House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) has requested an interview with Jay Bratt, a prosecutor on special counsel Jack Smith’s team, over alleged unethical behavior in the prosecution of Donald Trump. Jordan’s inquiry focuses on Bratt’s involvement in the classified documents case in Florida and his meetings with White House officials.
Jordan’s letter highlights three meetings Bratt attended at the White House before Trump’s indictment. These meetings, which took place in September 2021, November 2021, and March 2023, are seen by Jordan as suspicious and potentially indicative of a coordinated effort between the DOJ and the White House against Biden’s political rivals.
“You have been closely involved with the investigation and prosecution of President Trump,” Jordan’s letter states. “You have engaged in a series of improper actions and unethical conduct that violate the Department’s duty to impartial justice.”
The timing and context of these meetings have led Jordan and other Republicans to suspect that there was improper coordination. Jordan had previously raised these concerns in letters to Attorney General Merrick Garland and White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients, suggesting that the meetings created “a perception of improper coordination.”
In addition to the meetings, Jordan is scrutinizing a claim by Stanley Woodward, an attorney for one of Trump’s co-defendants. Woodward alleged that Bratt mentioned a potential judicial appointment during their discussions. According to Woodward, Bratt said, “I wouldn’t want to do anything to mess that up,” implying potential leverage over Woodward’s nomination. Smith’s team denied any wrongdoing, attributing the comment to “professional courtesy” and “confusion.”
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon has delayed the start of the classified documents case indefinitely, with hearings scheduled later this month to address legal issues raised by Trump’s defense team.
Jordan’s efforts underscore ongoing Republican concerns about the impartiality of the DOJ and its handling of cases involving political figures. The outcome of Bratt’s interview and the subsequent legal proceedings will be closely watched by both parties.
