Tom Cotton demands DOJ investigate Jack Smith for election interference

FIRST ON FOX: A Senate Republican wants the Justice Department to investigate, and potentially prosecute, former Special Counsel Jack Smith over whether he “unlawfully took political actions to influence the 2024 election” against President Donald Trump.

Sen. Tom Cotton, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused Smith of seeking to impact the 2024 election in his capacity as special counsel under the Biden-led Justice Department in a letter to the acting head of the Office of Special Counsel, Jamieson Greer, first obtained by Fox News Digital.  

KEY TRUMP NOMINEES STALLED BY SENATE DEMS PUTS PRESSURE ON GOP LEADERS

“As the Office of the Special Counsel is tasked with ensuring federal employees aren’t conducting partisan political activity under the guise of their federal employment, you’re well situated to determine whether Smith broke the law,” the Arkansas Republican wrote.

“Many of Smith’s legal actions seem to have no rationale except for an attempt to affect the 2024 election results – actions that would violate federal law,” he continued.

Smith was tapped by former Attorney General Merrick Garland to probe allegations that Trump sought to overturn the 2020 election results, and later investigated the handling of classified documents that were uncovered during a raid at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago compound.

‘LOUDER BY THE HOUR’: SENATE GOP WANTS THE EPSTEIN DRAMA TO END, BUT DEMOCRATS AREN’T LETTING IT GO

Cotton listed four instances during Smith’s tenure where he charged that the prosecutor sped up trial dates and published information “with no legitimate purpose.”

In one example, Cotton accused Smith of fast-tracking the trial date and jury selection for his case against Trump related to his August 2023 indictment that was part of his 2020 election investigation.

That indictment included four charges against the president, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.

Cotton argued that, typically, defendants have more than two years to prepare for that kind of trial, and noted that the jury selection period was slated just two weeks before the Iowa Caucuses in 2024.

He also charged that Smith skirted the normal appellate process and “failed to articulate a legitimate reason” the court should grant his request when Smith demanded a trial before the forthcoming election day, wanted an expedited review by the appeals court and then filed a petition with the Supreme Court to bypass the district court after Trump filed his defense with the District of Columbia District Court in December 2023.

HOW TRUMP’S ‘NO SHRINKING VIOLETS’ DOJ IS DIGGING IN ON SCHIFF’S MORTGAGE DEALINGS AS LEGAL PERIL LOOMS

Cotton accused Smith of violating the Justice Department’s “60-day rule,” that prevents prosecutorial steps from being taken that could influence an upcoming election. That charge stemmed from Smith’s move to file a brief following the Supreme Court’s decision regarding presidential immunity, which was granted on Sept. 26, 2024, a little over a month out from the election.

And that brief, Cotton noted, exceeded the normally allowed length four times over and included grand jury testimony “typically kept secret at this point in other proceedings.”

“These actions were not standard, necessary, or justified – unless Smith’s real purpose was to influence the election,” Cotton said. “In fact, throughout Special Counsel Smith’s tenure, he regularly used farfetched and aggressive legal theories to prosecute the Republican nominee for president. I would add that President Biden also called during the election for President Trump to be ‘locked up.’”

“President Trump, of course, vanquished Joe Biden, Jack Smith, every Democrat who weaponized the law against him, but President Trump’s astounding victory doesn’t excuse Smith of responsibility for his unlawful election interference,” he continued. “I therefore ask the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether Jack Smith or any members of his team unlawfully acted for political purposes.”

Fox News Digital reached out to Smith but did not immediately hear back.