House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan asked the Justice Department on Wednesday to investigate and potentially prosecute Thomas Windom, who served as an aide to former special counsel Jack Smith, accusing him of obstructing a congressional investigation.
The case trods tricky ground in that Mr. Windom did appear before Mr. Jordan’s committee — twice. But he ducked answers to crucial questions while giving “shifting” justifications for why he wasn’t cooperating, the committee said.
That, Mr. Jordan said, puts him in the territory of obstruction.
Mr. Jordan said Mr. Windom wouldn’t talk about his interactions with the House’s Jan. 6 investigative subcommittee, government surveillance of Rep. Scott Perry or other members of Congress investigated in relation to the 2020 election, or knowledge of a February 2021 proposal to investigate President Trump.
He said Mr. Windom took a particularly antagonistic approach to the questions, using “shifting justifications” for ducking questions.
“Although DOJ had specifically authorized Windom to testify without significant restrictions about his role as a prosecutor on Jack Smith’s team, he flouted the committee’s constitutional oversight authority and its deposition rules by not answering most of the committee’s questions,” Mr. Jordan said in his referral to Attorney General Pam Bondi.
“Windom’s insistence on refusing to answer the committee’s important questions about his work deprives the committee and Congress of necessary firsthand information about the operations of the Office of Special Counsel Jack Smith,” Mr. Jordan wrote.
In response to the referral, Mr. Windom’s lawyer, Preston Burton, pointed back to his statement during one of the depositions where he unloaded on the committee for the proceeding.
During one of the depositions, Mr. Burton unloaded on the committee for the proceeding.
“Majority staff, operating with no meaningful oversight or checks, have engaged in an unserious, performative exercise, convened for political theater,” he said. “Majority staff have demonstrated no respect for, nor understanding of, my client’s obligation to follow the laws, such as the grand jury secrecy rules.”
He predicted at the time that Republicans were setting Mr. Windom up for charges over his decision not to answer some of the questions.
The case draws similarities to the House Democrats’ Jan. 6 investigation, where the Justice Department brought cases and won convictions against Trump aides for not cooperating with that congressional probe. In those cases, Peter Navarro and Stephen Bannon both refused to cooperate at all, earning them each criminal sentences.
Mr. Windom, who was Mr. Smith’s senior assistant special counsel, appeared twice — the first appearance was voluntary, and when he ducked questions, Mr. Jordan issued a subpoena.
The second appearance didn’t go much better, Mr. Jordan said, with Mr. Windom skirting the committee’s questions despite a specific authorization from the Justice Department to talk about some of those areas of inquiry.
In one exchange, Mr. Windom declined to talk about his communications with FBI officials, saying he was only authorized to talk about Justice Department employees and he did not consider the FBI to be part of the department for that purpose.
The bureau does, in fact, report to the attorney general, who heads the Justice Department.
Mr. Jordan called Mr. Windom’s position “absurd and indefensible.”
At another point, Mr. Windom refused to say where he currently worked, nor even if he was working as a lawyer.
“I respectfully decline to respond for the reasons stated by my counsel,” he said.
The committee said that was an assertion of his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination — but they said that didn’t make sense in this situation.
• Stephen Dinan can be reached at sdinan@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.