Mediaboss Marketing

Republicans are increasingly turning to a popular conservative punching bag, the District of Columbia, in a gambit to raise the alarm of crime in Americas cities before the 2024 elections.

The GOP won control of the House last year in part by pledging to tackle crime. Four months in, they have yet to pass major crime legislation, but have moved political messaging rolling back recent changes in D.C. criminal sentencing rules that they believe will appeal to voters across party lines.

What they saw with the criminal code bill was an opportunity to make that a national issue and put Democrats on the defensive, said D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), who supported the criminal code changes.

President Joe Biden and 33 Senate Democrats signed onto the measure (Public Law 118-1) after Republicans were able to cast the citys changes as politically unpalatable.

Politicians respond to public opinion, Comer said in a brief interview last month. Democrats realized that this crime is a huge issue, especially in their districts, in the blue districts. So we need to have a tough-on-crime position here in the House of Representatives. Republicans do, and I think were going to see more Democrats support our crime policies moving forward.

Rep. James Comer (R-Tenn.) is chairman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, which oversees the District of Columbia.

Photographer: Ting Shen/Bloomberg

The GOPs increased focus on violent crime comes as the nation has grappled with an increase in murders since 2020, but also after more ambitious legislation on immigration and oversight of federal prosecutors has stalled.

Murder rates both nationwide and in the capital city remain below records set in the 1990s, when Washington was dubbed the Murder Capital of the US.

House GOP Off to Bumpy Start Slowed by Debt Limit, Party Rifts

Nevertheless, Republicans in particular have zeroed in crime rates on large cities run by Democrats, including New York City in the aftermath of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Braggs indictment of former President Donald Trump. The GOP also was quick to note this week when Democrats announced their convention next year would be in Chicago that delegates there would be dodging bullets in the crime-infested city.

Congress claims uniquely broad jurisdiction over D.C., creating political and procedural opportunities to weigh in even as residents seek statehood and greater autonomy from the federal government.

The Home Rule Act of 1973 (Public Law 93198) grants legislation striking down crime-related D.C. laws an exemption from Senate filibuster rules, easing their path to the presidents desk.

In fact, House Republicans have advanced as many measures overturning D.C. law in four months as previous Congresses did in the last four decades.

Biden already last month signed bipartisan legislation pushed by Republicans striking down legislation eliminating most mandatory minimum sentences and lowering the sentences on violent crimes like carjacking and robbery.

Supporters of the overhaul to the citys century-old criminal code pointed out new maximum sentences still exceed what judges typically hand down.

Next, House Republicans plan to bring up for a vote this month a measure (H. J. Res. 42) that would overturn a 2020 D.C. law prohibiting police use of chokeholds and tear gas as well as increasing public access to body-worn camera footage.

The law also nixes disciplinary matters from being negotiated by the police union, and all matters relating to disciplinary action against police officers to be retained by management.

The DC police union filed a lawsuit challenging the collective bargaining provision but ultimately lost. The union opposes the law and backs efforts to block it from going into effect.

Comers panel advanced the legislation on a party-line vote late last month, and key chairmen expect it to come to the floor by the end of the month.

This is a vehicle that youll see a lot of Democrats support said Comer, stressing Democrats who dont risk being labeled soft on crime.

But Biden has promised to veto the legislation if the Senate sends the measure to his desk, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters last month.

Republicans have sought to cast crime in D.C. as a particularly personal issue. Republican lawmakers at a hearing by Comers committee recalled lawmakers, friends, and staffers being robbed or assaulted in the city.

Its their capital, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said of his constituents. Their capital is getting overrun by crime, they want to be able to come here and try to live safely.

But some Republicans came under fire for the tone of their remarks. Rep. Gary Palmer (Ala.), a member of GOP leadership, faced blowback for calling D.C. schools inmate factories. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) inaccurately said the criminal code Congress overthrew was still law, and she pressed a witness about his nonexistent support for decriminalization of public urination.

People who watched it might have become more sympathetic to the District, Mendelson said of Boeberts line of questioning.

Comer has scheduled a second hearing on D.C. for May 16 and invited DC Muriel Bowser to testify.

Congress has a long history of passing laws governing D.C., even after granting the city quasi-autonomy in the 1970s.

Most congressional intervention in the citys business rides on annual spending bills. They often bar the city from spending federal funds on abortion, marijuana legalization, needle exchanges, and lobbying for voting representation in Congress.

The House in February backed (H. J. Res. 24) that would block the city from allowing noncitizens to vote in local elections. Most GOP senators backed companion measures (S. J. Res. 5/S. J. Res. 6), but they dont enjoy the same privilege status as crime-related overturns and withered in committee.

Two past successful congressional vetoes of D.C. law over 40 years ago struck down changes to local sexual assault law (H. Res. 208), while the other prevented restrictions on where diplomatic missions could be built (S. Con. Res. 63).

Other measures since 1975 blocking the local government initiatives on bonds (S. Con. Res. 78), prison overcrowding (H. J. Res. 341), and reproductive health (H. J. Res. 43) have also won the support of one chamber but never became law.

Before this year, the last time Congress successfully struck down D.C. law was in 1991. Congress that year prevented construction in D.C.'s Penn Quarter above the citys limit on building heights (Public Law 102-11).

When theyre in power, thats what they usually do, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said in an interview of the GOP intervention in the District. Theyre going after these disapproval resolutions, but thats not going to be the end of it.

See the rest here:
Republicans Dust Off Anti-D.C. Playbook to Sound Tough on Crime - Bloomberg Law

The direction of the past several elections should concern Republicans. Instead, too many ignore what voters are telling them and convince themselves that Democrats have figured out how to conduct massive fraud, except in Florida and perhaps New York.

Ironically, Florida is where many Democrats believe Republicans stole the 2000 presidential election. New York, one of the most liberal states in the union, prevented Democrats from holding on to their House majority in the 2022 midterms, an election that by every metric should have been a GOP romp.

Democrats ran on two issues in 2022: The primary issue was abortion. Rarely has one event motivated voters like the Supreme Courts decision to overturn Roe v. Wade energized votes for Democrats. Trumps refusal to concede the 2020 election and efforts to overturn the results galvanized other independent voters who feared candidates labeled election deniers imperiled democracy.

Election results in early 2023 suggest that these issues remain salient with voters.

Getting indicted may help Donald Trump win the Republican nomination. Its drowned out all other information and focused every spotlight on him. Hes making the 2024 election about him and his grievances.

The Republican Party would be wisest to nominate somebody else with Trumps 2016 themes but without Trumps 2023 baggage. I know too many Trumpers who arent ready to let go yet. However, they must face reality and stop telling one another that massive cheating is why they lost and continue to lose.

Its this simple: Biden won, Trump lost, and not because of cheating. Eight well-known Trump-supporting Republicans wrote a report called Lost, Not Stolen.

Its a must-read for anybody who still believes Donald Trump won the election. The group reviews all 64 legal challenges by Trumps legal team.

Out of 64 lawsuits, Trumps lawyers withdrew from fourteen cases. Federal judges dismissed 47more, including eight judges appointed by Trump.

Trumps lawyers won a total of three motions, all in Pennsylvania, which threw out 270 provisional ballots lacking signatures, separated Election Day provisional ballots, and moved back the states deadline for absentee voters to present voter ID by three days, but hardly changed the outcome.

The Supreme Court declined to hear Trumps cases twice.

Georgia conducted two statewide recounts that narrowed Bidens lead from 14,196 to 12,284 and finally to 11,779 something Trump-haters must bear in mind in the legal matter regarding the phone call they want him imprisoned over.

In Wisconsin, two partial recounts of the states results added 74 votes to Bidens lead.

Trumps team didnt prove fraud in any of the 64 cases, with 87 different judges and two attempts to go to the Supreme Court. Documents emerging because of the Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit demonstrate that even the Fox News Channel anchors knew they were putting guests on the air who were insane or whose conspiracy theories were lies. Despite all this, many still believe it when Trump continues to say Democrats stole the 2020 election.

Cheating on a mass scale didnt happen, but the rules did change. Trump may have sealed his fate when he told his voters not to vote by mail. By Election Day, Democrats had legally run up the count by enough that perhaps Trump never had a chance to win.

In sports, rules change from season to season. The teams that win adapt to the new regulations first. Losers hold on to old traditions. Democrats adjusted to mail-in voting better than Republicans, just as they did to the internet in its infancy.

The 2022 midterms are replaying in 2023.

In Chicago, incumbent mayor Lori Lightfoot didnt survive the elections first round, but the end result is arguably worse. After a five-week battle between former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas and Cook County Commissioner Brandon Johnson, a paid organizer for the Chicago Teachers Union, Johnson won.

CNN Political Commentator, former Obama chief campaign strategist, and senior presidential advisor David Axelrod called it candidate of the Chicago Teachers Union vs. the Fraternal Order of Police, and the teachers union won.

Vallas ran a campaign around Chicagos utter breakdown of law and order and promised to fill the 1,700 police vacancies.

Johnson ran on a pledge of $800 million in new and increased taxes and $1 billion in new spending. His position on the police changed over time, but initially, he said he would cut $150 million from the departments nearly $2 billion budget. He wouldnt commit to filling the open positions either.

Why does a city as crime-ridden as Chicago boots Lori Lightfoot only to replace her with an even more liberal and anti-cop mayor?

On the same day, Wisconsin voters sent another pro-choice message to Republicans by giving control of the States Supreme Court to the liberal faction for the first time in fifteen years.

The election was between Janet Protasiewicz, a Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge, and Dan Kelly, a former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice. Then-Governor Scott Walker appointed Kelly to the state Supreme Court in 2016. However, in 2020 he lost to a liberal opponent in his first attempt to win a full 10-year term.

TV ads hammered Kelly for his paid work advising Republicans on legal efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and the alternate elector plan.

The primary issue, however, was abortion. Wisconsin has a restrictive abortion law dating to 1849. It bans abortion in nearly all circumstances and could come before the state Supreme Court anytime.

Protasiewicz said she supported abortion rights. Prominent Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, and abortion rights groups like Emilys List endorsed her.

Kelly previously worked for Wisconsin Right to Life, and pro-life groups supported him.

While neither candidate would specifically say how they would rule on a hypothetical abortion case, each stated how the other would rule. Voters understood their options and the likely impact.

The race became the most expensive state Supreme Court contest in U.S. history. According to OpenSecrets.org, the independent, nonpartisan, and nonprofit research group that tracks money in U.S. politics, spending on the election surpassed $45 million, three times the prior record for a state Supreme Court race ($15 million).

The youth vote has been discounted for ages because it failed to materialize on Election Day. Whether its because of mail-in voting or their passion for issues, Millennials (born 1981 1996) and Gen Z (1997 forward and now up to 25 years old) are voting in record numbers.

For example, in the Wisconsin state Supreme Court election, there were approximately 7,000 more total votes in Dane County (Madison and the University of Wisconsin Population 568,203) than in Milwaukee County (the City of Milwaukee and its suburbs Population 918,661).

Abortion is one of the issues driving the youth voting trend.

A 2022 Pew Research Center poll shows that 61 percent of all Americans believe that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. The figure rises to 74 percent among 18- to 29-year-olds. It drops to 55 percent of 50- to 64-year-olds and 54 percent among those over 65.

The Gallup Poll shows similar trends, as does virtually every other public opinion poll.

These trends will only get worse for Republicans.

With new perspectives gained from the Covid vaccine controversies, conservatives should better understand my body, my choice. Fighting to ban abortion will cause the GOP to lose elections and the ability to impact other issues.

Throughout history, bans have never stopped people from doing what they are determined to do. I dont believe Republicans can successfully ban abortions anymore, probably than I think Democrats can ban semi-automatic weapons.

I understand many people believe abortion is murder. Its a deeply personal view, sometimes rooted in religion. Its also becoming a minority issue. Republicans should not be the minority party.

The trends are clear. For Trump voters who believe Democrats stole the 2020 elections, more disappointment lies ahead. They need to wake up and move forward instead of trying to settle perceived past grievances thats a sure way to continue losing. There is no future in pursuing losses based on cheating. You might as well give up.

Continuing to try and ban abortions almost entirely ensures a future as a minority party. The demographics make that unavoidable. The Party has adjusted to the racial make-up of the country. Even as Democrats call conservatives racists, the Republican Party continues to attract more minorities. Playing the race card is wearing thinner and thinner with each fraudulent usage.

Finally, the game has changed, so Republicans must change how they play. Mail voting is here to stay. Republicans must get better at it than Democrats.

Paraphrasing Charles Darwin, Its not the strongest species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the most adaptable to change. Will we permit Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi to be the adaptable ones and allow conservatism to become obsolete and irrelevant, or will we embrace change and learn to adapt?

Andy Bloom is president of Andy Bloom Communications. He specializes in media training and political communications. He has programmed legendary stations including WIP, WPHT and WYSP/Philadelphia, KLSX, Los Angeles and WCCO Minneapolis. He was Vice President Programming for Emmis International, Greater Media Inc. and Coleman Research. Andy also served as communications director for Rep. Michael R. Turner (R-Ohio). He can be reached by email at andy@andybloom.com or you can follow him on Twitter @AndyBloomCom.

Read the original here:
Andy Bloom: Election trends portend ominous forecast for Republicans - Broad + Liberty

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) receives applause from fellow Representatives at the start of the 118th Congress on January 3, 2023.Win McNamee/Getty Images

Republicans are finally reportedly ready to share their debt ceiling demands as a package.

Those demands will reportedly include banning student loan forgiveness, among other big cuts.

Their package would only raise the debt ceiling for a year, setting up another fight in the middle of the next election.

After months of back and forth as the country slowly teeters toward a potentially catastrophic debt ceiling crisis, Republicans arereportedly finally ready to start making a deal.

According to Punchbowl News, House Republican leaders are gearing up to present their ideas to the rest of the party as recess comes to a close. Per the report, the lawmakers are starting to to put together a debt ceiling package that would raise the limit until May 2024, and they're aiming to limit budget growth to 1% annually over the next decade by banning student-loan forgiveness, placing work requirements on welfare programs, and rescinding unspent COVID-19 funds, among other things.

These cuts are not entirely new ideas. The GOP House Budget Committeefloated blocking student-loan forgiveness, rescinding unspent pandemic funds, and placing work requirements on welfare programs like SNAP in a February memo outlining areas in which they would support cutting spending for a debt ceiling deal.

If a deal to raise the limit through May 2024 goes through, it would bring another debt ceiling fight just before the presidential election adding another level of chaos to that cycle.

With Congress returning from recess next week, formal details of a debt ceiling plan are expected after months of stalemate and Republican callsfor President Joe Biden to sit down with Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy and negotiate a deal.

The US is potentially mere months away from breaching the debt ceiling, meaning it'll be unable to pay for the spending that Congress has already authorized. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that a breach might come as soon as July; in the meantime, Republicans have been preparing emergency measures to pay off high priority debts what Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said would still be "effectively a default."

Story continues

Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy has said that defaulting on the debt "is not an option," but neither is "a future of higher taxes, higher interest rates and an economy that doesn't work for working Americans." But the White House continues to insist on a clean raise, with no cuts or deals attached, which leaves them far from Republicans.Congress passed a clean debt ceiling raise three times under former President Donald Trump.

And it looks like lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are getting antsy to reach a deal. Republican Study Committee Chairman Kevin Hern sent a letter to the committee's members on Wednesday urging them to pass a "strong" debt limit deal in April.

"We must work night and day to get it passed to show the American people we can be trusted and force the Senate and White House to answer for their dereliction of duty," Hern wrote.

As Democrats have repeatedly stressed, the consequences of defaulting on the nation's debt would have major financial consequences. Moody's Analytics projected that even a short default could lead to 1 million Americans losing their jobs, and a mild recession. A report from the Joint Economic Committee found that a default could cost Americans $20,000 in retirement savings, private student-loan payments would surge, and a monthly mortgage payment could increase $150 a month. With Republicans' reported package only covering the debt limit until May 2024, the same concerns could be on the table yet again in a year.

Still, Biden has been adamant that he will not meet with McCarthy over raising the debt ceiling. That's a problem for McCarthy, who told Bloomberg TV last week that "the president never wants to meet."

"I'm very concerned about the debt ceiling," he said. "I want to make sure we don't have conflict."

Read the original article on Business Insider

Original post:
Republicans reportedly want to ban student loan forgiveness and make it harder to get food stamps in a debt ceiling deal and they seem to want to do...

Im looking at society today, and its like Im watching an X-Men movie.

A Florida Republican named Webster Barnaby said this at a committee hearing about the ceaseless march of Republican lawmakers seeking to make it impossible for trans people to so much as use a public washroom safely. He was speaking directly to trans people in the room with him, who had gathered there to speak their peace and plead for some sanity in a fraught and terrible time for trans lives. Choice words that firmly root Republicans in their comical super-villain era.

The rub of it: Hes not wrong.

Hes not wrong that when looking out at a sea of trans people, he is seeing the X-Men. He is seeing people who look different than the pressed suits on his side of the line, slamming gavels and pointing fingers and remarking at the demonic appearance of the congregated masses. The X-Men are indeed a group hated and feared by a society that sees itself as normal and mutants as counter to that norm. Whats telling is that Barnaby, in labeling the people he despises as demons, imps, and mutants, sees his heroes in villainy. Hes entering his Robert Kelly era.

Robert Kelly, apologies, SENATOR Robert Kelly is a longtime anti-mutant politician and X-Men enemy in Marvel comics who was tricked into believing the mutant hero Cyclops had fired his optic blasts into a crowd of innocent bystanders. With no real evidence to go on, he swiftly and decisively makes up his mind about an entire group of people and begins campaigning against the scourge of mutants living among the other human detritus he surrounded himself with.

Robert Kelly was a primary backer of programs like the Mutant Control Act and Project Wideawake, loosely defined anti-mutant laws requiring all mutants to register with the state to make their identities known and, by extension, tracked. When that law was shot down by the senate for being unconstitutional, Kelly aided the funding of AI-powered robots called Sentinels that were designed to track, counter, and detain/destroy mutants wherever they might be found. The ultimate goal was to remove mutants from society.

As you can imagine, AI-powered robots designed to track and detain certain kinds of folk as their primary function spiraled out of control pretty quickly.

Robert Kelly is a direct analogue to the kind of real life politicians who love nothing more than to keep a fire of hatred burning hot and bright.

The issue with someone like Barnaby saying he looks out and sees trans people as the X-Men and also demons and imps, his other colorful words for real live people in the room with him is that he sees himself as a Robert Kelly-type, and that he is okay with that comparison being drawn. Like watching Star Wars and only rooting for the Empire, thinking it sure would be nice to be that Palpatine fella.

His words cut hard enough that even fellow republicans distanced themselves from his rhetoric, without enough self-awareness that this road was always going to lead to this point.

In the fictional world of the X-Men, the constant fear of mutants leads to the invention and mass production of literal mutant-hunting robots. Robert Kelly, eventually, sees the error of his ways, begins to listen to their pleas, and starts to understand them as worthy of rights and freedoms the same as anyone else. His anti-mutant crusade well and truly ends when his life is saved by a queer mutant named Pyro, a mutant stricken with the Legacy Virus (the in-world analogue to AIDS). And he is, of course, eventually assassinated at a rally where he was speaking about his reformed worldview.

But, this isnt comics.

Shortly after his speech, Barnaby expressed regrets for his choice of words toward trans people. He said he considers himself a christian and it is unlike people of his faith to dehumanize others the way that he did. But this bears too little responsibility, too little consideration of just how he and others get to this point where they are calling trans people demons in public committee hearings with little forethought.

Barnaby apologized but also said he stands by his statement, which is a really professional way of saying well Im sorry that you feel this way. And unless politicians start to push back on their peers who have become so emboldened in their bigotry that they are drawing these comparisons to real life people in settings such as this, we can only surmise that the situation which is already fraught and terrifying will get worse. We know indeed where this path leads, and it travels a short distance to a terrifying place.

Gutter Talkis a biweekly series by Niko Stratis that looks at comic books from a queer and trans perspective.

Join A+!

View original post here:
Gutter Talk: Republicans Are in Their X-Men Villain Era - http://www.autostraddle.com

The new litigation was filed in federal district court in Manhattan and assigned to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, a Trump appointee. It stems from the first subpoena issued in a sweeping House GOP investigation into Braggs office. Republicans launched their probe, led by Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Administration Chair Bryan Steil (R-Wis.), while rallying to Trumps side ahead of his indictment.

Vyskocil replied to Braggs lawsuit Tuesday afternoon, indicating that she would not grant his motion for a temporary restraining order. Instead, she ordered Bragg to serve the lawsuit on Jordan by 9 p.m. Tuesday and for Jordan and the committee to respond to the filing by April 17. Vyskocil said she would hold a hearing on April 19.

Meanwhile, Jordan and members of his committee will take their defense of Trump to a new height by heading to New York on Monday, ramping up their public pressure campaign against Bragg. And the Ohioan quickly took to Twitter to push back on Braggs suit.

First, they indict a president for no crime, Jordan wrote. Then, they sue to block congressional oversight when we ask questions about the federal funds they say they used to do it.

The three GOP lawmakers have also been quietly preparing for a potential court battle. They warned in a March response to Braggs office that they believed any subpoena would survive a three-prong test previously laid out by the Supreme Court that is meant to determine the legal sufficiency of a congressional subpoena.

Pomerantz told Jordan and the Judiciary Committee on March 27 that he would not testify voluntarily, citing an instruction he received from Braggs office earlier in the month. That instruction came in a letter, dated March 25, in which Braggs general counsel, Leslie Dubeck, told Pomerantz that the Judiciary Committee subpoena raised concerns about federalism, state sovereignty, the limits on congressional power, and the purpose and legality of the probe.

The battle over Pomerantz could also portend a more prolonged fight between House Republicans and Braggs office. Jordan sent a letter on Friday to Matthew Colangelo, senior counsel to the New York County District Attorneys Office, requesting closed-door testimony. (He took a similar step with Pomerantz before issuing his subpoena.)

And Jordan hasnt ruled out subpoenaing Bragg himself. Judiciary panel staffers were already laying some of the groundwork for that step, but their timeline is in limbo amid a volley of letters back-and-forth with Braggs office. Responses from the DAs office have not ruled out cooperating and instead pushed for more details on what the three GOP lawmakers would want to discuss as part of any sitdown interview.

Pomerantz began working on investigations into Trump under former Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. and continued after Bragg took office in December 2021. However, Pomerantz and a colleague abruptly resigned about two months later, with reports quickly emerging that Bragg had balked at launching the wide-scale tax-and-insurance fraud prosecution of Trump that Pomerantz favored.

Two months ago, Pomerantz released a book accusing Bragg of abandoning a winnable criminal case against Trump. Just before the book was published, Bragg sent the author and the books publisher, Simon & Schuster, a letter urging a delay and warning that Pomerantz had a duty to clear any manuscript about his work in advance with Braggs office.

The book was published as scheduled, and Pomerantz insisted hed abided by his duties. I am confident that all of my actions with respect to the Trump investigation, including the writing of my forthcoming book, are consistent with my legal and ethical obligations, he said in a statement at the time.

Bragg never sued to block Pomerantzs book or interviews he granted in connection with its release. However, the district attorneys new lawsuit does seek orders forbidding the former prosecutor from complying with the House subpoena. Its unclear whether the DA will ask the judge for a broader order that limits Pomerantzs ability to discuss his interactions in the office.

Bragg also used his lawsuit to swing back at Trumps attacks on him, noting that they led to threats to his office.

Mr. Trump in particular has threatened New York officials with violent and racist vitriol, Braggs filing states. These statements have had a powerful effect. District Attorney Bragg has received multiple death threats. In one instance, he received a package containing suspicious white powder with a note making a specific death threat against him.

Braggs lawsuit features a chronology of Jordan and the House Judiciary Committees public statements attacking the DA and bashing the investigation of Trump, which he says betrays the political nature of the GOP investigation. He contends that those Republican statements are evidence that the committee lacks a legitimate legislative purpose for probing his office and is instead using it to punish a political adversary engaged in a criminal investigation.

To bolster that position, Bragg cites the Supreme Courts decision in another Trump-related matter: Democrats yearslong effort to get the former presidents financial records from his accounting firm, Mazars USA. In its opinion, the court endorsed Congress sweeping power to investigate matters it plans to legislate, but acknowledged some limits on that power.

The purported legislative purposes Chairman Jordan has invoked to support the subpoena are unsupported, speculative, specious, and/or unconstitutional. The subpoena is more broad than reasonably necessary to support any claimed congressional objective, Braggs office contends.

But courts have long been wary of policing Congress investigative power, and even more loath to delve into the mindset of individual lawmakers who are pursuing politically explosive investigations. However, Braggs lawsuit may tie up Congress ability to garner testimony and information related to the Trump probe while it plays out in court.

Erica Orden contributed to this report.

Read the original here:
Bragg sues House Republicans over 'campaign of harassment' amid ... - POLITICO