Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has sent a letter to former Special Counsel Jack Smith, requesting his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. The letter comes after several members of Smith's Special Counsel team did not fully cooperate with the Committee's investigation into what Jordan describes as the Biden-Harris Justice Department's "weaponization of the rule of law."
Jordan's letter outlines concerns about the actions taken by Smith's team during the prosecution of former President Donald J. Trump and his co-defendants. The letter alleges that the Special Counsel's office engaged in tactics such as restricting Trump's public statements, conducting a raid on his residence, attempting to pressure defense counsel with the promise of political patronage, and manipulating evidence. Jordan claims these actions undermined the integrity of the criminal justice system and violated federal prosecutors' responsibilities.
"Since the beginning of the 118th Congress, the Committee has conducted oversight of the operations of the Office of Special Counsel you led—specifically, your team's partisan and politically motivated prosecutions of President Donald J. Trump and his co-defendants. Among the disturbing tactics employed in that prosecution, your team sought to silence President Trump by restricting his public statements about the case, conducted an unnecessary and abusive raid of his residence, attempted to improperly pressure defense counsel with the promise of political patronage, and manipulated key evidence in the investigation. These actions undermined the integrity of the criminal justice system and violated the core responsibility of federal prosecutors to do justice. As the Committee continues its oversight, your testimony is necessary to understand the full extent to which the Biden-Harris Justice Department weaponized federal law enforcement," Jordan wrote.
The Committee has already interviewed several individuals from Smith's office, including Jay Bratt, J.P. Cooney, and Thomas Windom. Jordan's letter also references internal FBI documents indicating that Representative Scott Perry was surveilled before his cell phone was seized, suggesting this was a breach of constitutional separation of powers. The letter further claims that Smith's office requested and obtained private phone records for at least eight Senators and one Representative during an investigation called "Arctic Frost." Jordan asserts these actions support claims that Smith's office conducted politically motivated investigations.
"To date, the Committee has conducted transcribed interviews and depositions of several individuals detailed to your office, including Jay Bratt, J.P. Cooney, and Thomas Windom. In addition, the Committee has obtained internal Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) documents that show the FBI, with the likely involvement of prosecutors that were later assigned to your team, surveilled Representative Scott Perry prior to seizing his cell phone in a stunning breach of constitutional separation of powers. Your abusive surveillance of sitting Members of Congress did not stop there. Earlier this week, the FBI, at the direction of Director Kash Patel, released an alarming document showing that your team requested and obtained private phone records for at least eight Senators and one Representative during an investigation known as 'Arctic Frost.' These documents reinforce the conclusion that your office conducted politically motivated investigations," according to Jordan's letter.
The letter details instances where members of Smith's team invoked constitutional rights or privileges during their interviews with the Committee. For example, Thomas Windom cited grand jury secrecy protections and later invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to approximately 70 questions from lawmakers. Similarly, Jay Bratt invoked the Fifth Amendment about 75 times during his interview.
"Although the Committee has learned new information from these interviews, several members of your Special Counsel team failed to fully cooperate with the Committee's inquiry. For example, during a transcribed interview with the Committee, former Senior Assistant Special Counsel Thomas Windom relied on an overbroad and unreasonable interpretation of grand jury secrecy protections to refuse to answer the Committee's questions on important topics. After the Committee subpoenaed Windom to compel his testimony, he invoked various ill-defined privileges and objections, including the Fifth Amendment, to refuse to answer approximately 70 questions. According to Windom's counsel, 'the foundation of [Windom's] decision to decline to answer is his constitutional right to silence embodied in the Fifth Amendment.' For instance, Windom refused to answer 'how many other members of Congress were investigated as part of the Arctic Frost investigation and Jack Smith investigation' and if there are records of additional 'Members of Congress that were swept up by a legal process' pursuant to this investigation," Jordan wrote.
The letter also describes how Bratt declined to answer questions about whether certain actions were intended to influence elections or collect political intelligence.
"Similarly, former Counselor to the Special Counsel Jay Bratt invoked the Fifth Amendment approximately 75 times during his interview with the Committee. He refused to answer key questions necessary for the Committee's oversight, including whether the purpose of the classified documents investigation was to affect the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, whether the raid on Mar-a-Lago was intended to capture political intelligence, who he met with during his three visits to the Biden-Harris White House, and why he pressured defense counsel using the promise of political patronage," according to Jordan's letter.
Jordan further notes that in November 2024, an inquiry was opened by Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility into Smith's tactics. He states that previous requests for documents related to Smith's investigation have gone unanswered.
"As the Special Counsel, you are ultimately responsible for the prosecutorial misconduct and constitutional abuses of your office. Your misdeeds were so flagrant that the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility confirmed to the Committee in November 2024 that it had opened an inquiry into the tactics of your office. Over the course of our oversight, we have written you several times to request documents relating to your politicized investigation. You failed to respond," Jordan wrote.
The full text of Jordan's letter as well as deposition transcripts with Thomas Windom and Jay Bratt are available online.
