Smith defends Trump investigations at House Judiciary hearing

WASHINGTON (JN) – Former Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith on Thursday defended his investigations into President Donald Trump, telling lawmakers that the cases were based on evidence and law rather than political considerations.

Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, Smith said he would make the same decisions again if presented with the same facts. He rejected Republican claims that the investigations were designed to harm Trump politically, calling them a necessary step to uphold the rule of law.

The hearing lasted several hours and followed familiar partisan lines. Republicans criticized Smith’s conduct, while Democrats defended the investigations and accused their colleagues of attempting to recast the events surrounding the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Smith’s core defense of the prosecutions

Smith told the committee that his decisions rested on evidence collected during lengthy investigations involving numerous witnesses and records.

“No one should be above the law in our country,” Smith said. He added that prosecutors developed proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Trump engaged in criminal conduct. According to Smith, party affiliation played no role in his conclusions.

The Justice Department appointed Smith as special counsel in 2022 to oversee two investigations. One examined efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The other focused on Trump’s handling of classified documents after leaving the White House.

Both investigations led to indictments. However, Smith closed the cases after Trump won the 2024 election. The decision followed long-standing Justice Department opinions that bar criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

A hearing divided by party lines

Republicans used the hearing to portray Smith as an aggressive prosecutor who exceeded constitutional limits. Committee Chairman Jim Jordan of Ohio accused him of allowing politics to influence his work.

Smith rejected that claim. He said his office followed established legal standards throughout the investigations.

Democrats, meanwhile, argued that the hearing itself sought to undermine a lawful inquiry. They pointed to the extensive evidence described in court filings and public records.

“For us, it’s about the rule of law,” Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland said, responding to repeated Republican criticism.

During the hearing, Trump commented publicly while returning from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. On his Truth Social platform, he called for Smith to be prosecuted and accused him, without evidence, of lying under oath.

Dispute over lawmakers’ phone records

Tensions rose when lawmakers questioned Smith about subpoenas for phone metadata linked to several Republican members of Congress.

The records showed call dates, durations, and numbers involved. They did not include call content. Republicans argued the move violated constitutional protections.

Representative Brandon Gill of Texas said the subpoenas demonstrated prosecutorial overreach.

Smith countered that prosecutors regularly use such records in criminal investigations. He said the subpoenas helped determine whether Trump or his allies contacted lawmakers on Jan. 6, 2021, as Congress met to certify the election results.

“My office didn’t spy on anyone,” Smith said. He added that courts approved the requests and that investigators applied them narrowly.

Jan. 6 investigation and witness testimony

Under questioning, Smith described what he called a broad effort to overturn the 2020 election outcome. He said Trump ignored advisers who told him he had lost.

Smith also said Trump attempted to intimidate potential witnesses after charges were filed. Prosecutors raised those concerns when they sought limits on Trump’s public statements during the campaign.

Notably, Smith said some of the strongest testimony came from Trump’s own supporters.

“Some of the most powerful witnesses were Republicans who voted for Donald Trump and wanted him to win,” Smith said. He stressed that the case did not rely on political opponents.

Claims of election interference rejected

Republican lawmakers continued to argue that Smith timed legal actions to damage Trump’s presidential campaign.

Representative Kevin Kiley of California accused Smith of seeking legal advantage at every stage. Representative Ben Cline of Virginia questioned efforts to restrict Trump’s public rhetoric, arguing they interfered with campaign speech.

Smith rejected both claims. He said prosecutors acted to protect witnesses and preserve the integrity of the legal process.

“Our investigation revealed that Donald Trump caused Jan. 6,” Smith said. He added that the violence was foreseeable and that Trump “sought to exploit” it.

Concerns over Justice Department independence

The hearing took place amid broader concern over the Justice Department’s independence under Trump’s renewed presidency. Trump has repeatedly criticized investigators involved in past probes and suggested they should face consequences.

When asked whether he feared prosecution by the current administration, Smith said he believed efforts would be made against him.

“I believe they will do everything in their power to do that,” he said, “because they’ve been ordered to by the president.”

Smith warned that failing to hold powerful figures accountable could weaken democratic institutions.

“If we don’t call people to account in this context,” he said, “we risk endangering our democracy.”