Jack Smith tells House of ‘proof’ of Trump’s crimes
President Donald Trump ‘engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election,’ hoarded classified documents and ‘repeatedly tried to obstruct justice’
What happened
Former special counsel Jack Smith Wednesday told members of the House Judiciary Committee that his investigators had uncovered “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” that President Donald Trump “engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election,” according to his prepared remarks for the closed-door deposition.
Smith said his team also found “powerful evidence” that Trump had illegally hoarded classified documents and “repeatedly tried to obstruct justice.” Due to Justice Department policy, both investigations were dropped after Trump won last year’s election.
Who said what
Wednesday’s “day-long deposition” gave lawmakers their “first chance, albeit in private, to question Smith” about his twin criminal investigations of Trump, The Associated Press said. It “unfolded against the backdrop of a broader retribution campaign by the Trump administration against former officials involved in investigating Trump and his allies.”
Smith himself faces a “renewed wave of Republican attacks,” said NBC News. He had repeatedly requested a “public forum for his testimony to set the record straight” about his investigations and their nonpartisan nature, Politico said, but committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) “declined that request.” Jordan told reporters after the interview that he had “learned some interesting things,” but declined to elaborate.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
What next?
Jordan said “he had not ruled out the possibility of Smith appearing in a public venue,” Politico said, and Democrats supported that idea. Had Smith testified publicly Wednesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told reporters, “it would have been absolutely devastating to the president.” Trump previously “told reporters that he supported the idea of an open hearing,” the AP said.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Rafi Schwartz has worked as a politics writer at The Week since 2022, where he covers elections, Congress and the White House. He was previously a contributing writer with Mic focusing largely on politics, a senior writer with Splinter News, a staff writer for Fusion's news lab, and the managing editor of Heeb Magazine, a Jewish life and culture publication. Rafi's work has appeared in Rolling Stone, GOOD and The Forward, among others.
-
How does A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms compare to Game of Thrones?Talking Point George R.R. Martin prequel is more ‘fun’ but still has plenty of blood and guts
-
The Board of Peace: Donald Trump’s ‘alternative to the UN’The Explainer Body set up to oversee reconstruction of Gaza could have broader mandate to mediate other conflicts and create a ‘US-dominated alternative to the UN’
-
Prince Harry’s court battle with ‘highly intrusive’ pressIn the Spotlight As the Duke of Sussex and other high-profile claimants begin their trial against Associated Newspapers, ‘the stakes for all sides are high’
-
The Board of Peace: Donald Trump’s ‘alternative to the UN’The Explainer Body set up to oversee reconstruction of Gaza could have broader mandate to mediate other conflicts and create a ‘US-dominated alternative to the UN’
-
Can Starmer continue to walk the Trump tightrope?Today's Big Question PM condemns US tariff threat but is less confrontational than some European allies
-
A new serif in town: Trump’s font culture warIn the Spotlight As the State Department shifts from Calibri to Times New Roman, is this just a ‘typographic dispute’, or the ‘latest battleground’ of a culture war
-
Trump threatens Minnesota with Insurrection ActSpeed Read The law was passed in 1807 but has rarely been used
-
Why is Trump threatening defense firms?Talking Points CEO pay and stock buybacks will be restricted
-
‘The security implications are harder still to dismiss’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Judge clears wind farm construction to resumeSpeed Read The Trump administration had ordered the farm shuttered in December over national security issues
-
Trump DOJ targets Fed’s Powell, drawing pushbackSpeed Read Powell called the investigation ‘unprecedented’
