House Judiciary Chair Demands Criminal Charges Against Trump Prosecutor Jack Smith

The Republican chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jim Jordan, is calling for the Justice Department to criminally charge Jack Smith, the former special counsel who brought charges against President Trump, alleging he lied to Congress. Smith's lawyers have labeled these allegations as "spurious."

This criminal referral comes after revelations that investigators obtained phone records from several Republican lawmakers during an inquiry into Trump's actions following the 2020 election. In a deposition last year, Smith stated that his team did not receive the contents of any phone calls or text messages, asserting that the records sought were merely "tolling records," which only detail the numbers dialed.

However, last week, the Justice Department informed lawmakers that Smith's team had acquired text messages exchanged between Trump-era White House staffers and numerous members of Congress through a separate subpoena directed at the National Archives and Records Administration.

In response to this information, Jordan accused Smith of making "materially false statements" and claimed he improperly failed to disclose the subpoena related to the National Archives.

Jordan emphasized that all individuals must comply with authorized congressional inquiries, stating, "Mr. Smith, a former public servant, is no different." He asserted that Smith's testimony included intentionally false statements aimed at obstructing the Committee's oversight.

Jordan has requested Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to investigate Smith. The decision to pursue criminal charges now rests with the Justice Department following this congressional referral.

A spokesperson for the Justice Department confirmed receipt of the referral letter and stated it would investigate all evidence of criminal conduct.

Trump has previously called for Smith's prosecution, frequently attacking officials who investigated him, including former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, both of whom faced criminal charges.

In a letter addressed to Jordan and Blanche, Smith's attorneys defended his responses to the committee's inquiries as "unimpeachably truthful." They pointed out that Smith was questioned about the subpoena for GOP lawmakers' tolling records, not the request for records from the National Archives. They also noted that Smith's team had disclosed the text messages to Trump's lawyers, who did not raise any concerns about unlawful or improper conduct at that time.

The attorneys described the referral as an alarming attempt to weaponize the justice system against a dedicated public servant who diligently followed the facts and the law.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, dismissed the criminal referral as "baseless and vindictive," asserting that it would be dismissed in court if presented before a judge.

Raskin criticized Republicans for expecting Smith to read the minds of congressional investigators and for not volunteering information they did not request, labeling this expectation as absurd.

Smith was appointed as special counsel by Biden-era Attorney General Merrick Garland in late 2022, shortly after Trump announced his 2024 presidential campaign. He oversaw two significant Justice Department investigations: one concerning Trump's efforts to remain in office after losing the 2020 election and another regarding Trump's handling of sensitive government documents taken to Mar-a-Lago after leaving the White House.

Smith ultimately filed charges in both cases, marking a historic federal prosecution of a former president and inciting Trump's ire, who denied any wrongdoing and accused Smith of political bias.

Both cases against Trump concluded without charges in 2024. A judge dismissed the indictment related to classified documents due to Smith's invalid appointment, while the Supreme Court ruled that Trump was entitled to broad immunity for official acts, complicating the 2020 election indictment. Smith dropped the election case after Trump won the 2024 race but contended in a final report that Trump would have been convicted otherwise.

Smith's final report and the 2023 indictment concerning election-related crimes examined phone calls between lawmakers and Trump following the January 6 Capitol riot. The indictment alleged these calls were part of an effort by Trump to exploit the violence and persuade Republicans to block certification of Joe Biden's victory.

The Senate Judiciary Committee disclosed in October that the FBI analyzed phone tolling records from eight Republican senators and one GOP House member during the days surrounding January 6, 2021.

GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa described this discovery as "disturbing and outrageous," accusing the FBI of spying on Congress members. Grassley claimed it exemplified law enforcement's "weaponization," a narrative frequently echoed by Trump regarding investigations into him and his associates.

Smith has consistently defended his actions. His attorneys stated last year that obtaining telephone toll records via subpoena is a standard and lawful investigative procedure that does not infringe on privacy expectations.

Last week, Grassley released a letter from the Justice Department detailing 44 lawmakers whose text messages with the White House were sent to investigators on Smith's team as part of the National Archives subpoena. Most of these lawmakers were Republicans, although four Democrats were also included, among them Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey.

The letter indicated that these texts were promptly forwarded to Smith's staff without being screened by a "filter team," which typically reviews evidence for potential privilege before investigators access it.

Grassley accused investigators of trampling on constitutional rights, arguing that these texts could be protected under the Speech or Debate Clause, which restricts criminal prosecutions of Congress members. Jordan's criminal referral also claimed that Smith likely bypassed essential constitutional protections.

"Jack Smith's criminal investigation of President Trump was a runaway train that had no brakes," Grassley stated last week. He urged his Democratic colleagues, some of whom had their texts included in this inquiry, to set aside partisanship and recognize the gravity of these actions.

Smith's attorneys countered in their letter Wednesday night that the Speech or Debate Clause does not prevent prosecutors from utilizing or reviewing text messages between Congress members and Executive Branch officials during investigations into Executive Branch officials, which is precisely what transpired here.

They further asserted that a filter team was unnecessary for reviewing White House records since this process primarily exists to identify evidence covered by protections like attorney-client privilege.

"Mr. Smith approached the investigation into President Trump as he has approached every other investigation throughout his career as a prosecutor—following the facts and the law while adhering to Department of Justice protocol and regulations," Smith's lawyers stated.