(WND News Center)—Multiple actors who have participated in the years-long lawfare against President Donald Trump already have been referred to the Department of Justice for various prosecutions.
New York’s attorney general, several members of Congress and more.
But now the name of one key player in special counsel Jack Smith’s Democrat lawfare against Trump is awaiting an investigation and a decision at the DOJ.
It is Thomas Windom, who formerly was a senior assistant special counsel to Smith, and was involved in those election interference and government records cases created against Trump, both of which have since died.
“Windom corruptly obstructed the committee’s duly authorized inquiry by withholding information from the committee during his deposition using improperly invoked privileges, ill defined and inapplicable justifications, and repeated invocation of the same blanket set of objections,” a letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to Attorney General Pam Bondi explained.
“Windom’s conduct throughout the deposition evidences his improper purpose of impeding the committee’s investigation. To be clear, this referral does not result from a good-faith disagreement between the committee and Windom about the scope of Rule 6(e). Had Windom, at his deposition, simply refused to answer the same questions that he had refused to answer on Rule 6(e) grounds during his transcribed interview, the committee would not be making this referral, notwithstanding the committee’s strong disagreement with Windom’s interpretation of Rule 6(e). Unfortunately, Windom’s conduct at the deposition went far beyond that, evidencing an intent to obstruct the committee’s investigation.”
The letter, 138 pages long plus other evidence, cites Windom’s actions to violate the law “when he ‘corruptly … obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede … the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee … of the Congress.’”
“Congress cannot perform its oversight function if witnesses who appear before its committees corruptly refuse to provide information that the law requires them to furnish. The obstruction of a committee investigation undermines Congress’s core constitutional oversight obligations. The committee is providing this information for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate potential violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1505,” the letter said.
In his position helping Smith’s lawfare, “Windom possesses unique, firsthand information about the work of that office. Yet, despite being given express authorization by DOJ on two separate occasions, Windom declined to answer questions during his deposition about topics necessary and relevant to the committee’s inquiry,” Jordon’s announcement revealed.
Those topics included “Knowledge of a February 2021 proposal that J.P. Cooney brought to the FBI to investigate President Trump and the individuals within his orbit;
“Interactions with and materials obtained from the January 6th Select Committee;
“Information related to the surveillance of Representative Scott Perry and the seizure of his cell phone;
“Information related to how many other Members of Congress were investigated as part of the Arctic Frost investigation and the Jack Smith investigation; and
“Communications with FBI officials related to potential evidence in the possession of the Willard Hotel.”
The DOJ, in fact, had authorized Windom to answer the committee’s questions, and the committee provided him with a list of topics and subjects ahead of time.
But then Windom refused to answer questions based on his claim that the DOJ hadn’t authorized him to respond.
“Windom declined to answer multiple questions during this transcribed interview on the inaccurate basis that DOJ had not authorized testimony about those topics. For example, Windom invoked an absurd and indefensible interpretation of DOJ’s authorization by refusing to testify about communications with FBI officials in part on the grounds that FBI officials are not ‘DOJ officials,’” the letter listed among many charges.
The announcement charged, “Windom’s improper refusal to answer nearly all questions during his deposition obstructed the committee’s fact-finding, and his conduct can only be understood as an intentional, corrupt effort to thwart the committee’s inquiry.”
* * *
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.
