Appeals Court rules in favor of Alvin Bragg and Mark Pomerantz, and against Jim Jordan

| 6:43 pm EDT April 20, 2023
Dear Palmer Report readers, we all understand the difficult era we're heading into. Major media outlets are caving to Trump already. Even the internet itself and publishing platforms may be at risk. But Palmer Report is nonetheless going to lead the fight. We're funding our 2025 operating expenses now, so we can keep publishing no matter what happens. I'm asking you to contribute if you can, because the stakes are just so high. You can donate here.

The U.S. Court of Appeals has just ruled that former Manhattan DA’s office prosecutor Mark Pomerantz won’t have to testify at Jim Jordan’s House circus hearing, for now. This is good news. Pomerantz would wipe the floor with Jordan in a hearing, and it would only make Trump look more guilty in the eyes of the public, but that’s not the point.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has a solid criminal case against Donald Trump. The reason Jordan and Trump are pulling this stunt is that they’re hoping Pomerantz will slip up and reveal one detail that Trump can then use as the basis for appeal at trial. It’s not a risk worth taking.

It’s why Bragg and Pomerantz, who don’t agree on almost anything, are both strongly in agreement that Pomerantz shouldn’t testify in the House hearing. Whatever entertainment value we might all get out of watching Pomerantz pummel Jordan, it isn’t worth the risk.

The appeals court has only blocked the testimony temporarily while it hears the case. There’s no way to know which way it will ultimately rule. And it won’t be some big doomsday thing if Pomerantz does have to testify. But why take the risk? We should all be 100% rooting for Pomerantz to not have to testify. Again, there’s a reason Pomerantz and Bragg are both trying to block this sideshow testimony from happening.