This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Mark Pomerantz, a Trump-attacking lawyer who once worked on an investigation of the president, then quit and released a book arguing for prosecution in a move that ethics experts say is questionable, refused – over and over – to answer congressional questions about the legality of his actions.

On Thursday, the House Judiciary Committee released the video of its earlier deposition of Pomerantz, a former special assistant district attorney for New York DA Alvin Bragg's office.

The committee explained, "Pomerantz was a lead prosecutor for the politicized prosecution of President Donald Trump and later wrote a book revealing how political animus motivated the prosecution."

Components of that case now are on trial. In it Bragg, who along with multiple other prosecutors earlier had decided there was no case there, accuses Trump of multiple felonies for misdemeanor bookkeeping entries. Bragg now claims that they are felonies because they were done in furtherance of other misdemeanors.

The judge hearing the case, Juan Merchan, has refused to step away from the case even though his daughter is a Democrat activist possibly raising funds, and generating income, on her father's actions in the case. He also repeatedly has attacked Trump with gag orders, while leaving others who have been verbally bashing Trump untouched with his court actions.

And this excerpt:

JUST IN: Mark Pomerantz, the attorney who assisted Alvin Bragg in investigating Trump, pleads the 5th on multiple occasions when asked about his conduct on the case. “Did you knowingly break any laws when investigating President Trump?” “I plead the 5th!” “Did you violate anyone’s constitutional rights while investigating Trump?” “I plead the 5th.”

Pomerantz repeatedly refused to answer questions from Congress regarding whether he broke any laws while investigating Trump, or working in the office Bragg now holds.

Or whether he violated any person's constitutional rights.

Or whether he misused federal funds.

Or whether he violated the state bar.

Or whether he violated any canons of legal ethics.

He noted that Pomerantz had written a book about the case, and explained Pomerantz's refusal to answer questions.

He said it doesn't mean Pomerantz is guilty, but it raises additional questions about the scheme against Trump.

Earlier media reports explained how Pomerantz wanted to bring a case against Trump, but others in the Manhattan office didn't, so he quit and wrote a book.