Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request to testify before Congress underscores his intention to pull no punches as he defends his legacy against a growing Republican onslaught.
President Trump has declared, in the presence of Attorney General Pam Bondi, that “deranged Jack Smith in my opinion is a criminal.” Mr. Smith’s willingness to speak under oath came Thursday in a letter written by 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 set up a high-stakes reckoning of Mr. Smith’s two unsuccessful prosecutions of Mr. Trump. The special counsel’s desire to tell Congress and the nation his account of two of the highest-profile cases in American history comes as his record has come under escalating scrutiny.
Mr. Jordan has summoned him to answer for the “prosecutorial misconduct and constitutional abuses of his office.” Meanwhile, Mr. Grassley has expressed outrage over “Operation Arctic Frost,” Mr. Smith’s inquiry into the events of January 6. As part of that probe, the prosecutor acquired telephone data of Republican lawmakers.
The prosecutor’s attorneys, Peter Koski and Lanny Breuer of the Covington & Burling firm, wrote: “Given the many mischaracterizations of Mr. Smith’s investigation into President Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents and role in attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Mr. Smith respectfully requests the opportunity to testify in open hearings before the House and Senate Judiciary Committees.”
Mr. Smith contends that he has, throughout his career, “steadfastly adhered to established legal standards and Department of Justice guidelines.”
However, Mr. Grassley appears hesitant to offer Mr. Smith a platform just yet. He told CNN, “Jack Smith certainly has a lot of answering to do, but first, Congress needs to have all the facts at its disposal. Hearings should follow once the investigative foundation has been firmly set.”
While the special counsel appears ready to talk, his lawyers are insisting on ground rules and guardrails. They write, “Mr. Smith is prepared to answer questions about the Special Counsel’s investigation and prosecution, but requires assurance from the Department of Justice that he will not be punished for doing so.”
This suggests that they are seeking some form of immunity, possibly prompted by the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey for lying to Congress.
Mr. Smith also requests “guidance from the Department of Justice regarding federal grand jury secrecy requirements and authorization on the matters he may speak to regarding, among other things, Volume II of the Final Report of the Special Counsel, which is not publicly available.”
The release of that second volume, which covers the Mar-a-Lago prosecution, was blocked by Judge Aileen Cannon. Mr. Smith’s report on the January 6 case, which insists that he possessed 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,” Raskin stated.
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 delivered a keynote address at George Mason University where he said, “What I see happening at the Department of Justice today saddens me and angers me.” He also defended the DOJ employees who have been fired by Ms. Bondi, which include his entire team.
Mr. Smith followed that denunciation with an appearance in Britain alongside paid MSNBC contributor Andrew Weissmann, a fierce foe of the president who was Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s top deputy.
During the same Oval Office diatribe in which he called Mr. Smith a “criminal,” Mr. Trump declared, “I hope they are going to look into Weissmann, too. Weissmann’s a bad guy. There was tremendous criminal activity.”
Mr. Smith told Mr. Weissmann in respect of the DOJ that “Nothing like what we see now has ever gone on,” and blasted as “absolutely ludicrous” the accusation that his prosecutions of Mr. Trump were politically motivated.
The special counsel wrote in his final report that the “claim from Mr. Trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable.”
Mr. Smith is also facing scrutiny from the Trump administration over whether his all-fired rush to prosecute Mr. Trump before the 2024 presidential election violated the Hatch Act. That federal law prohibits federal employees from undertaking political activity intended to influence elections.
No prosecutor has ever been found to violate its prohibition, which is a civil offense.
https://www.nysun.com/article/jack-smith-in-a-stunning-move-offers-to-testify-under-oath-about-his-prosecutions-of-trump
