House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, demanding information relating to the superseding indictment filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith against Donald Trump.
The letter, obtained by The Daily Caller, says that Smith “appears to have violated longstanding Department policy intended to protect our democratic processes” in his superseding indictment against former president Donald Trump.
“The Committee must therefore understand whether you approved Special Counsel Smith’s indictment in advance or whether Special Counsel Smith continues to exercise prosecutorial authority without your ‘meaningful direction or supervision,'” Jordan wrote to Garland.
Jordan explained that both Republican and Democrat administrations have “attempted to safeguard the sanctity of the electoral process by adhering to a ’60-day rule,’ under which federal prosecutors avoid ‘the return of indictments against a candidate for office within 60 days of a primary or general election.”
Despite not being officially codified, there is a “wide acceptance that the 60-day rule is critical to protecting the integrity of the electoral process.”
“Special Counsel Smith obtained the superseding indictment against President Trump just 10 days before early voting begins in some states. There can be little question that the superseding indictment has some effect on the election, especially coming after the Supreme Court’s opinion on presidential immunity cast significant doubt on Special Counsel Smith’s ability to prosecute the initial indictment,” Jordan added.
“There is no persuasive argument why Special Counsel Smith could not wait until after the election to file this superseding indictment,” the letter notes. “It is therefore difficult to believe that the superseding indictment was filed now for any purpose other than to affect the outcome of the election.”
“In other words, either you are personally weaponizing the Department of Justice against President Trump or Special Counsel Smith is continuing his unconstitutional prosecution against President Trump—but either does not reflect well upon you or your commitment to the rule of law in the United States,” Jordan asserted.
