Smith Answers Questions About the Evidence Gathered

This is really a good review of what special Council Jack Smith has to say about the investigation of Trump. I am sure there is more to be revealed from his testimony than what is in the is piece by Dan Rather.

It’s Been a Long Time Coming

Dan Rather @ Steady

It may be the biggest irony in the history of American politics – if not the history of our country — that if Donald Trump wasn’t elected to a second term, he probably would be serving time in prison right now.

Instead, the president flat out got away with it. And now he will never face federal criminal charges for trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election or removing highly classified documents from the White House and hiding them at his Palm Beach resort.

We’ve waited a long time for former special counsel Jack Smith to tell us what evidence he amassed against Trump. And now we know at least part of that picture. His recent matter-of-fact recounting of his comprehensive investigations only whets the appetite for the whole story.

The famously tight-lipped Smith, who led two investigations into Trump and secured two indictments, testified before the House Judiciary Committee on December 17. Surprise!

Smith’s deposition, a robust defense of his investigations, was reported in the media. But The New York Times, for example, ran its piece on page A19 of the print edition of the paper, because the closed-door hearing was free of reporters and no video recording or transcript of the exhaustive eight-hour testimony was made available. Until December 31.

After ignoring calls from Smith’s lawyers to release the transcript, Rep. Jim Jordan, the chairman of the committee, decided to dump the 255-page transcript after everyone had gone home for the New Year.

Smith, who was subpoenaed to appear, asked for a public hearing. Surprisingly, so did the president. “I’d rather see him testify publicly, because there’s no way he can answer the questions.” Actually, he did – at least all the questions he was not barred by a Trump-appointed judge from answering.

The reason for the closed session was that Republicans were concerned Smith would use the hearing as a platform to divulge heretofore unreleased information.

Smith withstood a barrage of questions from both Republicans and Democrats. Republicans, doing Trump’s bidding to go after those who went after him, tried to trip him up. Democrats hoped to bait him into revealing details of his investigations. Neither side succeeded, though that doesn’t mean the testimony was without revelations.

Smith, a career prosecutor, who served under Democrats and Republicans, spoke with confidence and candor.

“The decision to bring charges against President Trump was mine, but the basis for those charges rests entirely with President Trump and his actions, as alleged in the indictments returned by grand juries in two different districts,” he said in his opening statement.

He went on to explain what he and his team discovered about Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election:

“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power.”

And Trump’s mishandling of classified documents:

“Our investigation also developed powerful evidence that showed that President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents… then repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents.”

Smith revealed that he planned to rely on Trump allies as witnesses, saying he thought they would be more credible than partisan ones.

“We had numerous witnesses who would say, ‘I voted for President Trump. I campaigned for President Trump. I wanted him to win,’” Smith testified. “Our case was built on, frankly, Republicans who put their allegiance to the country before the party.”

When asked if Trump ever admitted that he knew he lost the election, Smith answered yes. He went on to say the president made statements about it to several people.

“One is that, ‘It doesn’t matter if you won or lost the election. You still fight like hell.’ And then the other was, ‘Can you believe I lost to this f’ing guy?’ referring to Joe Biden.”

Smith laid out his evidence like, well, a prosecutor.

“[Trump], in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6, created a level of distrust. He used that level of distrust to get people to believe fraud claims that weren’t true. He made false statements to state legislatures, to his supporters in all sorts of contexts and was aware, in the days leading up to Jan. 6, that his supporters were angry when he invited them and then he directed them to the Capitol.”

As Trump is trying to downplay and distort what happened at the Capitol on January 6, Smith did not whitewash the violence perpetrated by the rioters. “Cracked ribs, traumatic brain injuries, smashed spinal disks and heart attacks as rioters used bats, poles, chemical sprays, stolen police shields and batons.”

That violence, Smith said, was “foreseeable” to the president and Trump exploited it.

When Republican committee members suggested Trump’s statements about the 2020 election were protected speech, Smith pushed back, hard. “Fraud is not protected by the First Amendment.”

Smith had far less to say about the classified documents case because Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee who slow-walked the original case and then tossed it, is now deciding if Smith’s report of the investigation will ever be released. She blocked the release for more than a year, though ruled last week she would lift the order on February 24, if Trump doesn’t challenge the ruling. What are the odds?

In the meantime Smith is barred from speaking about it, including to the House Judiciary Committee.

When asked if he could draw any conclusions about Trump’s refusal to return the classified documents despite being given multiple opportunities, Smith responded, “I don’t think I can answer that question because it may involve nonpublic facts that are a part of the final report that is currently under an injunction.”

He gave a similar answer to most questions posed about the documents.

In Trumpworld, Jack Smith is Public Enemy No. 1. There is no doubt Trump’s allies in the House were hoping Smith’s testimony would give the president some viable legal avenue to use against him. Though he didn’t give them one, Smith is not naive about his future.

He said he wouldn’t be surprised if Trump directs the Department of Justice to indict him. “I believe that President Trump wants to seek retribution against me because of my role as special counsel.”

Which brings us to another great irony: The man who the government believed committed one of the greatest crimes in our nation’s history now has the ability to seek revenge against those who tried to hold him accountable.