Sen. Tom Cotton has unleashed a firestorm, prompting a federal watchdog to scrutinize former special counsel Jack Smith.
Fox News reported that the U.S. Office of Special Counsel is investigating Smith for possible violations of the Hatch Act, which bars government employees from political activities, following Cotton’s pointed allegations.
This probe, sparked by a July 30 letter, questions whether Smith’s actions as special counsel crossed legal boundaries. It’s a non-criminal inquiry, but the stakes are high.
In 2022, then-Attorney General Merrick Garland tapped Smith to lead two investigations targeting then-former President Donald Trump. Those probes thrust Smith into a contentious spotlight, navigating the murky waters of high-profile political investigations. Now, his conduct is under the microscope.
Sen. Cotton, a staunch conservative from Arkansas, didn’t mince words in his July 30 letter to Acting Special Counsel Jamieson Greer. He accused Smith of taking “political actions to influence” an election, a serious charge under the Hatch Act. It’s a bold move, but Cotton’s framing feels like a calculated jab at progressive overreach.
“I write requesting the Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether Jack Smith… unlawfully took political actions,” Cotton wrote.
His words drip with conviction, but they also raise questions about whether this is a genuine pursuit of justice or a political counterpunch. The Hatch Act’s strict rules don’t bend for anyone, not even a special counsel.
The Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency, isn’t your typical bureaucratic outfit. It wields authority under laws like the Civil Service Reform Act and the Hatch Act to keep federal employees in check. This isn’t a criminal probe, but it’s a reminder that even the powerful aren’t above scrutiny.
The Hatch Act, a cornerstone of federal ethics, forbids government employees from engaging in partisan politicking.
If Smith’s actions veered into election meddling, as Cotton alleges, it’s a breach that could tarnish his legacy. But without specifics, the probe’s scope remains frustratingly vague.
Cotton’s letter pulls no punches, claiming Smith’s work aimed to “harm then-candidate President Donald Trump.” It’s a spicy accusation, but one wonders if it’s more about rallying the base than airtight evidence. Still, the OSC’s involvement lends weight to the complaint.
The investigation’s non-criminal nature means Smith won’t face jail time, but his reputation could take a hit. The OSC’s role is to enforce accountability, not to sling mud, which makes this probe a test of their impartiality. Conservatives will be watching closely, skeptical of any soft-pedaling.
Smith’s appointment by Garland in 2022 was meant to ensure impartiality in the Trump investigations. But Cotton’s letter suggests Smith may have played fast and loose with his mandate. The irony of a special counsel facing his investigation isn’t lost on anyone.
“President Trump’s astounding victory doesn’t excuse Smith of responsibility,” Cotton wrote, doubling down on his charge of “unlawful election interference.”
It’s a zinger that paints Smith as a partisan operative, though the evidence remains to be seen. The senator’s rhetoric is sharp but risks overplaying his hand.
The OSC’s authority stems from laws designed to protect the integrity of federal service. Their investigation into Smith will likely dig into whether his actions crossed into political advocacy. It’s a tightrope walk for an agency tasked with staying above the fray.
The probe’s outcome hinges on what the OSC uncovers about Smith’s conduct. If they find Hatch Act violations, it could fuel conservative arguments about weaponized justice. If cleared, Smith might emerge as a martyr of progressive causes, which won’t sit well with Cotton’s base.
For now, the investigation’s specifics are under wraps, leaving room for speculation. Cotton’s call for scrutiny resonates with those wary of unelected officials wielding outsized influence. Yet, without hard evidence, it’s a gamble that could backfire.
