begin with.

He owed no explanation to anyone then, and he doesn't owe any explanations now.

And as far as idle speculations in the name of serious people go, the simplest explanation for Bragg's actions is likely to be the most accurate one: new evidence that may lead to more than a snowflake's chance for a conviction. But beyond my speculation and at the risk of repeating myself, however disappointing it may be to the aforementioned serious people, they will have to live with this: Bragg owes no explanation to anyone. Understanding requires information, which is not currently available. Nor is it likely to become available on demand, which is a good thing as far as prosecutions are concerned. Baseless guesswork had never been a halfass decent excuse to bash Bragg then, and it is not any more of a legitimate excuse to question his motives now.

[MyOwnPeace]

38. There was plenty of 'discussion' when Bragg assumed the office.....

Many had hoped that DA Vance was leading the way to charge tRump with something - but that didn't happen before DA Vance retired and DA Bragg took over the office.

https://www.vox.com/2022/2/23/22947946/trump-prosecutors-new-york-bragg

Those aforementioned serious people had questions - and it is the right in a free democracy to ask those questions whether there is a requirement for answers or not. Questioning actions or non-actions taken by public officials is a right of the citizens that have elected people to fill a public office - whether it be based on 'baseless guesswork' or factual actions taken prior to the change in office - and we are a better country when we have the right to do so.

[Beastly Boy]

39. That was not a discussion or an inquiry, it was pure speculation based on appearances,

not information. Whatever transpired as a consequence of this "discussion" (and I appreciate you putting the word in quotation marks), did not create an obligation on Bragg's part to respond to it. On the contrary, Bragg not only had a right to disregard those speculations, but a professional obligation to do so.

I don't mind the questions at all. Questioning actions or non-actions is fine. Being informed about the subject one questions is preferable, but that is not my peeve either. Being uninformed, by choice or by circumstance, is also a right, although I would rather see the uninformed remain unengaged until information becomes available. But that's my personal preference, and I cannot insist on it.

My issue is with those aforementioned smart people who didn't stop at asking questions or having discussions among themselves. My problem is with the people who followed this up, based on nothing particularly relevant, with something that makes me question how serious they were: they took Bragg's silence to mean whatever they wanted it to mean, and responded to it with unfounded insults and accusations.

Nobody has a right to THAT.

[Joinfortmill]

35. I wonder about that, too. Was it political? A personality conflict? What was it?

[Ray Bruns]

9. Bragg should tell them to go pound sand.

[ShazzieB]

13. I think he just did that, in effect. 😁

[wnylib]

14. Lawrence O'Donnell demonstrated the perfect response for Bragg to give.

He called it the Pelosi response. After reading the House Republican letter for his listeners, O'Donnell ripped it in two.

[niyad]

23. I watched that entire segment twice.

[tonekat]

10. House Goobers need to Stay In Their Lane

They have no jurisdiction at all here.

[DC77]

24. love it! House Goobers. Stay in your lane, respekt my authoritah

[HuskyOffset]

16. My response

To: The "Honorable" Jim Jordan

Sir,

In response to your demands, please:

1) Sit the fuck down
2) Shut the fuck up
3) Stand the fuck back up
4) Put your jacket the fuck on
5) Sit the fuck back down
6) Continue shutting the fuck up

Have a nice day, or don't, at your discretion, we couldn't give less of a fuck. Be advised, our office is disinclined to take orders from people who failed to report multiple instances of attempted sexual assault.

[NBachers]

17. "Politically motivated prosecutorial decision?" What is the entire Hunter Biden clusterfuck?

[SheltieLover]

18. Gym jacket off should stfu.

[Mr. Ected]

21. Ironic, isn't it, that the very committee investigating the weaponization of government

Has yet again revealed itself to be the pre-eminent offender in this regard.

[niyad]

22. I can't wait for Lawrence's comment tonight.

[Uncle Joe]

25. Kicked and recommended

Thanks for the thread Ohio Joe

[Beartracks]

28. Never ceases to amaze how much Republicans have reframed "neutrality"...

... such that their own naked political partisanship is to be regarded as "neutral," which of course means the actions of actual non-partisans are claimed to be "politically motivated."

Reference 2+2=5 from Orwell's 1984; the GOP would have you believe such obvious falsehood are true.

=========

[keithbvadu2]

29. Didn't Gym Jordan have an issue about testifying?

[Joinfortmill]

33. Gym Jordan, the predator enabler. He makes my skin crawl.

[Hotler]

36. I hoped his answer would be, 'go pound salt'. Don't be affraid of these fuckers Al.

get in their face.