This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg handled one of the Democrats' many lawfare cases against President Donald Trump before he took office the second time.

He took some questions about business reporting activities that would have been misdemeanors had not the statute of limitations expired already. But he claimed they were felonies because they were in pursuit of some other, unidentified crime.

Hearing the case was Juan Merchan, who had donated to leftist causes, and whose daughter was a Democrat activist making money off her father's courtroom decisions against Trump, including his decision to allow salacious testimony from an ex-porn star and a convicted perjurer. Merchan also ruled the jury's decision didn't have to be unanimous, unheard of in American justice.

Bragg and Merchan, with the help of a leftist Manhattan jury, convicted Trump on 34 counts.

And while that verdict now is on appeal, the lower court isn't entirely out of the picture, as FBI Director Kash Patel wants to know the details of that money flow, and much more.

He has announced he is working with members of Congress for subpoenas to be issued to Merchan's daughter's company, "who made $15 million plus from the illicit information pouring out of her father's courtroom."

He said, "I want to know the bank records, because money doesn't lie. I want to know how deep it is and how much of it went to the family," for the "false conviction" of Trump.

Earlier, the Daily Caller News Foundation pointed out how Merchan "spent seven minutes" "bemoaning that then President-elect Donald Trump's election victory prevented him from imposing a sentence normally given to an 'ordinary citizen.'"

Merchan ultimately handed down a sentence of "unconditional discharge." That includes no fines, jail or probation.

He claimed that the trial, in which Trump essentially was convicted of describing legal expenses as legal expenses, with its salacious testimony, was ordinary, but the sentencing was different.

Merchan said, "It is clear from legal precedent … that Donald Trump, the ordinary citizen [and] Donald Trump, the criminal defendant, would not be entitled to such considerable protections. I'm referring to protections that extended well beyond those afforded the average defendant who winds their way through the criminal justice system each day. No, ordinary citizens do not receive those legal protections. It is the office of the president that bestows those far-reaching protections to the office holder."

Merchan's jury had claimed Trump falsified business records to cover a $130,000 payment for a non-disclosure agreement with porn actress Stormy Daniels.

Trump explained he is "totally innocent" and said he was treated "very unfairly" throughout Merchan's court proceedings.

Bragg claimed the payment to Daniels was labeled legal expenses by accountants, and experts have confirmed the case never should have been opened. Some of those called for Merchan to be disbarred for his activities.