Jordan Probing Alleged Misconduct Of Trump Special Counsel Smith

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has raised the alarm over alleged prosecutorial misconduct within special counsel Jack Smith’s team investigating President Donald Trump. Jordan is now demanding documents related to alleged misconduct by senior prosecutor Jay Bratt. This latest development could set the stage for increased scrutiny over what some critics describe as “impartial justice” at the Biden Department of Justice.

In a Thursday letter to Smith, Jordan cited allegations that Bratt improperly pressured Stanley Woodward, an attorney for Trump associate and co-defendant Walter Nauta. “Mr. Bratt’s attempt to bully Mr. Nauta in cooperating, first by extorting his attorney and then by alleging a conflict of interest that precludes his attorney from the case, seriously calls into question your team and your ability to remain impartial and uphold the Department’s mission,” wrote Jordan.

Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, saying prosecutorial misconduct is “at the heart” of the Biden DOJ’s misuse of its power. Jordan’s actions have already gained support from several corners of the conservative community.

This isn’t the first time concerns have been raised over the special counsel’s operation. Jordan had previously demanded information about Bratt’s meeting with White House officials weeks before Trump was indicted. He’s given a deadline of September 21 for Smith to deliver the demanded documents, including records related to Woodward, his representation of Nauta, and his application for a judgeship on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

What’s especially troubling is the timing of these events. Trump and Nauta have been charged with hiding classified documents and obstructing justice as Trump runs a 2024 campaign for another term in the White House. It raises questions about the justice system’s integrity when a prosecutor is alleged to have pressured an attorney by bringing up career prospects to sway legal outcomes.

Mike Davis, founder of the Article III Project and former chief counsel for nominations to then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA), cheered Jordan on. He emphasized the need to “End Biden’s lawfare and blatant election interference.”

However, not everyone is on board with Jordan’s inquiry. National security attorney Bradley Moss criticized the investigation as a “blatant political stunt designed only to protect the former president.” While some might argue that Jordan is engaging in political grandstanding, what he’s doing is holding the system accountable. Oversight is not a “political stunt” but a vital component of the checks and balances that keep American democracy fair and just.

At its core, this story is about the rule of law. If a prosecutor involved in a case against a political figure is accused of misconduct, it becomes more than just a legal matter — it’s a matter of public trust. By launching this investigation, Jim Jordan is doing what is necessary to maintain the integrity of America’s legal system and uphold the Department of Justice’s mission to “ensure impartial justice.”

While the special counsel’s team has declined to comment, the nation will watch closely as Jordan seeks answers.