Special counsel Jack Smith’s request to testify before Congress underscores the prosecutor’s intention to pull no punches as he defends his legacy against a growing Republican attack. President Trump, in the presence of Attorney General Pam Bondi, declared that “in my opinion, crazy Jack Smith is a criminal.”
Mr. Smith’s willingness to speak under oath was reflected Thursday in a letter from his lawyers to Senator Chuck Grassley and Congressman Jim Jordan – the chairmen of the Judiciary Committees in the Senate and House of Representatives. That could raise the stakes in Mr. Smith’s two failed prosecutions against Mr. Trump.
The special counsel’s desire to tell Congress — and the nation — about his accounting of two of the most prominent cases in American history comes at a time when his record has come under escalating scrutiny. Mr Jordan has called on him to answer for ‘prosecutive misconduct and constitutional abuses of his office’. Mr Grassley has expressed outrage at ‘Operation Arctic Frost’, Mr Smith’s investigation into the events of January 6. As part of that investigation, the prosecutor obtained phone records from Republican lawmakers.
The plaintiff’s attorneys – Peter Koski and Lanny Breuer, of the firm Covington & Burling – write: “Given the many mischaracterizations of Mr. Smith’s investigation into President Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents and role in an effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Mr. Smith respectfully requests the opportunity to testify in open hearings before the judiciary House and Senate committees.”
Mr. Smith maintains that throughout his career he has “steadfastly adhered to established legal standards and Department of Justice guidelines.” Mr. Grassley does not yet appear to hesitate in offering Mr. Smith a platform. He tells CNN that “Jack Smith certainly has a lot of answering to do, but first Congress must have all the facts. “Hearings should follow once the investigative foundation is firmly established.”
While the special counsel appears ready to talk, his lawyers are pushing for ground rules and guardrails. They write that “Mr. Smith agreed to answer questions about the Special Counsel’s investigation and prosecution, but needs assurances from the Department of Justice that he will not be punished for doing so.” That suggests they are seeking some form of immunity — which may have been given urgency by the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey for lying to Congress.
Mr. Smith is also seeking “advice from the Department of Justice regarding federal grand jury confidentiality requirements and clearance of the matters with which he may speak, including with respect to Part II of the Special Counsel’s Final Report, which is not publicly available.” The release of that second part, which concerns the prosecution of Mar-a-Lago, was blocked by Judge Aileen Cannon. Mr. Smith’s report on the Jan. 6 case, which emphasizes that he had the evidence to convict Mr. Trump, was released by Attorney General Merrick Garland.
Congressman Jamie Raskin, a critic of Mr. Trump, quickly wrote his own letter to Mr. Jordan urging him to accept Mr. Smith’s offer: “I can think of no reason to deny the American people the opportunity to hear his testimony, under oath and with questioning from members of both parties, and to let all Americans judge for themselves the integrity of Mr. Smith’s investigations.”
The special counsel’s request to address Congress in an open hearing adds to an emerging strategy of publicly defending his record — and criticizing Mr. Trump. Last month, he gave a keynote address at George Mason University, where he said that “what I see happening today at the Department of Justice saddens and angers me.” He also defended the DOJ employees fired by Ms. Bondi, including his entire team.
Mr. Smith followed that indictment with an appearance in Britain with paid MSNBC contributor Andrew Weissmann, a fierce enemy of the president who served as special counsel Robert Mueller’s top deputy. Mr. Trump, during the same Oval Office tirade in which he called Mr. Smith a “criminal,” declared: “I hope they take a look at Weissmann, too. Weissmann is a bad guy. There was massive criminal activity.”
Mr. Smith told Mr. Weissman regarding the DOJ that “nothing like what we are seeing has ever occurred” and called the accusation that his prosecutions of Mr. Trump were politically motivated “absolutely ridiculous.” The special counsel wrote in his final report that Mr. Trump’s “claim that my decisions as prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable.”
Mr. Smith is also under scrutiny by the Trump administration over whether his all-out rush to prosecute Mr. Trump before the 2024 presidential election violated the Hatch Act. That federal law prohibits federal employees from engaging in political activities intended to influence elections. No prosecutor has ever been found to have violated the ban, which is a civil offense.
#stunning #move #Jack #Smith #offers #testify #oath #prosecutions #Trump