Pomerantz: The public interest warrants the criminal prosecution of Mr. Trump

This is the astonishing full text of one of the two deputy assistant attorneys resignation letters, that of Mark Pomerantz, who resigned because NYC DA Alvin Bragg apparently lacks the cajones to prosecute Trump when they are quite certain they have a solid case.

Apparently, Pomerantz is basically saying that Bragg claims his reluctance to prosecute now is because he is waiting for 'more evidence' is a merely a ruse to hide the fact that he lacks the courage to prosecute such a high value target as Trump, ie., the former President Of the United States.

I agree that such a 'maiden voyage' prosecution, as such a prosecution is known (amongst the ranks of prosecutors --- one that has never been done before) will take courage, for the onslaught/spate of hate mail and death threats will definitely be forthcoming, which is no trivial matter, but it's not comforting to know that someone in that position lacks courage, and it sure as hell is a disservice to the concept of public confidence in justice. In my view, if you don't have courage you have no business walking in the boots of the NY County District Attorney, Are you listening, Mr. Bragg?

I've quoted the salient portions of the letter below, for those of you who do not subscribe to the Nytimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/23/nyregion/mark-pomerantz-resignation-letter.html

Dear Alvin,

I write to tender my resignation as a Special Assistant District Attorney and to explain my reasons for resigning.

As you know from our recent conversations and presentations, I believe that Donald Trump is guilty of numerous felony violations of the Penal Law in connection with the preparation and use of his annual Statements of Financial Condition. His financial statements were false, and he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people. The team that has been investigating Mr. Trump harbors no doubt about whether he committed crimes — he did.
[...]
In my view, the public interest warrants the criminal prosecution of Mr. Trump...
[...]
To the extent you have raised issues as to the legal and factual sufficiency of our case and the likelihood that a prosecution would succeed, I and others have advised you that we have evidence sufficient to establish Mr. Trump’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and we believe that the prosecution would prevail if charges were brought and the matter were tried to an impartial jury. No case is perfect. Whatever the risks of bringing the case may be, I am convinced that a failure to prosecute will pose much greater risks in terms of public confidence in the fair administration of justice. As I have suggested to you, respect for the rule of law, and the need to reinforce the bedrock proposition that “no man is above the law,” require that this prosecution be brought even if a conviction is not certain.
[...]
...I and others believe that your decision not to authorize prosecution now will doom any future prospects that Mr. Trump will be prosecuted for the criminal conduct we have been investigating.

I fear that your decision means that Mr. Trump will not be held fully accountable for his crimes. I have worked too hard as a lawyer, and for too long, now to become a passive participant in what I believe to be a grave failure of justice. I therefore resign from my position as a Special Assistant District Attorney, effective immediately.

Sincerely,

Mark F. Pomerantz

 

Thanks for the post. I just added it to my "the Great Unraveling Continues" thread.

I wonder if the reluctance to indict has to do with trickle down from Garland and his concern over accusations the DoJ would be showing signs of being politicized if the NY office charged Individual 1. Something he is likely sensitive to after Billy the Bagman made a mockery of DoJ independence from the exec branch and thus politics. Assuming Pomerantz is correct, and there's no reason not to, the failure to prosecute is an ongoing travesty of justice on multiple fronts.

 

It's simpler than that, Lee. You all thought I was Looney Tunes when I opined that the Capitol Riot was a trial run. That was his warning to let everyone know he can get thousands of people to do his bidding on nothing but a bald faced lie.

He's ruthless.

400K COVID deaths on his watch,
5 dead Capitol police officers,
hundreds of Capitol police officers injured,
traumatized lawmakers,
hundreds of rioters with felony records,
unleashing 5,000 Taliban on a skeleton crew and our Afghani friends,
brazenly praising a dictator for invading a country while maligning his own POTUS
COVID infections and deaths happening in pro-Trump counties at 3X the rate of other demographics

...body counts are infinite in his Trump Universe.


One judge's kid was murdered. I wouldn't want to prosecute him either.

 

A few possibilities ultimately:
1) Bribed
2) Blackmailed
3) No political will for justice to be served
4) Wants his own people to follow through instead
5) Wants a different AG to do the deed
6) Some form of quid pro quo ensued, a favor for a favor
7) Fear and intimidation
8+) Everything I missed including the Trump Crime Syndicate being innocent whiny victims per his cult but not his record

I am going to assume that this L of R was well scripted to be leaked. Tons of detail as to why this need to be pursued.

 

They can't follow through. Read the resignation letter (it's dripping with frustration). If they could they would.

 

Pomerantz: The public interest warrants the criminal prosecution of Mr. Trump

While such a prosecution would be incredibly entertaining, I'm afraid it won't happen. Sorry.

 

I'm not very sure this is a precedent you would want to set. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

If you wanted to be consistent.....* Insert eye roll emojis here.....

You would need to prosecute pretty much every former president in the last several decades

 

If they had evidence for BARD they would not be saying even if a conviction is uncertain. You either have him BARD or you don't. Pomerantz is just flouncing off and probably doesn't want his liberal friends to think less of him for not being able to make the case.

 

So when all else fails, employ the over used, factually inaccurate, "they all do it" meme in the face of a career attorney saying there is ample evidence of Trump's criminality to go to trial.

 

Well what are you waiting on? Get on it!
After several years of the army of trump haters assuring us that he's ripe for prosecution what the hell are they waiting on?

Maybe it's because people with good common Sense know better.

And many attorneys make a career out of lying, just because they allow their partisan bias to taint their opinion doesn't mean a damn hill of beans. We already know you think he's Hitler's first cousin or something so no surprise there

 

I'll take Pomerantz's opinion over yours since he's the one who is aware of the facts.

 

What am I waiting for? I don't have the authority to bring charges.

 

And the fact is he's not being prosecuted no matter how badly you want it.

Why don't you share some more of these facts with us and tell us why he's not being prosecuted?

 

Well, since I am not Pomerantz I don't know the facts. That's why I said..........I'll take Pomerantz's opinion over yours since he's the one who is aware of the facts. Are you asserting he is making things up?

 

Against the apparent opinion of Pomerantz and the team he works with.

As you know from our recent conversations and presentations, I believe that Donald Trump is guilty of numerous felony violations of the Penal Law in connection with the preparation and use of his annual Statements of Financial Condition. His financial statements were false, and he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people. The team that has been investigating Mr. Trump harbors no doubt about whether he committed crimes — he did.

 

So post the facts that he has shared, I really could care less about his egg headed opinion.

Everyone has an opinion and you know what they say about those.

But since his opinion agrees with your bias you will accept his opinion as cold, hard fact.

 

So, you'll take his opinion over that of his former boss's opinion. Someone who presumably has more experience and know how than Pomerantz. Why? Because he's saying what you want to hear?

Look. Its easy to say things when you have no skin in the game because you no longer work at a place.

 

It was an op-ed, not a charging document. At the risk of being redundant.........I'll take Pomerantz's opinion over yours since he's the one who is aware of the facts.

You're aware his opinion is based on the investigatory work he and the team has done, right?

 

Lots of people fully believe that Trump committed crimes. Harboring no doubt that he committed crimes =/= proving or being able to prove that he committed any crimes in a court of law.

 

You're aware that his former Boss's opinion holds far more weight than his, right? Also you do know that he does not, cannot, speak for the team he was on, right?

 

That's great because I CITED Pomerantz's opinion. HE'S the one who said a conviction wasn't certain AFTER he said he was certain he had him BARD.

It's not my fault the man can't remain ****ing consistent when he's writing a ****ing show and tell letter.

 

Without a confession nothing is certain when you go to trial. He's simply being cautious while feeling strongly there is enough evidence to convict.

 

Nvm...none of this has anything to do with the topic of the thread.

 

He can feel however he wants and have all the opinions in the world and it wont buy you a cup of coffee after a senior discount at McDonald's.

 

I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to parlay his opinion in to a discounted Big Mac. Rather, he was making the point sufficient evidence exists to indict Eric's dad. Neither of us are in a position to definitively know if he's right, but I accept the opinion of a career prosecutor given we know Trump has misrepresented financial statements. They've been published. I understand why you don't........after all........Dear Leader. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/14/trump-tax-firm-says-documents-not-reliable.html