An embarrassing moment for the GOP, a defensive witness and other takeaways from Jack Smith’s hearing

Nathan Howard/Reuters

Special counsel Jack Smith, who brought two indictments against now-President Donald Trump in 2023, testified in front of Congress again on Tuesday — this time, to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Smith’s testimony comes as Republicans continue to probe the investigations into Trump and as some in the party, including the president, have pushed for often-unspecified criminal charges to be brought against Smith.

Here are the major takeaways from Tuesday’s hearing.

Republicans have struggled mightily to substantiate Trump’s desire for Smith to be charged criminally . But rarely has it seemed to backfire like it did Tuesday .

Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri crafted an apparent conspiracy theory about Smith being tied to the prosecution of Trump in Fulton County, Georgia. To substantiate his theory, Schmitt cited text messages he suggested showed Smith had been at an Atlanta Hawks game on February 3, 2024 – the day after Fulton County prosecutor Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade admitted to an affair.

Smith appeared dumbfounded, though. He denied going to a Hawks game and said he had no recollection of even being in Atlanta.

“What would you say if I had a series of text messages from your team that said you were in Atlanta at a Warriors-Hawks game on February 3, 2024 – the day after Willis and Wade announced their affair?” Schmitt said.

Schmitt went big on the allegation, telling Smith, “I don’t think you know that we have this stuff.” He urged Smith not to “perjure yourself.” He later called Smith a “dirtbag.” He later told the “Charlie Kirk Show” that he was just asking questions and seeing whether Smith would ensnare himself.

Eventually, Democrats got Schmitt to allow Smith to actually review the evidence – a poster featuring the texts in question. In one of them, a fellow prosecutor asks about a seat being reserved for Smith. The poster showed the Atlanta Hawks’ arena.

But by this point, Smith seemed to put it together. He said he was not at a game featuring the Atlanta Hawks , but rather the University of Iowa Hawkeyes women’s basketball team – which then featured Caitlin Clark – at the University of Maryland in the Washington, DC, area.

Smith’s recollection matches up with a game played that day.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, after clearing up the matter, said Schmitt should apologize.

Schmitt’s office has not responded a request for comment.

At the hearing, he maintained that the texts “could have obviously been related to the prosecution” in Fulton County. He said he stood by calling Smith a “dirtbag.”

The scene epitomized how speculative and thinly constructed the GOP’s allegations about Smith, Trump’s foes and about the justice system being weaponized against Trump have been. Likewise, the GOP’s other major perjury allegation against Smith rests on a complete misreading of the evidence .

But rarely has this apparent fishing expedition been laid so bare. Schmitt seemed to firmly believe he had nailed Smith on something. But just minutes later, it seemed to fall apart – and rather spectacularly so.

Smith is a very careful witness. He often pauses noticeably before answering a question – in a way that can be a little jarring.

But he’s also made clear that he wants to fight back against the Trump administration’s weaponization of the justice system against people like him. And on Tuesday, he was a little more animated and open.

He punctuated his opening statement by saying, “Fear may be contagious; courage is as well.”

He also called it an “outrage” that people he worked with were “targeted illegally, lost their jobs illegally, and had their lives turned upside down by this Department of Justice.”

When asked about the Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling conferring presidents with a large degree of immunity, Smith said it “can be very dangerous for the rule of law” for powerful people to benefit from such exceptions.

He also jousted with lawmakers a little more than he did before, rather than dryly reciting facts.

When GOP Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas asked him whether he had any regrets, Smith said he regretted that “the people I worked with have been unfairly fired and vilified.”

When Republican Sen. Darline Graham of South Carolina claimed Smith unfairly targeted the phone records of her late brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham, Smith told her that Lindsey Graham had investigated Trump’s underlying voter-fraud claims and found them to be false.

And he said he won’t be going away quietly.

“I will not be silenced by the continued threats of prosecution from the president or others,” Smith said.

That exchange with Darline Graham was also significant when it comes to learning something new about the attempted prosecutions of Trump.

The reason: Smith said Lindsey Graham was likely to be a witness in the case.

“I believe your brother was a patriotic public servant,” Smith said. “He was not a target of our investigation. In fact, he likely would have been a witness in our case. Your brother investigated the claims that Donald Trump was making. He found them to be false.”

Lindsey Graham publicly broke with Trump on the Senate floor after January 6 (i.e. “ count me out ”) and appeared to be initially helpful to investigators probing the situation.

He later reconciled with Trump and assailed Smith’s investigation when he was among those whose phone records were wrapped up in the probe — and even pushed to get a financial payout for it.

Smith’s comments suggest Graham could have played at least some role in proving the charges against Trump.

The former special counsel seemed to make a point to repeatedly vouch for members of his former staff who were fired by Trump’s Justice Department and, in some cases, were repeatedly invoked by name at Tuesday’s hearing.

Smith even called them “heroes.”

“My view: These people are heroes, and I believe our country does not recognize and pay enough attention to people like that,” he said. “I think if we did, the partisan things that we’re discussing today – a lot of that would go away.”

Smith also warned about what ousting people like that would portend for the country.

“If you drive those people out of public service, the institutions we rely on for justice, for protecting our country — those institutions are weakened,” Smith said.

When Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California talked about how Smith had been attacked, Smith said it was “much more important that the public servants who I work with – that we stop vilifying public servants.”

It’s been nearly a year since Trump appeared alongside then-Attorney General Pam Bondi and claimed Smith had committed crimes.

“Hopefully the Attorney General is looking at what he’s done,” Trump added eight months ago on social media.

There’s been little since then to suggest the Trump administration is able to provide him what he wants. And Tuesday’s hearing often felt like going through the motions more so than anything else.

Apart from Schmitt’s attempt at a gotcha, other Republican lawmakers generally mined territory already covered in the January House Judiciary Committee hearing .

Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri and others repeated an allegation from months ago that Smith perjured himself with his denials about seeking the contents of lawmakers’ communications. But Smith pointed to the holes in that previously debunked theory.

Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana at one point tried to suggest that Smith might have lobbied to become special counsel — the implication being that he had a political agenda and was targeting Trump — but when Smith denied it, Kennedy moved on.

Smith also told lawmakers that he sought to keep secret the phone and other records he was seeking because of concerns that Trump and his allies would try to obstruct justice .

When lawmakers suggested that Smith was implying with the nondisclosure requests that they couldn’t be trusted not to destroy evidence, Smith said it was actually Trump he was worried about.

“Our nondisclosure orders were not predicated on the idea that members of Congress or members of this committee would commit acts of obstruction,” Smith said. “It was based on a real concern that Donald Trump and his associates would do that because they had done it, and they did it again.”

Smith cited the fact that the charges against Trump included obstruction of justice and also how Trump had at one point suggested the death penalty for a known witness, former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley.

“We had an absolute basis to seek protection of our investigation from that sort of obstruction,” Smith added.

内森·霍华德/路透社

特别检察官杰克·史密斯曾在 2023 年对现任总统唐纳德·特朗普提起两项起诉，他于周二再次在国会作证——这次是在参议院司法委员会作证。

史密斯作证之际，共和党人仍在继续调查对特朗普的调查，而该党的一些成员，包括总统本人，一直在推动对史密斯提出通常未指明的刑事指控。

以下是周二听证会的主要结论。

共和党人一直竭力想证实特朗普希望对史密斯提起刑事诉讼的意愿。但很少有像周二这样适得其反的例子。

密苏里州参议员埃里克·施密特炮制了一个明显的阴谋论，声称史密斯与佐治亚州富尔顿县对特朗普的起诉有关。为了佐证他的理论，施密特引用了一些短信，他认为这些短信显示史密斯曾在2024年2月3日——也就是富尔顿县检察官法尼·威利斯和特别检察官内森·韦德承认婚外情后的第二天——出现在亚特兰大老鹰队的比赛现场。

史密斯似乎一脸茫然。他否认去过老鹰队的比赛，并表示自己完全不记得去过亚特兰大。

“如果我拿到你团队发来的一系列短信，说你在 2024 年 2 月 3 日——也就是威利斯和韦德宣布婚外情的第二天——在亚特兰大观看勇士队对阵老鹰队的比赛，你会怎么说？”施密特说道。

施密特对指控大加挞伐，告诉史密斯：“我觉得你不知道我们掌握了这些证据。”他敦促史密斯不要“作伪证”。之后，他又称史密斯是“人渣”。后来，他在“查理·柯克秀”节目中解释说，他只是在问问题，看看史密斯是否会自投罗网。

最终，民主党人说服施密特允许史密斯查看证据——一张印有相关短信的海报。其中一条短信中，一位检察官同事询问是否为史密斯预留了一个座位。海报上显示的是亚特兰大老鹰队的主场球馆。

但这时，史密斯似乎明白了是怎么回事。他说他当时不是在观看亚特兰大老鹰队的比赛，而是在华盛顿特区附近的马里兰大学观看爱荷华大学鹰眼队女子篮球队的比赛——当时凯特琳·克拉克是这支球队的队员。

史密斯的回忆与当天进行的一场比赛相符。

明尼苏达州参议员艾米·克洛布查尔在澄清此事后表示，施密特应该道歉。

施密特的办公室尚未回应置评请求。

在听证会上，他坚称这些短信“显然可能与富尔顿县的起诉有关”。他还表示，他坚持称史密斯为“人渣”。

这一幕淋漓尽致地展现了共和党对史密斯、特朗普的政敌以及司法系统被武器化以对付特朗普的指控是多么的臆测和漏洞百出。同样，共和党对史密斯的另一项主要伪证指控也完全建立在对证据的误读之上。

但这种明显的钓鱼式调查很少像这样被彻底揭穿。施密特似乎坚信自己抓住了史密斯的把柄。但仅仅几分钟后，他的计划就彻底失败了——而且失败得相当惨烈。

史密斯是一位非常谨慎的证人。他经常在回答问题前明显停顿一下——这种做法有时会让人觉得有点突兀。

但他也明确表示，他要反击特朗普政府利用司法系统打压像他这样的人的做法。周二，他显得更加激动和坦诚。

他在开场白中强调：“恐惧可能会传染；勇气也会传染。”

他还称，与他共事的人“被司法部非法针对、非法失去工作，生活被彻底颠覆”，这“令人愤慨”。

当被问及最高法院 2024 年的裁决赋予总统很大程度的豁免权时，史密斯表示，有权势的人从这种例外中受益“对法治来说可能非常危险”。

他也比以前更多地与立法者进行辩论，而不是枯燥地陈述事实。

当德克萨斯州共和党参议员特德·克鲁兹问他是否有什么遗憾时，史密斯说他感到遗憾的是“与我共事的人遭到了不公正的解雇和诋毁”。

当南卡罗来纳州共和党参议员达琳·格雷厄姆声称史密斯不公平地针对她已故的哥哥、参议员林赛·格雷厄姆的电话记录时，史密斯告诉她，林赛·格雷厄姆调查了特朗普关于选民欺诈的指控，并发现这些指控是错误的。

他说他不会就此罢休。

“我不会因为总统或其他人的持续起诉威胁而保持沉默，”史密斯说。

与达琳·格雷厄姆的那次交流也意义重大，因为它让我们了解到了有关对特朗普的起诉尝试的新情况。

原因：史密斯说林赛·格雷厄姆很可能是此案的证人。

“我相信你哥哥是一位爱国的公职人员，”史密斯说。“他并非我们调查的目标。事实上，他很可能是我们案件的证人。你哥哥调查了唐纳德·特朗普的言论，并发现那些言论都是虚假的。”

1 月 6 日之后，林赛·格雷厄姆在参议院公开与特朗普决裂（即“别指望我”），并且最初似乎对调查人员调查情况有所帮助。

后来他与特朗普和解，并抨击了史密斯的调查，因为他的电话记录也被卷入了调查——甚至还试图从中获得经济赔偿。

史密斯的评论表明，格雷厄姆可能在证明对特朗普的指控方面发挥了一定的作用。

这位前特别检察官似乎有意反复为他被特朗普司法部解雇的前工作人员作证，在某些情况下，这些人的名字在周二的听证会上被反复提及。

史密斯甚至称他们为“英雄”。

“我的看法是：这些人都是英雄，我认为我们国家对这样的人没有给予足够的认可和关注，”他说。“我认为如果我们能做到这一点，我们今天讨论的很多党派之争就会迎刃而解。”

史密斯还警告说，驱逐这样的人会对国家造成怎样的影响。

史密斯说：“如果你把这些人赶出公共服务部门，我们赖以伸张正义、保护国家的机构就会被削弱。”

当加州民主党参议员亚当·希夫谈到史密斯如何遭到攻击时，史密斯说：“更重要的是，我要停止诋毁与我共事的公务员。”

距离特朗普与时任司法部长帕姆·邦迪一同露面并声称史密斯犯下罪行已经过去近一年了。

“希望司法部长正在反思他所做的一切，”特朗普八个月前在社交媒体上补充道。

此后几乎没有任何迹象表明特朗普政府能够满足他的要求。周二的听证会也更像是走过场，而非真正意义上的听证会。

除了施密特试图抓住把柄之外，其他共和党议员大多是在1月份众议院司法委员会听证会上已经讨论过的领域。

密苏里州参议员乔什·霍利等人重申了数月前的指控，称史密斯否认曾试图获取议员通信内容，构成伪证罪。但史密斯指出，这种已被驳斥的说法存在诸多漏洞。

路易斯安那州参议员约翰·肯尼迪一度试图暗示史密斯可能游说成为特别检察官——言下之意是他有政治目的，并且针对的是特朗普——但当史密斯否认后，肯尼迪便不再追究此事。

史密斯还告诉立法者，他之所以试图对所寻求的电话和其他记录保密，是因为担心特朗普及其盟友会试图妨碍司法公正。

当议员们暗示史密斯提出的保密请求暗示他们不可信，可能会销毁证据时，史密斯说，他真正担心的是特朗普。

史密斯说：“我们的保密令并非基于国会议员或本委员会成员会妨碍司法公正的想法，而是基于对唐纳德·特朗普及其同伙会再次妨碍司法公正的真正担忧，因为他们过去就曾这样做过，而且他们又故伎重演了。”

史密斯指出，对特朗普的指控包括妨碍司法公正，以及特朗普一度建议对一名已知的证人——前参谋长联席会议主席马克·米利将军——判处死刑。

史密斯补充说：“我们有充分的理由寻求保护，使我们的调查免受此类阻挠。”