This is unbelievable, how can they refuse to show any proof.
House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, and Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance Chair Andy Biggs, a Republican from Arizona, have demanded for the release of information from special counsel Jack Smith regarding his ongoing investigation into former President Donald Trump. In a letter sent on Thursday, the lawmakers expressed doubts about Smith’s commitment to impartial justice, citing concerns about his perceived inclination to criminalize political discourse. They pointed to reports suggesting Smith’s interest in exploring the Justice Department’s ability to prosecute conservative tax-exempt groups engaged in constitutionally protected political speech.
The Judiciary Committee, in its pursuit of oversight, aims to gather communications and relevant information related to what they described as the “unprecedented investigation and prosecution” of Trump, emphasizing his role as the primary opponent to President Joe Biden in the upcoming election. The committee intends to use the obtained information to inform potential legislative reforms concerning politically motivated prosecutions involving current and former presidents.
The lawmakers warned of potential compulsory measures if the Department of Justice continues to obstruct the investigation. Notably, they revealed their recent discovery that Smith obtained extensive private information, including political speech, from millions of Americans through X (formerly Twitter), without an apparent connection to criminal activity.
The letter outlined specific demands for information, including documents and communications related to the investigation and prosecution of Trump, details about the special counsel’s office members and staff, and information regarding the acquisition of private data from Twitter. The lawmakers set a deadline of January 4 for the submission of these materials and threatened compulsory processes if the deadline is not met.
This development comes in the wake of Trump’s criticism of Smith’s recent legal maneuver, characterized as a “Hail Mary” move, where the special counsel sought a swift ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court on the prosecution of the former president for alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. The Supreme Court has agreed to expedite consideration of Smith’s petition, with Trump’s response due by December 20. However, the court clarified that accepting the case for review is not guaranteed.