USA (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Former special counsel Jack Smith told Congress his team found proof beyond reasonable doubt that Donald Trump pursued a criminal scheme after 2020.
Additionally, Smith told members of the House Judiciary Committee during a closed-door meeting that Trump “repeatedly tried to obstruct justice” in order to conceal his retention of sensitive documents discovered during an FBI search in Mar-a-Lago.
According to Smith, his team discovered “powerful evidence that showed Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a bathroom and a ballroom where events and gatherings took place.”
In an attempt by Republicans to look into the special counsel’s office, House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, subpoenaed Smith to appear. Two indictments against Trump resulted from Smith’s investigations: one in the 2020 election interference case and the other in the classified documents case.
Trump has called for Smith’s prosecution on multiple occasions.
Smith was anticipated to try to use the meeting to address what his team has called misrepresentations of the special counsel probe in response to a fresh round of Republican attacks on his investigations into Trump.
House Republicans turned down Smith’s request to speak in public.
Smith’s lawyer, Lanny Breuer, told reporters on Wednesday that his client “is showing tremendous courage in light of the remarkable and unprecedented retribution campaign against him by this administration and this White House.”
“January 6 was an attack on the structure of our democracy in which over 100 heroic law enforcement officers were assaulted. Over 160 individuals later pled guilty to assaulting police officers that day,”
Smith said.
“Exploiting that violence, President Trump and his associates tried to call Members of Congress in furtherance of their criminal scheme, urging them to further delay certification of the 2020 election.”
Smith told committee members that the phone records of nine congressional Republicans “were lawfully subpoenaed and were relevant to complete a comprehensive” investigation, defending his team’s decision to obtain and examine them.
According to Smith’s investigation on Trump’s attempts to overturn the election, Trump intentionally disseminated “demonstrably and, in many cases, obviously false” allegations about the election and “inspired his supporters to commit acts of physical violence” on January 6.
Regarding Volume II of his investigation, which concentrated on Trump’s handling of sensitive documents, Smith is not anticipated to testify.
Cannon prohibited the publication of that report and the sharing of “any information or conclusions in Volume II” with anybody outside the Justice Department after Trump’s team attempted to prevent its release.
“Volume II of Jack Smith’s Final Report should not be made public,”
stated a Trump attorney in a court document this month.
Early in the year, the Trump administration dismissed career prosecutors who were part of Smith’s team; more recently, it dismissed FBI special agents and even Smith-related support personnel. Smith has been referred to by Trump as “a criminal” who ought to be “investigated and put in prison.”
During his testimony on Wednesday, Smith stated that although he is in charge of deciding whether to charge Trump in the cases involving election subversion and classified documents, 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.”
Smith described how, as a young prosecutor, he was instructed to follow the law and the evidence “without fear or favor” and to act “the right thing, the right way, for the right reasons.” He said that these lessons shaped his career.
“If asked whether to prosecute a former President based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether the President was a Republican or Democrat,”
Smith said.
What specific evidence did Jack Smith cite in his statement?
Jack Smith cited grand jury complaints, Trump’s knowing retention of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago( including in a restroom and chamber), repeated inhibition of justice attempts to conceal them, and exploitation of January 6 violence to press Congress on election instrument as crucial substantiation of a felonious scheme to capsize 2020 results.
Smith stressed Trump’s false fraud claims made deliberately to further conspiracy, connections with lawgivers via chaos, and lack of direct intent evidence for incitement charges despite Brandenburg norms. He stressed examinations followed data law, not politics.
Prosecutors set up” important substantiation” of willful retention/post-presidency and inhibition, with risk records from legislators( targeted by Trump’s conduct) essential for thorough examinations. Smith affirmed he would re-indict on the same data anyhow of the party.
