Mark Pomerantz, a former prosecutor in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office, refused to answer any questions relevant to former President Donald Trump’s indictment during much of a deposition before Congress on Friday.
Pomerantz warned in an opening statement he would do as much, according to a copy of the opening statement leaked to CNN and other legacy media outlets.
“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,” Pomerantz said, per his statement.
The deposition ran for roughly five hours.
A source with direct knowledge of the matter told Breitbart News that Pomerantz had invoked the Fifth Amendment for “most of his deposition.”
Pomerantz served for years as a special assistant on the Trump case but resigned from Bragg’s office in February 2022 out of frustration that Bragg, who had just taken office, was initially reluctant to pursue the case further.
Outside of Friday’s testimony, Pomerantz has been highly public about his opinions on the DA office’s investigation into Trump.
He wrote a book called People vs. Donald Trump: An Inside Account in which he expressed his grievances with Trump in vivid detail. He has discussed the case in media appearances. He opined in his resignation letter, which was leaked to the New York Times, that Trump was “guilty of numerous felony violations.”
Throughout the drawn-out behind-closed-doors questioning, members of the House Judiciary Committee and Weaponization of the Federal Government Select Subcommittee, the two panels conducting the investigation into Bragg’s indictment of Trump, could be seen coming and going from the deposition room.
Congress’s ability to question Pomerantz came after Bragg, who is prosecuting Trump on charges of falsifying business records, unsuccessfully sued Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to block the chairman from enforcing a subpoena against Pomerantz.
Jordan issued the subpoena in April, contending the former prosecutor could provide “information that is relevant and necessary to inform the Committee’s oversight and potential legislative reforms” related to the historic indictment of a former president.
U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ruled firmly in Jordan’s favor, and although he quickly filed an appeal, Bragg relented days later and withdrew his suit under the agreement that he be allowed to send one lawyer with Pomerantz to accompany him during his deposition.
In response to his tight-lipped testimony, the Republican-led Judiciary Committee quoted from Vyskocil’s decision in a statement on social media.
Pomerantz’s subpoena “was issued with a ‘valid legislative purpose’ in connection with the ‘broad’ and ‘indespensable’ congressional power to ‘conduct investigations,'” the committee wrote.
Mark Pomerantz’s subpoena “was issued with a ‘valid legislative purpose’ in connection with the ‘broad’ and ‘indispensable’ congressional power to ‘conduct investigations.'”
“No one is above the law.”
-U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, Bragg v. Jordan
— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) May 12, 2023
Jordan spoke with reporters at the conclusion of the afternoon, saying rules restricted him from talking about the substance of the questioning but that he was “surprised at some of the positions [Pomerantz] took.”
The chairman would not say at this stage if holding Pomerantz in contempt of Congress, an option for lawmakers when witnesses do not comply with subpoenas, was on the table.
Editor’s Note: This story was updated throughout with the most recent details about the deposition.