Republican attorneys have refuted Republican claims that the cases were politically motivated. Former US Special Counsel Jack Smith has defended his prosecution of President Donald Trump.
Testifying before lawmakers at the House Judiciary Committee, Smith said the two federal cases, one over Trump’s handling of classified documents and the other over efforts to overturn the 2020 election, were based on evidence, not politics.
In accordance with long-standing Department of Justice rule prohibiting the investigation or prosecution of a sitting president, both cases were dropped after Trump’s re-election in November 2024. Shortly before Trump’s inauguration in January 2025, Smith resigned.
The hearing marked the first time the US public heard at length from Smith since his resignation. He stated to the panel that he anticipated a criminal prosecution attempt by Trump’s Justice Department.
What are the main lessons learned?
What specifics do we know about the cases?
In November 2022, Smith was appointed to lead the Trump investigation.
He conducted two investigations into these two cases:
Classified documents
After taking office at the end of his first term, Smith allegedly looked into Trump’s handling of classified documents.
The US Espionage Act-related willful retention of national defense information counts as part of the criminal case, which is punishable by ten years in prison for each. Separate charges accused Trump of conspiring to obstruct justice and making false statements to investigators.
According to the prosecution, Trump allegedly removed highly sensitive documents from the White House when he assumed office in 2021 and later deposited them at his Florida Mar-a-Lago estate.
2020 election results
The second case focused on Trump’s unsuccessful bid to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election. Trump allegedly sought to halt the constitutional transfer of power following the election rather than accept the outcome, according to the prosecution.
The charges followed a wide-ranging investigation into the events leading up to the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol. Trump faces charges of conspiring to defraud US citizens and violating the rights of voters on four counts.
Trump was not directly accused of inciting the Capitol riot, by Smith. Instead, the case centred on Trump’s actions in the weeks between his election defeat and the violence in Washington, examining efforts to pressure officials, advance false claims of fraud and interfere with the certification of the election results.
What were the main conclusions drawn from the testimony on Thursday?
No one should be a person of law, according to the saying.
Smith said his investigation into Trump was driven by evidence and the law.
“We followed the law and the facts,” the statement read. An indictment of a previously unreleased criminal scheme to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power, Smith said, was where that led.
“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity. Regardless of whether the former president was a Republican or a Democrat, I would pursue a former president if the same facts were presented today, Smith said in his opening remarks.
No one should be held accountable in this country because the law mandated that no one be above the law. So that is what I did”, Smith added.
The special counsel continued to say that he had not yet dropped Trump’s insurrection charge. Following the election of Trump in the House on January 6, the president was cleared of the Senate’s sole charge of inciting an uprising.
Cassidy Hutchinson
Republicans have long focused on challenging the testimony of former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, which was a key moment in the congressional investigation into the January 6 attack.
Hutchinson testified to the committee that she was aware that Trump had demanded to go to the US Capitol when he attempted to cram the steering wheel into his presidential vehicle. Other witnesses later disputed that account.
During the hearing, Republican Representative Jim Jordan, the committee’s chair, pressed Jack Smith on the episode. “Mr Smith, is Cassidy Hutchinson a liar?” Jordan asked.
Smith claimed that investigators couldn’t confirm Hutchinson’s claim because it was second-hand. He claimed that the Secret Service agent who was driving at the time did not verify the claim.
Jordan pressed whether Smith would have brought Hutchinson forward to testify anyway, and Smith said he had not made “any final determinations”.
That response, Jordan claimed, demonstrated how determined prosecutors were to pursue Trump.
In fact, Smith said, one of the “central challenges” of the case was to present it in a concise way, “because we did have so many witnesses” – state officials, Trump campaign workers and advisers – to testify.
According to Smith, “some of the most powerful witnesses were witnesses who were actually fellow Republicans who had voted for Donald Trump, who had campaigned for him, and who wanted him to win the election.”
Threatening democracy
One Democrat, Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, asked how he would describe the consequences – for US democracy – of not holding Trump accountable for alleged violations of the law and his oath.
It can be catastrophic, according to Smith, “if we don’t hold the most powerful people in our society to the same standards of the rule of law.”
“It’s very simple to understand why people would believe they don’t have to follow the law as well,” he said.
Smith continued, “If we don’t hold people to account when they commit crimes, that it sends a message that those crimes are OK, that our society accepts that… It can endanger our election process, it can endanger election workers, and ultimately our democracy”.
“I don’t understand it,”
Smith sharply criticised Trump’s decision to issue mass pardons for people convicted in connection with the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol.
Trump granted clemency to hundreds of people who had been accused or found guilty of assaulting police officers on his first day in office.
When asked about the action, Smith responded, “The people who assaulted police officers and were later found guilty of a crime are dangerous to their communities,” in my opinion and what I think the judges who sentenced them to prison are. As you mentioned, some of these people have already committed crimes against their communities again, and I think all of us – if we are reasonable – know that there is going to be more crimes committed by these people in the future.
On Thursday, Smith said, “I don’t understand why you would mass pardon those who assaulted police officers.” I don’t understand it. I never will. “
At least 140 police officers were hurt, according to reports from the Capitol attack.
Smith defends his work
Republican lawmakers sought to portray Smith as an overly aggressive prosecutor who needed to be restrained by senior Justice Department officials as he pursued cases against Trump before the former president’s potential return to office.
They argued that Smith’s decision to obtain phone records for members of Congress, including then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, amounted to an overreach.
Republican Representative Brandon Gill of Texas allegedly accused Smith of using nondisclosure orders to “hide” subpoenas from both their targets and the general public during a heated exchange.
Smith rejected those claims, saying the collection of phone records was a routine investigative step aimed at understanding the” scope of the conspiracy “to overturn the 2020 election.
Smith claimed that “my office didn’t spy on anyone.”
He added that witnesses’ intimidation was the subject of nondisclosure orders, citing Trump’s public warnings that he would “be” coming after “people who crossed him.”
” I had grave concerns about obstruction of justice in this investigation, specifically with regards to Donald Trump, “Smith said.
According to Smith, “prosecutors are not required to wait until someone dies before moving for an order to protect the proceedings.”
Trump responds
Trump gave the impression that he was closely following Smith’s testimony, posting on Truth Social as it went on, and praising Republicans’ treatment of the former special counsel.
“Deranged Jack Smith is being deposed before Congress,” the statement read. It was over when they discussed his past failures and unfair prosecutions, “Trump , wrote”. Under the pretense of legitimacy, he claimed to have saved many lives. “Jack Smith is a vicious animal who shouldn’t be permitted to practice law,” Smith said.
Trump framed the investigations as a” Democrat SCAM “and said those involved should” pay a big price”.
Source: Aljazeera
Leave a Reply