Jeremy Rosenberg, a key investigator in the Manhattan District Attorney’s probe into President Donald Trump, has been suspended over contacts with Michael Cohen, Trump’s disgruntled ex-attorney. This revelation raises serious questions about the fairness and transparency of the prosecution’s methods and obviously political motivations.
Rosenberg, a financial crimes detective working under DA Alvin Bragg, had his firearm privileges revoked following his alleged interactions with Cohen. According to a spokesperson for Bragg’s office, the department is reviewing the investigator’s compliance with internal protocols.
Bragg detective Jeremy Rosenberg involved in Trump case suspended for Michael Cohen ties: officials https://t.co/PM2HZhp7Hu via @nypmetro
— Bo Snerdley (@BoSnerdley) June 3, 2023
Despite the seriousness of the situation, Lanny J. Davis, Cohen’s lawyer, shrugged off the implications. Davis assured reporters that all interactions between Rosenberg, Cohen and himself were always professional and focused on Cohen’s personal security. Yet, this dismissive response does little to alleviate concerns over the potential conflict of interest these interactions could represent.
Defense attorney Mark Bedrow highlighted the curiosity this suspension will likely generate from Trump’s defense team. He remarked, “It might not affect the case, but certainly, from a defense standpoint, they would want to know the nature of their relationship.” Bedrow, a former Manhattan prosecutor, stressed the need for transparency, suggesting that the defense may be entitled to any information disclosed by Rosenberg to Cohen that could affect the case.
The decision to suspend Rosenberg is already being criticized as “extremely political.” John Fleming, retired President of the Detective Investigators Association, likened the situation to the often politically charged atmosphere within the FBI.
Interestingly, Rosenberg’s investigative pursuits extend beyond Trump. He was also involved in prosecuting Steve Bannon, Trump’s former advisor, over an alleged $15 million fundraising scam concerning the border wall, from which Trump later pardoned Bannon.
The focal point remains Bragg’s prosecution of Trump over alleged payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. The timing of the case, during the impending fervor of the primary election season, has been met with frustration and suspicion from Trump and his supporters.
Despite Trump’s attempts to move the case to federal court, Bragg’s office has steadfastly opposed any change of venue. The argument from the prosecution in objecting to a transfer is that Trump’s alleged misconduct is disconnected from his presidential duties and is more related to his private business dealings and pre-election actions.
The suspension of a key investigator on account of controversial contact brings into question the entire conduct of the investigation. Justice must be delivered in an environment free of political bias and opaque dealings.
