The Justice Department had the case. The evidence was there. The legal bar was cleared. And Republicans made sure the public didn’t hear it.
In a closed-door deposition on Capitol Hill, former special counsel Jack Smith told lawmakers his team “developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt” that President Donald Trump criminally conspired to overturn the 2020 election. That’s the highest standard in criminal law — and Smith said his investigators met it.
But instead of a public reckoning, the testimony happened in secret.
As reported by The Hill, Smith spent more than three hours answering questions from the House Judiciary Committee about his investigations into Trump, including the probe into election interference that culminated in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. It was his first chance to speak directly to Congress about cases that once threatened Trump’s freedom — and it was sealed off from voters.
That wasn’t Smith’s call.
Republicans subpoenaed him earlier this month, despite the fact that Smith had already offered to testify publicly. His lawyers say GOP leaders turned that down. Closed doors. No cameras. No live transcript.
Behind those doors, Smith didn’t mince words. He also told lawmakers his team gathered “powerful evidence” that Trump broke the law by holding onto classified documents at Mar-a-Lago and obstructing government efforts to recover them.
Two investigations. Two criminal cases. Both dropped for one reason only: Trump was elected president again.
Smith emphasized that the cases didn’t fall apart. The evidence didn’t weaken. The Justice Department simply followed long-standing rules barring the indictment of a sitting president.
“I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs or candidacy in the 2024 election,” Smith said. “We took actions based on what the facts and the law required — the very lesson I learned early in my career as a prosecutor.”
He went further, saying he would prosecute a former president “based on the same facts today … whether the president was a Republican or Democrat.”
That statement alone guts years of claims that the investigation was a partisan hit job.
Trump, meanwhile, struck a familiar pose of confidence. Speaking to reporters at the White House, he said he wanted Smith to testify publicly. “I’d rather see him testify publicly. There’s no way he can answer the questions.”
Democrats say that’s a convenient rewrite of history.
“It would have been absolutely devastating to the president and all the president’s men involved in the insurrectionary activities of January the 6th,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the panel.
Now Democrats are demanding that Smith’s testimony — and his full investigative report — be released.
“The American people should hear for themselves,” said Rep. Dan Goldman, D-NY.
Smith also used the deposition to push back against Republican attacks on his team, including criticism over prosecutors reviewing phone records tied to some GOP lawmakers around Jan. 6. Those records showed only incoming and outgoing numbers and call duration, not call content — a routine step in major criminal investigations.
Smith declined to answer questions involving grand jury material, which is protected by law. That hasn’t stopped Republicans from suggesting wrongdoing anyway.
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan offered little substance after the session. “I think we’ve learned some interesting things,” he said, before reverting to his familiar refrain. “It’s political.”
Smith’s attorney, Lanny Breuer, wasn’t playing along.
“Testifying before this committee, Jack is showing tremendous courage in light of the remarkable and unprecedented retribution campaign against him by this administration and this White House,” Breuer said. “Jack Smith is a career prosecutor who conducted this investigation based on the facts and the law, and nothing more.”
Even some in Trump’s orbit aren’t buying the smear campaign. John Dowd, a former Trump lawyer, wrote that Smith “should be celebrated,” arguing that “Republicans are depriving the American people of the opportunity to hear from a career prosecutor who investigated serious allegations that President Donald Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election and unlawfully retained classified documents.”
And that’s the uncomfortable truth at the center of all this.
The prosecutor in charge says the evidence met the highest legal standard. The cases were real. The findings were damning.
But instead of transparency, Congress chose secrecy.
The testimony exists. The record exists. And sooner or later, the question will be impossible to dodge: if the DOJ had proof beyond a reasonable doubt, why was the public kept in the dark?
