'All smoke and mirrors': Outrage as Jim Jordan announces investigation against Special Counsel Jack Smith for mishandling evidence

WASHINGTON, DC: Representative Jim Jordan announced an investigation against Special Counsel Jack Smith over his handling of the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump, Raw Story reported.

In a post on X, the House Judiciary Committee said that the Ohio Republican's plan to investigate the prosecutor stemmed from his recent acknowledgment that some of the evidence in the classified documents case against Trump was "altered or manipulated" after it was seized from Mar-a-Lago by the FBI.

During a May 3 hearing, Smith admitted that the boxes seized from the ex-president's luxury resort in Florida in August 2022 were inadvertently jumbled, as per Politico. This contradicted what he previously told  District Judge Aileen Cannon, where he asserted the entire evidence was  "in their original, intact form as seized." 

Jim Jordan's probe into Jack Smith

In a letter dated May 6 to Jeffrey Ragsdale, Counsel for the Office of Professional Responsibility, Jordan said Smith's acknowledgment "presents grave concerns about the Department's commitment to impartial justice, whether the Special Counsel's Office misled a federal court, whether the Special Counsel's Office strenuously upheld the 'highest professional standards' of the Department of Justice."

The GOP lawmaker, the current chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, noted that Walt Nauta, a co-defendant in the classified document case and Trump's valet, found discrepancies in the evidence provided to his attorney.

After Nauta's counsel informed the court about the same, Smith admitted that "there are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans."

In light of this, Jordan, in his letter, asked the Department's Office of Professional what steps they were "undertaking to examine these facts and hold accountable attorneys who violated the standards of professional conduct."

However, during the May 3 hearing, the prosecution informed the court that the evidence might have jumbled while moving it from Mar-a-Lago, which was insignificant to the case.

Trump, who faces 40 counts for illegally retaining classified materials at his private residence in Palm Beach after leaving the White House, also accused Smith of committing "evidence tampering." In a recent Truth Social post, he said the special counsel's team "mishandled" the boxes used to bring the "fake case" against him.

In recent months, Jordan sent similar angry letters to Manhattan Attorney General Alvin Bragg and Fulton County DA Fani Willis, who respectively brought the hush money case in New York and the election subversion case in Georgia against Trump.

Internet slams Jim Jordan

Netizens lashed out at Jim Jordan's latest move to investigate Special Counsel Jack Smith.

One social media user wrote, "So many ongoing investigations.... Any actual results? Is there any reality or is this all smoke and mirrors?"

Another remarked, "Every time the same. Stop talking and writing letters, do something!"

"Jim 'all talk no action' Jordan...we won't hold our breath," one person added. Meanwhile, another response read, "Another investigation resulting in zilch, great."

One individual said, "Oh yay! More investigations! If this is the power of Congressional oversight, we have failed."

An enraged individual said, "Another 'investigation' that will go NO WHERE!!!! so sick of you guys and im a conservative! done with the whole lot of you."

"At this point who GAS? Jordan & Comer both huge disappointments," someone else chimed in.

Another argued, "This is a complete nothing burger. No documents have been removed or added. Even if there is an issue, it would be a matter for the trial court, not Jim Jordan. The desperation to avoid a trial does not justify interfering in the prosecution."

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.