The Office of Special Counsel has launched an official investigation into former special counsel Jack Smith.
As I’m sure you remember, Jack Smith infamously led two political witch hunts against President Trump.
Take a look:
BREAKING: There is now an OFFICIAL investigation into CROOKED Jack Smith!
He led the charge in politically persecuting Trump and wasn’t even legally put in his position!
“I appreciate the Office of Special Counsel taking this seriously and launching an investigation into Jack… pic.twitter.com/opW7qQQQcL
— Gunther Eagleman
(@GuntherEagleman) August 1, 2025
BREAKING: There is now an OFFICIAL investigation into CROOKED Jack Smith!He led the charge in politically persecuting Trump and wasn’t even legally put in his position!“I appreciate the Office of Special Counsel taking this seriously and launching an investigation into Jack Smith’s conduct. No one is above the law.”He deserves PRISON and nothing else!
The investigation centers around Jack Smith’s potential violations of the HATCH act, which prevents federal employees from using their positions to engage in partisan politics.
BREAKING: The U.S. government has officially opened an investigation into former Special Counsel Jack Smith for possible violations of the HATCH ACT
This comes after MULTIPLE politically-charged cases against Trump prosecuted by Smith were dismissed
FAFO!
The Hatch Act… pic.twitter.com/KW1C6IfyOP
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) August 1, 2025
The New York Post has more details on the probe:
The Office of Special Counsel has launched a formal investigation into Jack Smith, the first official legal probe into his conduct, The Post has learned.
ADVERTISEMENTSmith is the justice department lawyer who oversaw two criminal investigations into President Donald Trump during the Biden administration, one into Trump’s handling of classified documents, the other as to whether his actions on Jan. 6th, 2021, were an attempt to overturn the 2020 election. Both cases were dismissed.
An email reviewed by The Post states The Hatch Act Unit, which enforces a law restricting government employees from engaging in political activities, has begun reviewing the former Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice. The email was written by Senior Counsel Charles Baldis at OSC.
“I appreciate the Office of Special Counsel taking this seriously and launching an investigation into Jack Smith’s conduct. No one is above the law.
“Jack Smith’s actions were clearly driven to hurt President Trump’s election, and Smith should be held fully accountable,” said Senate Intelligence Committee chair Sen Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) in a statement to The Post.
The Office of Special Counsel launched the formal investigation into Jack Smith after Sen. Tom Cotton urged them to do so in a letter.
In his letter, Sen. Cotton listed several ways that Jack Smith blatantly weaponized the law against President Trump.
You can read that full letter here:
Jack Smith is a partisan Democrat who weaponized the law against President Trump to help Dems win. I’ve asked the Office of Special Counsel to investigate his actions that likely violated the law to influence the election. pic.twitter.com/64v6U3Y0wH
— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) July 30, 2025
Full text of the letter:
This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.Dear Acting Special Counsel Greer:
I write requesting the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether Jack Smith, Special Counsel for Attorney General Merrick Garland, unlawfully took political actions to influence the 2024 election to harm then-candidate President Donald Trump. 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.ADVERTISEMENTMany 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.
Consider just the following examples, where Smith expedited trial proceedings and deliberately published information, with no legitimate purpose:
• After filing the indictment against President Trump on August 10, 2023, Smith demanded the trial start January 2, 2024, with jury selection beginning as early as December 11, 2023. Defendants in these types of cases typically have more than two years to prepare for trial, but President Trump·s defense team had fewer than six months to review 13 million pages of evidence and thousands of hours of video footage provided by prosecutors. Notably, jury selection was to begin just two weeks before the Iowa caucuses.
• On December 11, 2023, after President Trump filed his defense with the District of Columbia District Court, Smith pressed for a trial before the election by moving for an expedited review by the appeals court. On the same day, however, Smith further escalated
this push and filed a petition with the Supreme Court to bypass the district court. Smith skirted the normal appellate process but failed to articulate a legitimate reason the court should grant this abnormal request.• Following the Supreme Court’s decision recognizing presidential immunity, Smith’s prosecution team filed an initial brief on September 5, 2024, although there was no defense motion pending. The judge granted Smith permission to file the brief on September 26, 2024, but pointed out this was “procedurally irregular.” This timeline is
highly unusual considering complex litigation matters normally take place over several months, rather than a mere three weeks. This action also appears to violate the Justice Department’s 60-day rule, which prohibits timing any action, for the purpose of affecting any election or giving advantage or disadvantage to a candidate, within 60 days of the election.• Smith’s brief on Trump’s immunity from prosecution was 165 pages, which required special permission to exceed the normal maximum page limit by four times. In fact, Smith also incorporated grand jury testimony typically kept secret at this point in other proceedings. This action appears to be a deliberate and underhanded effort to disclose
unsubstantiated and extensive allegations timed to maximize electoral impact.These actions were not standard, necessary, or justified-unless Smith’s real purpose was to influence the election. In fact, throughout Special Counsel Smith’s tenure, he regularly used far fetched 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. I therefore ask the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether Jack Smith or any members of his team unlawfully acted for political
purposes.Sincerely,
Tom Cotton, United States Senator
ADVERTISEMENT
(@GuntherEagleman)
BREAKING: The U.S. government has officially opened an investigation into former Special Counsel Jack Smith for possible violations of the HATCH ACT






