>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Cotton laid out a blistering case in a lengthy thread on X, formerly known as Twitter, accusing Smith of weaponizing his role to help Democrats.
“Jack Smith’s legal actions were nothing more than a tool for the Biden and Harris campaigns. This isn’t just unethical, it is very likely illegal campaign activity from a public office. Let’s take a look at just how egregiously Smith used his DOJ role to influence the election,” Cotton posted.
The senator pointed out that Smith requested an unprecedented and highly expedited trial schedule for Trump, attempting to start jury selection mere days before the Iowa caucuses. “Special Counsel Smith pushed for an out-of-the-ordinary, rushed trial for President Trump, with jury selection to begin just two weeks before the Iowa caucuses. No other case of this magnitude and complexity would come to trial this quickly,” Cotton wrote.
But it didn’t stop there. Cotton accused Smith of trying to leapfrog the normal judicial process by petitioning the Supreme Court directly, offering no credible justification other than politics. “Special Counsel Smith tried to bypass the normal process and go right to the Supreme Court, but gave no reason why his abnormal request should be granted. The real reason was to get a quick ruling to damage Trump before the election—a partisan, unlawful action,” he posted.
Then came a particularly troubling detail: Cotton revealed that on September 24, 2024, Smith filed a 165-page brief — four times the normal limit — without any motion from the defense, and in direct violation of the DOJ’s long-standing “60-day rule” which prohibits politically sensitive actions in the lead-up to an election.
Cotton emphasized, “This brief was 165 pages, four times greater than the normal maximum page limit, and included what was at the time secret grand jury testimony. Why? To help Kamala and hurt Trump. There is no other reason.”
“These actions were not standard, necessary, or justified. They were the actions of a political actor masquerading as a public official. That’s why I’ve asked this unprecedented interference in the 2024 election be immediately investigated by OSC,” Cotton concluded.
Jack Smith, who led a crusade to prosecute Trump for alleged interference in the 2020 election and improper handling of classified documents — both cases that ultimately went nowhere — quietly resigned after Trump secured the nomination and vowed to remove him if re-elected.
While some in the media are already spinning the OSC probe as procedural, the consequences are anything but minor. As The New York Times noted, the harshest penalty for violating the Hatch Act is termination from federal service — a small price to pay, many believe, for manipulating the machinery of justice to interfere in a presidential election.
As this explosive inquiry unfolds, conservatives across the country are watching closely. The case may shine a long-overdue spotlight on how deep the partisan rot goes inside the federal bureaucracy — and how far unelected officials are willing to go to stop Donald Trump from returning to the White House.
