Jim Jordan Sends a Warning Letter to Corrupt DA Fani Willis

House Judiciary Chairman sent a letter to the corrupt DA Fani Willis explaining what role the House can play in her sham indictment of President Trump. Jordan expressed his concern about her “prosecutorial conduct” and how it appeared to be an exercise in “advancing a political cause and her own notoriety.” Jordan and his committee shared the letter on X.

The post read in part:

“Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent a letter to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis reinforcing concerns that Willis’s 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.”

“The letter details how Congress has a clear legislative interest in ensuring that popularly elected local prosecutors do not misuse their law-enforcement authority to target federal officials for political reasons. The letter also explains how the relevant Constitutional and legal precedent provides no legitimate basis for Willis to impede the Committee’s oversight.”

🚨#BREAKING: @Jim_Jordan Responds to District Attorney Fani Willis

Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent a letter to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis reinforcing concerns that Willis's prosecutorial conduct is geared more toward advancing a…

VISIT OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) September 27, 2023

The letter began with a direct challenge to Willis, who had written the Judiciary Committee objecting to any possible oversight.

“Congress in general, and this Committee in particular, have a strong legislative interest in ensuring that popularly elected local prosecutors do not misuse their law-enforcement authority to target federal officials for political reasons. We can only conclude from your hostile response to the Committee’s oversight that you are actively and aggressively engaged in such a scheme.”

The detailed nine-page missive was broken down into key points. Willis had sent a letter to the committee, claiming that she did not have to comply with the committee’s requests for information.

1. The Committee Has the Constitutional Authority to Conduct Oversight of Willis’ Apparently Politically Motivated Prosecution.
2. Willis’ Reliance Upon Mazars to Reject the Committee’s Oversight is Misplaced.
3. The Committee’s Inquiry Does Not Intrude on Federalism Because Congress Is Exercising Its Core Authority to Legislate.
4. The Committee’s Inquiry Does Not Usurp Executive Powers.
5. The Committee Requires Additional Information to Advance Our Oversight.

From The Letter:

The Committee Has the Constitutional Authority to Conduct Oversight of Your Apparently Politically Motivated Prosecution.

Article I of the Constitution grants Congress “[a]ll legislative [p]owers.”4 Federal courts have clearly explained that Congress’s “power to secure needed information . . . has long been treated as an attribute of the power to legislate.”5 Consequently, “[t]here can be no doubt as to the power of Congress, by itself or through its committees, to investigate matters and conditions relating to contemplated legislation.”6 The Supreme Court of the United States has described the
congressional power of inquiry as “broad” and “indispensable.”7 Without this power, the Court has stated, “Congress would be . . . unable to legislate ‘wisely or effectively.’”8

As the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York reiterated earlier this year in a matter also involving an elected local prosecutor’s office, “congressional committees have constitutional authority to conduct investigations and [request information from potential witnesses] because ‘each House has power to “secure needed information” in order to legislate.’”9 Indeed, “[t]his power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and
appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.”10 Accordingly, the court appropriately recognized that “[t]he r of the Congress to conduct [its] investigations is inherent in the legislative process.”