Bragg is unlikely to appear before Congress until after Trump's scheduled July sentencing due to scheduling conflicts and the need for more information about the hearing's scope and purpose.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has agreed to testify before a congressional subcommittee regarding Donald Trump's ongoing criminal cases.
The Manhattan DA is currently handling multiple criminal cases against Trump, including charges related to hush money payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign and allegations of classified document mishandling.
Trump has maintained his innocence in all matters and is appealing some of the convictions.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who campaigned on a promise to 'get Trump', has agreed to testify before a congressional subcommittee regarding the former president's ongoing criminal cases. However, due to scheduling conflicts and the need for more information about the hearing's scope and purpose, Bragg is unlikely to appear before Congress until after Trump's scheduled July sentencing.
Bragg's office has received a request from U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, for testimony related to what he describes as a 'political prosecution' of Trump by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
The Manhattan DA is currently handling multiple criminal cases against Trump, including charges related to hush money payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign and allegations of classified document mishandling. The former president has maintained his innocence in all matters and is appealing some of the convictions.
Michael Steele, a former Republican National Committee chair and MSNBC host, urged Bragg not to testify before Congress as requested by the GOP House committee. Steele argued that Bragg would be subjected to political attacks and that Congress has no authority over state matters.
Despite these challenges, Bragg's office has agreed in principle to cooperate with the congressional subcommittee and is currently discussing a potential date for testimony.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has agreed to testify before a Republican-controlled congressional subcommittee
Testimony likely to take place after Trump’s scheduled July sentence
Bragg’s office requested an alternative date and more information about the hearing’s scope and purpose
Accuracy
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg declined to testify about his prosecution of former President Donald Trump to House lawmakers next week due to scheduling conflicts.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg agreed to testify before a congressional subcommittee
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg declined to testify about his prosecution of former President Donald Trump to House lawmakers next week due to scheduling conflicts.
Bragg had campaigned for office on a promise to ‘get Trump'
Dubeck criticized the Judiciary Committee’s invitation for Bragg to testify, writing that Jordan ‘has not made clear the scope of the proposed testimony’
Trump is currently awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on whether he is immune from charges brought against him by Smith in his Jan. 6 investigation, awaiting a trial date on charges brought from Smith’s classified records case, and awaiting a trial date on charges brought by Willis in Georgia.
Accuracy
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has agreed to testify before a Republican-controlled congressional subcommittee
Trump maintains his innocence and calls the prosecution a ‘witch hunt’ coordinated by President Biden and Democrats.
Bragg had campaigned for office on a promise to ‘get Trump’
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(95%)
The author makes an appeal to authority by mentioning the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and his intentions without providing any evidence or context as to why this is relevant or a fallacy. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by referring to the prosecution of Trump as a 'witch hunt' and 'politically motivated,' but does not provide any evidence for these claims.
]The House Judiciary Committee[s] invitation for Bragg to testify, writing that Jordan ‘has not made clear the scope of the proposed testimony.[’, ‘Trump has called the prosecution a ‘witch hunt’ coordinated by President Biden and Democrats with the intention of kneecapping his presidential campaign.[']
Donald Trump has been found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records relating to a hush money payment made to adult film star Stormy Daniels by Trump’s then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, before the 2016 presidential election. This makes Trump the first former president convicted of felony crimes.
Representative Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, requested Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s testimony before Congress regarding Trump’s trial.
Michael Steele, MSNBC host and former chair of the Republican National Committee, urged Bragg not to testify in front of Congress as requested by the GOP House committee.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy in the quote from Michael Steele where he suggests Alvin Bragg should not testify before Congress because it would be a 'punking move' and that the committee members intend to 'hang him politically'. This statement is an opinion presented as fact without evidence. Additionally, there is a dichotomous depiction in the phrase 'all this is [is] the biggest punking move of the year' which presents false dilemma by suggesting only two possibilities for why Bragg would testify: either it's purely political or it has no merit.
Michael Steele speaks on July 29, 2017 in Pasadena, California. Steele, MSNBC host and former chair of the Republican National Committee, urged Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg on Saturday to "stay his behind home' and...
Steele also questioned why Bragg would want to "subject that [the case] to a political process" when a jury already found Trump guilty and Congress "has no authority here to call him up and ask him about his prosecution in a state matter.'
