House Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan has launched an investigation targeting J.P. Cooney, a deputy of special counsel Jack Smith, amid scrutiny over the handling of legal matters linked to former President Donald Trump.

Jim Jordan's investigation into DOJ deputy J.P. Cooney centers on the prosecutorial conduct in Smith's cases involving former associates of Trump, as The Hill reports.

Starting Point: Jordan's Inquiry Announcement

Jordan, as chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has issued a formal request for documents to the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility. His focus is Cooney, known for his involvement in the prosecution of Trump ally Roger Stone and currently serving under Smith.

The inquiry demands access to all files concerning any internal reviews of Cooney’s professional conduct, particularly in light of his prior roles and decisions.

This move by Jordan is seen as part of a broader attempt to scrutinize the prosecutors linked with high-profile cases against former President Trump and those close to him.

The DOJ’s Past Reports and Cooney’s Concerns

Previously, the DOJ's Inspector General had released a report concerning the sentencing of Stone. It concluded that there was no improper political influence in the decision-making process. However, it did acknowledge that concerns raised by prosecutors like Cooney were not unreasonable.

Cooney, who once led the Fraud and Public Corruption Section, had expressed worries about potential political pressures influencing sentencing outcomes, especially given Stone's close relationship with Trump.

This report indirectly supports Cooney's cautious stance, despite being cleared of any wrongdoing by the Inspector General.

Details of Cooney’s Professional Background

Cooney has been involved in several high-profile cases, including the initial prosecution of Sen. Bob Menendez in 2015. His extensive experience in the DOJ's Fraud and Public Corruption section has positioned him as a critical figure in debates over the impartiality of federal prosecutions.

His attorney has defended Cooney’s actions and criticized any conclusions that might discourage open discussions within the DOJ about the politicization of sensitive cases.

Amid these defenses, Jordan has critiqued Cooney for allegedly promoting what he describes as "unsubstantiated conspiracy theories" related to sentencing decisions.

Investigation Reactions and Defense Strategies

In his communications with the DOJ, Jordan underscored the necessity for prosecutorial integrity, emphasizing that the role of a prosecutor is to pursue justice fairly and without political bias.

The whistleblower, Aaron Zelinsky, had also shared concerns with Cooney regarding political motivations that could influence the handling of legal cases, which Cooney found credible based on his own experiences.

Quotes from the DOJ report reiterate that Cooney’s concerns were based on his firsthand experiences and not merely speculative.

Broadening the Scope: Jordan's Wider Inquiry

Jordan's letter to the DOJ not only requests documents but also a briefing from the Office of Professional Responsibility to discuss Cooney’s alleged professional misconduct.

This is indicative of a larger investigative effort by Jordan to assess the fairness and impartiality of legal proceedings related to political figures, which has been a contentious topic in recent years.

The broader investigation aims to ensure transparency and accountability within the DOJ, reflecting ongoing political and legal battles that have significant implications for justice administration in the United States.

In conclusion, Jim Jordan's inquiry into J.P. Cooney’s role and actions as a DOJ prosecutor underscores a significant scrutiny of the operations of the Department of Justice, especially concerning cases linked to political figures. This investigation is part of a broader effort to assess the integrity and impartiality of federal prosecutorial practices in the aftermath of contentious political events.