House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) has been scrutinizing Georgia's Democratic Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' indictment and prosecution of former President Donald Trump for evidence of partisan political motivations and coordination with federal prosecutors also going after the former president.
Willis took aim at Jordan in a fiery response letter this week that accused the congressman of either being "ignorant" or of "abusing" his authority while she also refused to provide him with certain information he previously requested, according to The Hill.
The Democratic district attorney's response showcased the overt disrespect and hostility she holds toward the Republican chairman of the powerful Judiciary Committee and the oversight he is attempting to assert on a matter deemed within the purview of the committee.
In late August, shortly after DA Willis had criminally indicted former President Trump and numerous other associates for their purported roles in an alleged racketeering conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election, Chairman Jordan launched an inquiry into that prosecutorial effort.
He raised concerns that Willis' actions were "politically motivated" and possibly also coordinated with federal prosecutors, including Special Counsel Jack Smith, who had also targeted Trump with a "politicized indictment" over similar alleged crimes related to the 2020 election. Chairman Jordan requested that she provide the committee with any communications her office had with federal prosecutors as well as information about federal funding her office received.
Willis replied to that initial letter with hostility and, while she did provide some information about her office's federal funding, she refused to provide any additional information about communications with the Justice Department and instead offered the committee chair suggestions on how to do his job.
In late September, Jordan sent another letter to Willis to reiterate his concerns that her "prosecutorial conduct is geared more toward advancing a political cause and her own notoriety than toward promoting the fair and just administration of the law." He also renewed his earlier requests and explained the constitutional authority and legal precedents the investigation was based on.
On Wednesday, DA Willis sent a response letter to Chairman Jordan and wrote, "A charitable explanation of your correspondence is that you are ignorant of the United States and Georgia Constitutions and codes. A more troubling explanation is that you are abusing your authority as Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary to attempt to obstruct and interfere with a Georgia criminal prosecution."
"Indeed, you confessed to this motivation on Mark Levin’s September 10, 2023, show: when discussing one of my office’s active prosecutions, you boasted, 'We’re trying to get all the answers, but we’re trying to stop this stuff as well,'" she continued with added emphasis.
Willis went on to assert that Jordan's "behavior" was "offensive to the rule of law" and, while noting that she and her team were "exceptionally busy," claimed that "the legal positions you advance are meritless" and potentially in violation of "well-recognized confidentiality interests" and the doctrines of "federalism and separation of powers."
With regard to Jordan's requests about communications between her office and federal prosecutors, she referred him to the DOJ, and as to the federal funding, she merely referenced her prior letter while adding a link to a DOJ website about federal grant recipients.
Willis concluded by once again offering suggestions for more "noble" uses of the committee's time and resources besides scrutinizing her unprecedented prosecution of the former president, and wrote, " I would encourage you to focus your attention on those issues, which would make life better for the American people."
It is abundantly clear from her hostile response that DA Willis holds nothing but contempt and disrespect for Chairman Jordan and his probe of her prosecutorial conduct toward former President Trump and others.
How Jordan responds to the overt refusal of the district attorney to cooperate with his inquiry remains to be seen, but it seems like a safe bet that he won't meekly accept it as the end of the matter.