The Manhattan District Attorney's Office has once more criticized House Republicans for their attempts to interfere in the investigation into former President Donald Trump. The DA's office accuses the GOP of working with Trump to "vilify and denigrate the integrity of elected state prosecutors and trial judges."
Leslie B. Dubeck, the DA's general counsel, addressed a letter to three House GOP committee chairmen on Friday, highlighting Trump's verbal attacks on District Attorney Alvin Bragg. Dubeck wrote, "As Committee Chairmen, you could use the stature of your office to denounce these attacks and urge respect for the fairness of our justice system and for the work of the impartial grand jury."
Instead, Dubeck argued, the chairmen have chosen to support Trump's efforts to undermine the integrity of state prosecutors and trial judges while leveling baseless accusations that the investigation is politically motivated.
The letter was addressed to House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, House Oversight Chair James Comer, and House Administration Chair Bryan Steil. It marked the second time Dubeck has written to the chairmen since they began investigating the Manhattan DA following Trump's claim that he would soon be arrested.
In response to the House GOP's inquiries about the use of federal funds in the Trump probe, Dubeck revealed that roughly $5,000 was spent on related expenses. This money, she stated, came from "federal forfeiture money that the Office helped collect." No federal grant money was used in the investigation.
Dubeck explained that the $5,000 was spent on Trump-related expenses between October 2019 and August 2021, primarily for Supreme Court litigation. She also noted that the DA's office has helped the federal government secure over one billion dollars in asset forfeiture funds in the past 15 years.
Regarding the three federal grant programs the office participates in for its casework, Dubeck confirmed that no expenses related to the Trump investigation were paid from federal grant program funds.
Dubeck urged the chairmen to withdraw their inquiry, but said the DA's office is still willing to meet if they refuse. She concluded by asserting that the committees lack jurisdiction over the state prosecution and questioned the legislative purpose of their inquiry, suggesting they are "acting more like criminal defense counsel trying to gather evidence for a client than a legislative body seeking to achieve a legitimate legislative objective."