This trial, centered around hush-money allegations, resulted in the first-ever conviction of a former President.
According to The Hill, Bragg's decision to testify was in response to a demand made by House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) last month. Jordan had requested in a letter that both Bragg and Matthew Colangelo, another prosecutor involved in the case, attend a June 13 hearing to discuss what he termed as "the unprecedented political prosecution of President Trump." The prosecutors responded on Friday, stating that their office was "committed to voluntary cooperation," as reported by The Associated Press.
Leslie Dubeck, the district attorney's counsel, informed Jordan via a letter that Bragg would be available to testify at a mutually agreed date. However, she noted that the proposed date presented "various scheduling conflicts," as per the AP's report.
RUMORS ARE SWIRLING ABOUT NORTH KOREA’S 'HIDDEN' ROLE IN RUSSIA’S WAR ON UKRAINE
Last week, a New York jury convicted the former president on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal hush-money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels during his 2016 presidential campaign. The payments were allegedly made to silence Daniels over a past affair, which Trump denies. The sentencing for Trump has been scheduled for July 11, just days before the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, where he is expected to be named the official GOP nominee.
WATCH: VOTERS SPEAK UP ON BIDEN'S COGNITIVE STATE
June 09, 2024
The prosecutors, in their response, highlighted that the case was still ongoing. They still needed to provide the judge with their recommended repercussions for the former president, as per the letter. They wrote, "The trial court and reviewing appellate courts have issued numerous orders for the purpose of protecting the fair administration of justice in People v. Trump, and to participate in a public hearing at this time would be potentially detrimental to those efforts," according to AP.
WATCH: PELOSI HAD TO ANSWER QUESTIONS REGARDING INSIDER TRADING ALLEGATIONS
Dubeck also requested more information from Jordan's office regarding "the scope and purpose of the proposed hearing" and proposed negotiating a different date. The letter also mentioned that Colangelo's testimony was not ruled out, but they wanted to "evaluate the propriety" considering the active status of the prosecution.
This development comes amidst Jordan's criticism of the case's outcome, which he termed a "travesty of justice." He has threatened to withhold funding from the Justice Department that had been allocated for Trump investigations.
