Jack Smith Tells Senate He Won’t ‘Be Silenced’ by Trump Prosecution Threats/ TezzBuzz/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Former special counsel Jack Smith defended his two federal criminal cases against President Donald Trump during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Smith said prosecutors found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed serious crimes and insisted political considerations played no role in the charging decisions. Republicans accused Smith of prosecutorial overreach, focusing particularly on subpoenas for lawmakers’ phone records and a criminal referral alleging misleading testimony.
Quick Look
- Jack Smith testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday.
- He defended both federal indictments brought against Trump.
- Smith said he would bring the same charges under the same circumstances.
- He warned that the rule of law faces an unprecedented threat.
- Republicans characterized the investigations as politically motivated.
- Democrats accused Republicans of trying to rewrite Jan. 6 history.
- The hearing focused partly on Republican lawmakers’ phone records.
- Prosecutors obtained call-detail records that did not contain conversations.
- A separate subpoena obtained text messages stored by the National Archives.
- House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan referred Smith for possible prosecution.
- Smith’s attorneys deny that he misled Congress.
- Both Trump cases ended after his 2024 election victory.
- Justice Department policy prohibits indicting a sitting president.
Deep Look
Jack Smith Defends Trump Prosecutions
WASHINGTON — Former Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith told senators Tuesday that he would not be intimidated by threats of prosecution from President Donald Trump or his allies.
Smith, who brought two federal indictments against Trump, said the rule of law is facing a greater threat than at any previous point in his career.
He defended the investigations and insisted that his team followed the evidence without considering Trump’s political identity or presidential campaign.
“I made those decisions without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs or candidacy in the 2024 presidential election,” Smith said. “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in serious crimes against our nation. If asked whether to prosecute a former president today based on the same facts, I would do so regardless of whether that president was a Republican or a Democrat.”
Republicans Call Investigations Political
Republican senators sought to portray Smith’s investigations as partisan efforts designed to target Trump and his political network.
They accused prosecutors of abandoning standard procedures and aggressively investigating Republican officials and activists.
“The Smith election case ultimately wasn’t just about Trump,” said Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “It was about partisan agents and prosecutors mapping out the Republican apparatus.”
Republicans are expected to focus heavily on subpoenas Smith’s office used to obtain information about lawmakers who communicated with Trump around Jan. 6, 2021.
Democrats Accuse GOP of Distorting History
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the committee’s ranking Democrat, accused Republicans of promoting “baseless conspiracy theories” about Smith’s work.
Durbin said those allegations were part of an effort to “whitewash” Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election and the attack on the U.S. Capitol by his supporters.
“President Trump demonstrated a wanton disdain for the laws of the United States, the will of the people and our national security,” Durbin said. “The aspersions cast on Mr. Smith, nonstop, are petty, personal and political. They are nothing but a smoke screen to distract from the president’s own clear, unlawful conduct.”
Phone Records Become Central Issue
Republicans pressed Smith over prosecutors’ acquisition of phone records belonging to GOP members of Congress.
The lawmakers had communicated with Trump while his supporters attacked the Capitol and Congress prepared to certify Democrat Joe Biden’s election victory.
Smith previously defended the subpoenas as a “common practice” in criminal investigations.
He said the records were necessary to determine the “scope of the conspiracy” involving Trump and Republican allies seeking to overturn the election result.
The disclosures have angered Republican lawmakers, who cite them as evidence that the Biden administration’s Justice Department improperly targeted political opponents.
Toll Records Did Not Include Conversations
Grassley disclosed that Smith’s prosecutors obtained what are known as toll records.
Those records show the date, time and duration of calls between telephone numbers but do not reveal what the participants said.
Smith argued that investigators needed the information to establish whether Trump or his representatives contacted lawmakers while Congress was certifying the election results on Jan. 6.
Trump had encouraged supporters to oppose the certification before a mob breached the Capitol.
“My office didn’t spy on anyone,” Smith said during an earlier hearing in January.
Smith Rejects Threats of Prosecution
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan referred Smith to the Justice Department in July for possible criminal prosecution.
Jordan accused Smith of lying during previous congressional testimony about prosecutors’ collection of lawmakers’ communications.
Smith’s attorneys strongly rejected the allegation.
“I stand by my testimony before the House of Representatives,” Smith told senators. “I will not be silenced by the continued threats of prosecution from the president or others.”
Smith characterized the referral and other actions against him as attempts to discourage prosecutors from investigating powerful political figures.
Dispute Involves Separate Sets of Records
Jordan’s criminal referral centers on testimony Smith provided in December 2025.
Smith was questioned about subpoenas seeking toll records and said those records did not contain the substance of lawmakers’ communications.
Grassley later released documents showing that Smith’s investigation had obtained the contents of text messages involving 44 lawmakers through a different subpoena.
That subpoena was sent to the National Archives and Records Administration and sought communications involving various Trump advisers and aides.
Jordan contends that Smith’s answer was misleading because his investigation ultimately received message content through the separate request.
Smith’s Lawyers Defend His Testimony
Smith’s attorneys described his answers as “unimpeachably truthful.”
They noted that the questions Smith answered concerned toll records specifically.
Those records did not contain text messages or the spoken content of telephone conversations.
The attorneys argue that the separate National Archives subpoena does not make Smith’s answer about call-detail records false or misleading.
The dispute turns on whether Smith was obligated to discuss records beyond the specific category addressed by lawmakers’ questions.
Smith Was Appointed in 2022
Then-Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith as special counsel in 2022.
He took control of investigations into Trump’s effort to reverse his 2020 election defeat and his retention of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
Both investigations resulted in felony indictments.
The election case alleged that Trump conspired to overturn the legitimate results and obstruct the certification process.
The classified-documents case accused him of unlawfully retaining sensitive government materials and obstructing efforts to recover them.
Cases Ended After Trump’s Election Victory
Smith abandoned both federal cases after Trump won the 2024 presidential election and prepared to return to the White House.
He cited longstanding Justice Department legal opinions concluding that a sitting president cannot face federal criminal prosecution.
The cases therefore ended without trials or verdicts determining Trump’s guilt or innocence.
Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing and described Smith’s investigations as politically motivated.
Trump Administration Targets Smith
Smith has remained a prominent target of Trump and his administration.
The administration announced last year that it would revoke the security clearances of attorneys representing the former special counsel.
The Office of Special Counsel also launched an investigation into Smith.
That independent watchdog agency enforces federal restrictions against partisan political activity by government employees.
Smith maintains that his office’s work was based entirely on evidence, law and established prosecutorial standards.
The Senate hearing highlighted the broader conflict over whether Smith’s investigations represented neutral law enforcement or political targeting—and whether threats against former prosecutors could deter future investigations of presidents and other powerful officials.
More on US News