Former special counsel prosecutor Jay Bratt is set to testify before the GOP-led House Judiciary Committee’s hearing next week. We hope that this appearance will be a turning point. It would mark the first time that a special counsel prosecutor has been compelled to testify before the committee since Donald Trump became president. To that end, the committee hopes to explore possible cases of politicization in the federal criminal charges filed against Trump.
While still serving as a federal prosecutor in 2023, Bratt was pivotal in the 2022/23 prosecution leading to Trump’s multiple Espionage Act and obstruction of justice charges. He is now uniquely positioned to help explain the unprecedented investigations surrounding the former president. He publicly called on FBI leaders to get a warrant in Trump’s case. This prompted the FBI to recover a total of 101 marked classified documents from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
The context surrounding Bratt’s testimony is complex. He has directly and doggedly pursued this vision with the Biden White House and the Department of Justice. They unpacked each of the four criminal cases facing Trump in detail. At one point, Bratt even made a trip to the White House himself. This is particularly disturbing in light of the evidence that suggests political considerations may be skewing the legal process.
Bratt’s ties have come under fire, especially on the basis of his potential ties to wrongdoing. He reportedly suggested that Woodward’s judgeship application might be considered more favorably if he could convince his client to cooperate against Trump. Bratt expressed his doubt that Woodward’s real allegiance was to Trump. He was the one who said that Woodward wasn’t a “Trump guy” and promised that he would go hard to convince Nauta, a crucial witness, to testify against Trump.
And as Bratt gets ready for his own deposition to come, it’s anyone’s guess as to how long that deposition will stretch out. Legal experts are already speculating that he will try to invoke legal privileges to avoid responding to key questions. His testimony is likely to have profound implications. At the same time, it could expose whether—and if so, how—political pressures influenced how federal investigations into Trump were handled.
The House Judiciary Committee has been actively seeking evidence of politicization in Trump’s legal battles, particularly following his directives that led to the firings of over a dozen prosecutors who worked under special counsel Jack Smith, including Bratt himself. The committee’s inquiry demonstrates an important understanding that prosecutorial decisions shouldn’t be made under excessive political pressure.