Oversight Hearings on Jack Smith's Authority, Republicans, Related Matters

Good morning everybody. Mister Smith, thank you for being here. This hearing will highlight the committee's investigation into the special counsel's political work and weaponized conduct. today the special counsel's own record and those of his staff will tell the tale. The ranking member has repeatedly pushed to have this hearing much earlier and he'll probably mention that today but if we had followed that misguided and dangerous demand We wouldn't have had most of the necessary records. Needed to show how. Jack Smith's corrupt operation undermined the rule of law. And threatened our very political institutions. Of course. That was the strategy of the democrats. Call a premature hearing. So all we had were s- Mister Smith's account. That would bury the story. That's exactly the wrong way to do this. And it would have broken faith with the American people that Jack Smith has wronged. Let us begin with Operation Rampart twelve. That operation was a preliminary investigation opened into some of the members of the house of representatives. Ram part twelve appears to be a predecessor case to arctic frost and was opened january twenty twenty one. The investigation was based on allegations that house members led reconnaissance tours in advance of january sixth. But the available records show the evidence did not exist and the government knew it. Even so, JP Cooney personally uh concurred with opening the investigation even though his text messages with a colleague questioned predication. Cooney became Jack Smith's deputy And wanted to in his own words quote "Prosecute any none who still wears a head habit." End of quote. Cooney also Along with anti-Trump FBI agent Thibault Kept rampant part, rampant twelve active for a full year After was improperly opened. Ram part twelve shows how partisan agents and prosecutors lacked evidence but still tried to fix a case against Republicans. Now let's look at the Willard inquiry. On January twenty twenty two before Arctic Frost formally opened Thibault, an FBI special agent In charge, Wayne Jacobs tried to create a case. Notably, documents show FBI agent Jacobs was recused from Arctic Frost and that may relate to the fact that his wife was on the J six committee s- staff. Months after recusal, documents show he was still involved. which would violate his requital requirements. According to depot At the time quote supervisor special agent Liana Saylor has been in regular contact with uh Thomas Wyndham with a goal of opening a case to allow us to uh accomplish many of the investigative activities end quote that they wanted. He's referring to the desire to open a case on Republicans who stayed at the Willard around January sixth. Wyndham became a senior staffer for Jack Smith and later pled the fifth to most questions about his work. Thibault said the discredited Washington field office quote is hard at work attempting to predicate a preliminary investigation end of quote. Yet again partisan agents and prosecutors admitted they lacked evidence but they continued anyway. doj prosecutors john crab and windham sought and obtained invasive hotel booking information which scooped up customer data about many innocent parties but before we had jack smith there was arctic frost fbi agent thebo department of justice Prosecutors Windham and Crabb were instrumental in opening Arctic Frost. And Thibault's conduct violated the FBI's so-called no-self-approval rule. Thibault violated that rule when he advanced Arctic Frost but used subordinate staff as cutouts to prove his own case. Thibault also violated the hatchet for his anti-Trump political conduct on the taxpayers' dime. Thibault also emailed naked photos of his girlfriend using an FBI government email account. And that's not the type of a guy that you want to justify opening a case. Thibault also worked closely with FBI agent, Walter Giardina. Giardina reportedly filed a false FISA on Walid Perez, which, if true, is a criminal criminal act. Giardina was one of Jack Smith's financial experts, analyzing subpoena returns from hundreds of republican groups the perfect man to put the fix in and map out the republican apparatus which is exactly what happened and as you'll see today the smith election case ultimately wasn't just about trump it was about partisan agents and prosecutors mapping out the republican apparatus. That scope, looking at the apparatus, was what JP Cooney briefed to Deputy Attorney General Monaco. He and Smith used J six as a pretext to go way beyond, way beyond J six. Now it is obvious the ball and his crew wanted trump from the get-go which jack smith ultimately did for them in january twenty twenty two the ball said trump should be included in the subject as a subject in arctic frost then trump was removed but in march twenty twenty two Thibault emailed quote, we are removing the former, meaning Trump, as a predicated subject. However, this document provides a sort of road map, end of quote. So you see, Thibault set the stage for Jack Smith to take the lead. And Thibault uh s draft case opening used liberal media outlets as sources but the version sent to then attorney general garland had those liberal mentions removed of course garland turned a blind eye to arctic frost political origins arctic frost was formally approved april twenty twenty two thus The foundation Jack Smith took over in November twenty twenty two was built by partisan agents and prosecutors, many of whom staffed Smith. And Jack Smith took partisanship to a new level. Before Jack Smith, the government sought toll records from at least four members of Congress. jack smith sought the total records of sixteen members of congress and also obtained the content of members' communication breaching the constitutional speech and debate clause smith's subpoenas targeted hundreds of republican groups and individuals he subpoenaed communications those folks had with media and with the legislative branch. He also subpoenaed eighty-seven trump white house phones, knowing that they'd include communications with members of congress, forty-four members, just to be exact. He failed to all filter out speech and debate privilege information even though he and his teams knew that they'd scoop it up with their request. What I can say today is that Smith also obtained communications from members of the media to include sixty minutes Associated Press Bloomberg, CBS, CNBC, CNN, Fox News, LA Times Mark Levin, Joe, Media Research Center, NBC, NPR, New York Magazine, Reuters, The Federalist, The Washington Post, Washington Times, and The Wall Street Journal. Now, what will partisan media say about this disgraceful government overreach? i want to hear their response and i will if they are responsible media this wasn't a normal prosecution by any means yet today you'll absurdly hear from democrats that it was importantly mister smith has claimed his focus was on january sixth but his own conduct conduct contradicts that assertion. Listen. When his team subpoenaed records sometimes the date ranges extended weeks months or years before and after January sixth. Indeed some examples Mister Smith subpoenaed and obtained information on Republican groups as early as twenty nineteen and as late as twenty twenty three. You see, that's what you must do if your case is designed to map out and target the entire Republican Party. Messages obtained between Jack Smith's senior officials also expose how they were aware of constitutional speech and debate clause concerns and targeting congressional toll records. In these messages, his future staff discussed how they can circumvent the statutory barriers Congress put in place to obtain congressional toll records. Then in twenty twenty-three, Cooney, Gaston, Windham, and Ray Halzer were giving warnings that subpoenaing congressional records could violate the speech and debate clause. They were warned that legislators may intervene and oppose that subpoena process. They didn't care then or when they obtained the content of messages from forty-four members, including this senator. In fact, Smith's deputy, J P Cooney, said this about the speech and debate clause, quote, "I am an advocate for repealing the clause." End of quote. In effect, he and Smith did exactly that. They ignored the constitution. This wasn't a normal prosecution. Accordingly, mister Smith's secretive efforts obtained members' toll records and ultimately content. Then he sought nondisclosure orders to hide his effort from members while also apparently failing to apprise the court. of the targets. Judges Boasberg and Howell also didn't bother to raise any questions and instead complicity rubber-stamped this political charade. Judge Howell who was a former Democrat staff director uh of this very committee even met privately with partisan prosecution to help them map out strategy. Then Smith appeared before the House and gave dishonest testimony. Indeed, the FBI, at Mister Smith's request, also issued preservation letters to Apple against members of Congress. Those letters also sought the preservation of a range of content, not just totaling data. It's worth noting that Cooney and Ray Halzer killed an investigation into the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton campaign. So on the one hand, they covered up for Democrats, but on the other hand, went full scope on Republicans. Another example of Mister Smith's partisan operation. Now, because of Mister Smith, the Department of Justice and FBI have reams of very personal information on thousands of Republicans. Once the Department of Justice and FBI obtain these records, we all know they'll never delete them. The exception of course is Hillary Clinton. In that case the Comey FBI agreed to destroy information on her behalf, including laptops associated with her staff. Just another example of outrageous double standard. In the end, Mister Smith indicted one person. That one person was President Trump. But, and the process successfully mapped out the republican apparatus of fact that he didn't put in his report. I'll have more to show the public later today on that point. Now, mister Smith prosecuted Trump for allegedly mishandling classified information. While doing so, getting back to classified information, His team left a classified facility open, causing a security violation while prosecuting Trump for effectively the same offense. On at least one occasion, JP Cooney asked that the door to the classified facility remain unlocked. So talk about hypocrisy. As they throw the book at Trump, the prosecutors are playing fast and loose. with the rules in july of twenty twenty two before the raid on mar-a-lago fbi officials raised strong concerns about the lack of probable cause and overzealous prosecutors moreover in february twenty twenty two emails show that the fbi was actually going to treat marilago as a spillage not a criminal investigation and mister smith represented to the court that the national archives didn't substantially help the case in response to trump's team arguing they did these representations to the court were absolutely false Records from the archives show that Gary Stern, the archives general counsel, subst- substanti substantively assisted. Smith said he and his staff responsibly quote "is to do the right thing, the right way, for the right reasons", end of quote. Mister Smith's operation was a partisan weapon, that broke the rules, lied to the court, and engaged in bad faith throughout. His operation has no credibility only to the partisan media and Democrats who cheered him on as they will do today, Senator Durbin.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm glad my Republican colleagues have finally accepted special counsel Jack Smith's offer, long-standing offer, to appear before this committee and testify under oath. Republicans have spent months spreading baseless conspiracy theories about Mister Smith's investigation instead of hearing from him directly. Nearly a year ago, Mister Smith volunteered to testify under oath before this committee. We Democrats joined in that offer, saying, let's get to the bottom of it. put him under oath and let's ask questions." And then almost a year passed. House Republicans called Mister Smith to testify in January. But Senate Republicans refused his offer to testify and instead held eight hearings on his supposed wrongdoing, never calling him directly. In fact, this committee held only three hearings to question telecom companies for following the law and hear from mega loyalist witnesses with no firsthand knowledge of Mr. Smith's investigation. Finally, the Senate Republicans relented, and we have today's hearing. Here are the facts. Mr. Smith was tasked with investigating President Trump's efforts to overturn the twenty twenty presidential election and his unlawful retention and distribution of sensitive classified documents after President Trump left office. In the weeks following President Trump's twenty twenty election loss, and yes, for the record, the president did lose the election. He tried to subvert the will of the people and steal the presidency. The president did all of this while knowing and privately admitting he'd lost the election to Joe Biden by seven million votes. President Trump threatened state election officials in battleground states where he lost, urging them to submit fraudulent election certificates to overturn the votes in those states. Now that's a pretty tough allegation. But the president asked election officials in various states to change the outcome, to overturn the election. What proof do you have, Durbin? The voice of the president himself How do we know this? The president said it. He called the election official in Georgia and asked him to find, find was his word, eleven thousand seven hundred and eighty votes. I hope that that never happened before in American history, and I hope it never happens again. President Trump pressured two attorneys general to have the Justice Department falsely declare election fraud and pressure states to overturn the will of the people. One of these attorney generals resigned. And when his successor still refused, Trump threatened to replace him with a loyalist who would do his bidding. The president's own White House counsel called this threat, quote, "a murder-suicide pact." Trump only backed down when he was informed that his entire Department of Justice leadership threatened to resign en masse. rather than violate their oaths to the Constitution. President Trump's efforts to steal the election reached a crescendo on January sixth of twenty twenty one, when he exhorted his supporters at a rally by the White House to quote " fight like hell" and told them quote " we're going to the Capitol", the words of the president. I was here on January sixth. when that armed mob overran this building in a violent attempt to stop the election certification process which was taking place in the House and the Senate. In the wake of that attack of January sixth, and you saw it on video, exactly what happened, five law enforcement officers who defended us and the visitors to the Capitol and the ideals they represented lost their lives. More than a hundred and forty policemen were injured. It's been my honor to serve for thirty years in the United States Senate. There are moments I'll never forget. Twenty five years ago, nine eleven was one of those moments when we were asked to evacuate the Capitol for fear of what might happen if the terrorists attacked. But today I'll also remember as long as I live as January sixth, twenty twenty one when this cathedral of democracy was overrun by violent insurrectionists at the direction of the President of the United States. When he finally left office in twenty twenty one, President Trump seized boxes of classified documents containing top-secret information on our defense and weapon capabilities, our nuclear programs, and potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attacks. These were government documents the president took, not his personal effects. Yet he stored these extremely sensitive documents haphazardly in a Mar-a-Lago ballroom, a a bathroom shower, his bedroom and other unsecured spaces. And then he showed off these secret documents. to seemingly anyone at random including his publisher staff members and representatives of his political action committee when members of the senate are shown documents like this it is in a closed setting and guarded document room where we are told don't take anything in writing out of this room afterwards the president was showing these things off at mar-a-lago In both his theft and distribution of these classified documents, and his attempts to steal the twenty twenty election, President Trump demonstrated a wanton disdain for the laws of the United States, the will of the people, and our national security. Malfeasance by government officials is sadly not a new phenomenon. But President Trump's misconduct was egregious, differing in kind and scale from what we had seen by any president before him. Investigating misconduct by government officials requires scrupulous care. Thankfully, Mister Smith, who is here today and will be under oath, and his team of nonpartisan career prosecutors had the necessary experience to tackle this uh assignment. Mister Smith's resume as a professional prosecutor is solid. and extensive. He's done everything from securing a capital murder conviction against a gang leader who murdered two New York Police Department officers to securing convictions against war criminals from the Kosovo War. But in return, Mister Smith and his special counsel staff have had their names dragged through the mud by the MAGA machine. Timothy Thibault. Heard his name this morning? It was said repeatedly by the chairman. Timothy Timothy Thibault retired from the FBI in August of twenty twenty two. Mister Smith was appointed special counselor three months later in November of twenty twenty two. As an example. This is a result of the President Trump's campaign. aided and abetted by many congressional Republicans to whitewash the history of the twenty twenty election and the January sixth insidious attack on this Capitol building. Republicans have released documents and details related to these investigations in a haphazard non-chronological order to muddle the professional nature of Mister Smith's efforts in the manufactured controversy where there is none. They decry Mr. Smith for following the facts in the law and say nothing, nothing about a president who continued to break the law in an effort to prevent the truth from coming to light. Trump frequently threatened public officials and likely witnesses in the election interference case by name, which encouraged further threats and intimidation by his supporters. In the classified documents case, Trump took obstruction to a new level. He suggested to his attorneys that they lie and say they had submitted all the documents, or did not have them. He suggested they remove some documents prior to returning them, directed his employees to hide documents, directed his employees to delete video footage of the boxes being hidden at his home in Mar-a-Lago. It is sad to see my Republican colleagues contort themselves to support President Trump's lies. I expect that will continue today, because of the limits placed on Mister Smith's ability to testify by Magna Loyalist Judge Aline Cannon and the Trump administration. Judge Cannon has enjoined the release of volume two of the special counsel report on classified documents. And Mister Smith himself is enjoined from providing information about that investigation unless the Justice Department makes that information public. Let me be clear. There was nothing untoward about Special Counsel Smith and his fellow prosecutors conducting this investigation. The aspersion cast on Mister Smith, nonstop, are petty, personal, and political. They are nothing but a smoke screen to distract from the President's own clear unlawful conduct. After years of whitewashing President Trump's crimes, my republican colleagues can finally raise their concerns with the one person who can address them. Maybe this will finally free the committee from the endless endless debate and base on baseless conspiracy theories and allow us uh to address real problems affecting the American people. I yield.

Mr. Smith, would you please rise. Um You are from that the testimony you're about to give before the committee will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me god

i do

thank you you may proceed to your opening statement

jerry press crank the microphone

is your microphone on

Oh, wait. I think we have it. Chairman Grassley. Ranking Member Durbin, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss my work as special counsel. I've been fortunate to serve a country that I love for nearly thirty years, in local, national, and international settings. My service has spanned both Republican and Democratic administrations. I am not a politician, and I have no partisan loyalty. My career has been dedicated to serving our country, by upholding the rule of law and the core principles upon which our country was founded. I believe there is no role for politics in the proper administration of justice. A prosecutor's decisions must be based on the facts and the law. The status, power, prominence, or political affiliation of the subject of an investigation must play no role in the decision to investigate Prosecute or decline to prosecute. I approached my role as special counsel following these principles. The special counsel's office followed Justice Department policy, observed legal requirements, and took actions based on the facts and the law. I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including my decision to bring charges against President Trump. I made those decisions without regard to President Trump's political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the twenty, twenty-four presidential election. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in serious crimes against our nation. If asked whether to prosecute a former president today, based on the same facts, I would do so regardless of whether that president was a Republican or a Democrat. The charges against President Trump were the result of the evidence. Grand juries in two separate districts reached this conclusion based on his actions as alleged in the indictments they returned. Rather than accept his defeat in the twenty twenty presidential election, President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results and prevent the lawful transfer of power. After leaving office in January of twenty twenty one, President Trump illegally kept classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago social club, and repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents. Highly sensitive national security information was held in a bathroom and a ballroom where events and gatherings took place. As with my appearance before the US House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary I am prepared to answer your questions truthfully. I stand by my testimony before the House of Representatives and I will not be silenced by continued threats of prosecution from the President or others. As I appear before you today, it is my belief that the rule of law faces challenges unlike any we have experienced in our lifetime. Individuals are threatened with criminal prosecution because they are perceived to have opposed the president. Predetermined outcomes increasingly seem to take precedence over the Justice Department's long-standing core values and traditions. History teaches that the rule of law is rarely destroyed all at once. It's often weakened by attacks on the institutions and the public servants sworn to uphold it. Since January of twenty twenty five, we have witnessed precisely such an effort, including the vilification of the agents, prosecutors and staff who worked on my team, simply because of their unwavering dedication to the rule of law. I myself have been threatened with jail by the President of the United States. However, I remain confident that the rule of law will endure because so many continue to uphold it faithfully each day. Throughout our legal system, public servants have remained faithful to their oaths, despite extraordinary pressure to do otherwise. Their example demonstrates that while fear may be contagious, courage is as well. Thank you the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to your questions.

Thank you, Minister Smith. We'll have ten minute uh opportunities to ask questions and we'll only have one round for each member. In your public statements and testimony here today, you've given blowing assessment of your staff, saying that they had an unwavering commitment to justice, regardless of personal cause. Uh that is blatantly untrue. You're apparently in denial based on the litany of wrongdoing and political bias supported by reams of evidence that I've referenced in my opening statements, and I've either released documents or will today that proves this. Moreover, in your public report you said in part quote "those materials comprised a small part of the office's investigative record end of quote you're referring to the j uh j six committee materials records show that in your briefing memorandum for a meeting with uh garland you said your team quote fully read and reviewed end quote the j six committee report that memo also said your staff quote went over it page by page and incorporated it into investigative plan end quote the memo also said you quote unquote will leverage the report to avoid certain interviews your report provided false information to the public your staff also obtained subpoena returns that included the content of messages of forty four members of congress not just total records as you uh testified previously based on information provided to the committee that content was shared with case agents and prosecutors before it went through any filter review for privileged information which should have been done like it's been In other cases, those are clear violations by your staff. In addition, your deputy, JP Cooney, uh said he'd quote " prosecute any nun who still wears a head habit", end of quote. Then Cooney also said regarding the speech and debate clause, quote "I'm an advocate for repealing the clause", end of quote. Lastly, Cooney and Molly Gaston filed a complaint with the justice department inspector general your staff asked for the inspector general to investigate whistleblowers who bravely exposed abuses of authority to congress by you and your staff these are just some of the violations of law or policy that your staff and office committed and that doesn't include all the violations of former fbi agents like debo and giardina committed while creating false predicate for your cases and others so question number one out of six i have should whistleblowers who made lawful disclosures to congress about your taxpayer funded work be investigated

uh i'm not aware of any whistleblowers being investigated, uh, I believe public servants should be protected. The members of my team that you just mentioned, I'm extremely proud to have worked with them and the fact that they have been targeted illegally, lost their jobs illegally, and had their lives turned upside down by this Department of Justice is an outrage.

Well, you said you didn't know about it and I gave you evidence that they asked for investigation by the inspector. question number two did your special counsel obtain uh special counsel operation obtain possession of donor data including financial information yes or no

our investigation uh was focused on uh investigating uh matters under my mandate including whether any person or entity violated the law with attempts to block the peaceful transfer of power.

Yeah. Let me uh, let me ask the question again.

Uh.

Did your special counsel, operation obtain possession of donor data to include financial information, yes or no?

Yes, we acquired financial information. As I sit here right now, I cannot recite to you every subpoena we issued.

Yeah.

I can tell you why we issued subpoenas, and it was to conduct a criminal investigation of one of the most serious crimes that's ever happened in our nation's history.

Let me say

I had a duty to collect facts.

Let me say indeed you did, and you answered yes, accordingly to protect disclosures to my office you obtained at least four thousand, seven hundred and eighty-two donor checks. Many of those checks were five to ten dollars. The list includes checks from constituents in every state of every single member of this committee. both Republicans and Democrats, it included forty two checks from Iowans who dared to donate money to Republicans. No matter what you say, there is no legitimate basis for what you did, especially since your staff killed in an investigation into the Clinton campaign. Donations, uh, to Republican groups wasn't necessary for your investigation, which is proved out by the fact that it was not mentioned in your public report. Now the Justice Department and the FBI will forever possess thousands of people's address phone number bank and bank account number bank routing number and a copy of their true signature. Every member of this committee ought to be outraged for what happened to their constituents. I hope my democratic colleagues will join me in this outrage. Question number three. In October, last year, I asked you this question, but you never responded. Did you ever use a personal device for work purposes to include communications such as email, text, or creation, or editing of work product? If so, do you commit to providing that material to the committee? If not, are you testifying that you've complied with all federal record requirements?

Uh, yes. Uh, when I first became special counsel, uh, I did not have a government phone or government computer. And so, in the initial days when I was, uh, appointed, and I was still living in the Netherlands, uh, I did use, uh, a personal device and email to communicate with folks in the justice department. What I did when I got government accounts is made sure, uh, to the best of my ability, that those uh that information was forwarded to government accounts so it would be would be within the federal records act um i sought at all times to comply with the federal records act as i expected uh my attorneys to do as well

following up on my opening statement for the classified document case where did you store the classified material decide describe the skiff arrangements for both doj and fbi personnel during and after the court decisions.

Uh, I can't speak to FBI facilities. I can explain uh, our office uh, had a skiff, a a place to store classified information. And my recollection is that there was, at least in Florida, an ability to store it there. I can't recall if it was at the FBI field office. Or at the courthouse. But we had a a a skiff at our office. Uh, as part of our investigation, uh, knowing that classified information would be involved in the investigation.

Yeah, I said in my opening statement that one of your staff members suggested leaving the door open which is obviously be a violation of law. Question number five. Have you ever received any consultation? Or counsel? by john brennan former cia director whether during your time as special counsel or otherwise if so when and for what purpose

i've never met john brennan

ok have you ever well i guess you've answered my follow-up question question number six and the last question When you became special counsel, what direction did you give your staff to handle speech or debate? And attorney general, uh attorney client material? Did you issue any directories? If so, to whom? And please explain.

So, with respect to the speech or debate clause first, uh, we took our obligations seriously.

Let me, let me follow up with this. Let me, let me follow up with this, Mr. Smith, no amount of explanation can take away from Mr. Smith, no amount of explanation can take away from documentary record. My opening remarks and the statements I made about your staff's clear failure show unequivocally how you breached constitutional parameters and failed to require your staff to comply with relevant rules using the terrible acts on January sixth as a predicate for your misguided investigation is irresponsible. To that end either you were the world's worst manager or you shared your staff's political animus uh to fuel your partisan investigation an investigation that ruined the lives of many innocent people senator durbin

mr. smith thank you for being here there is i think appropriate concern by members of this committee and members of congress as to your activities related to their telephone conversations text messages and records Please explain to us what involvement you had with any information from members of Congress.

Uh, first with respect to uh toll records. Uh, toll records are non-content um records. They show who a call was to, who a call was from, and the length of that call. Uh, my office did secure uh toll records uh from third parties third party uh telephone companies in the course of our investigation uh that were records for members of congress before we did that uh we consulted with the public integrity section regarding whether those uh toll records subpoenas were appropriate uh i approved those records and those records were materially relevant to our investigation

why were they relevant

uh for a number of reasons first Um, with respect to the toll records regarding the evening of January sixth, uh, those records corroborated evidence that we had that the president, President Donald Trump, and his co-conspirators were seeking to exploit the violence on January sixth in furtherance of their criminal scheme. They were taking the fact that law enforcement officers had been brutally assaulted at this institution, and using that to seek to delay the proceedings further in violation of the law. It was an important part of our investigation. We had interviewed co-conspirators who talked about the calls that were made to, uh, members of Congress. Uh, we had recordings of voicemails that showed that, and these voicemails are public, uh, where the co-conspirators were again providing false information. uh to try to delay the proceedings. Uh it was an important part of our investigation and it was centrally relevant to the issue of criminal intent. Um to seek to further delay the proceedings in violation of the law, given what had happened that afternoon, uh January sixth, in my view added to the powerful evidence we had of Donald Trump's guilt and the participation of his co-conspirators in his criminal scheme at his behest.

So we have the Capitol under siege. We have the Vice President removed from presiding over the Senate uh by the Secret Service. We have members of the Senate and House and both political parties who are told to leave the building because of the danger. Uh, I wanna ask, is it fair to surmise from what you have said that the President was in contact with some members of Congress during the uh this period of time.

Yes, that is correct. Uh, both um members of congress um we uh gained evidence uh reaching out to the white house asking please help us, please stop what's happening, please have your supporters stop attacking the capital and then also uh again after the attack uh had occurred um telling uh his co-conspirators there's a message uh I believe it's between uh Mark Meadows and one of the co-conspirators that the president uh wants you to call these senators and that that record should be in the material that you all have um co-conspirators including Rudy Giuliani then sought to make those calls. We also had evidence that the president himself was trying to reach out to individual senators.

Now, the, this has been characterized by some as a wiretap. Did you initiate any wiretaps relative to members of Congress of either party?

No. The records that we're talking about are non-content records, the toll records are non-content records that we sought to corroborate evidence we had and also to assist us in questioning witnesses about these events, among other things.

So what did the records disclose to you if they didn't disclose the content and conversation?

Well. They were relevant for a number of reasons. First, uh, they corroborated other records we already had. Um, some of those records were helpful, but they had gaps in them in terms of when certain calls happened. Uh, there was also the issue of when we interviewed, um, one of these co-conspirators who was involved in making these calls. It was unclear from that interview, uh, how many phones were in fact being used to make those calls. And so getting these records would help us figure out, uh, how many phones in fact were being used, uh, to make these calls, and to see who else, if anyone, uh, was involved in that.

It is possible, and certainly as I understand legal, for a member of Congress to have more than one phone. Uh, the official, uh, business of the uh, senate may require, uh, one phone number, uh, there may be a personal phone number for you and your family. There may even be a political phone number, uh, which you could resort to if you were involved in political activity. Did you make any distinction in terms of the phone messages which you were investigating of these three possibilities?

Uh, my recollection is being focused on the phones of the

When you say co-conspirators, do you mean members of Congress?

No, no. Um, I'm I'm thinking specifically, uh, of Rudy Giuliani. One of the things that we learned in this interview of another co-conspirator is that he had multiple phones. And so the question was, if we had records, did we have all the records of the phones that were making calls to try to exploit the violence?

But in terms of the phones themselves of the members of Congress, where did you find those phone numbers?

Uh. As I sit here, I do not recall. What I recall my role, uh, in this aspect of the investigation was, I was asked by my staff to approve toll records, uh, subpoenas for these sort of records. Uh, after, uh, discussing the matter with my staff, Uh, I told them I wanted to make sure the public integrity section approved of that process. That process happened and they did. Um, with respect to how agents figured out or thought they'd figured out which phones belonged to which senators, I don't, I don't have an answer to that.

Assume for a moment that one of the phone conversations was between the President of the United States and a member of the Congress. Does the White House maintain any records of calls made by the president or on his behalf?

Uh, my understanding is the the White House does. But my recollection, and I think it, uh, the terminology is the White House switchboard. Uh, my recollection is that there, we had discovered at various points and times those records were incomplete, uh, or we didn't, or certainly we didn't have all the records. And so that was another important point, uh, to corroborate, for example, evidence of an email where someone says uh the president is trying to reach out to these people, but then to find the actual records of of the actual call.

Mr. Smith, my colleagues have spent an extensive amount of time discussing Timothy Thibault, who retired from the FBI in August of twenty twenty two. According to our information, you were appointed special counsel three months after his retirement. in November of twenty twenty two was Timothy Thibault a part of your special counsel team

no

did you ever meet him during your work as special counsel

no not that i recall

did Timothy Thibault or the work that he had done whatever it was influence any of your decision making a special counsel

no we did we made our decisions based on the facts and based on the law based on the investigation uh that my team conducted

so i would say to those who are following the hearing after hearing all these references to timothy thibault he was gone he was gone from the fbi by the time mister smith was appointed and he never met him and he was not part of his team some of these conspiracy theories just keep mushrooming despite the evidence to the contrary mister uh chairman i yield

say uh before we go to the next person which will be mister lee uh you said you never met john brennan uh but have you ever had any conversation with john brennan

uh i i have no recollection of having a conversation with john brennan

ok uh sir Well, Senator Lee's not here. So then that'd be Senator uh uh Kennedy. No, Crue Crue. Well, Cruz isn't here. Senator Kennedy, you're you're up now. Are you ready, if you are? Go ahead.

Mister Smith, you were uh pretty well known around washington even before you decided to prosecute president trump weren't you man aren't you

uh i i might would say a number of people in the justice department knew me i don't know about washington d. c.

what what what does the word arrogant mean

Uh. I suppose it means that you're full of, feel full of yourself, that sort of thing.

Yeah, would you pull that mike closer to you?

Sorry.

Yeah, we can do that.

Is that better?

Yeah.

We can do that first.

Um, what what does the word self-righteous mean?

I think it's pretty similar to arrogant.

uh have you ever heard the expression often wrong but never in doubt

i don't believe i have

you have um you used to work for the international criminal court did you

yes i did

Is that a, is that a worthy organization in your opinion?

Uh, I believe the the mission of the International Criminal Court is a worthy one. I think it's had numerous uh challenges and numerous problems over the years, but I think the idea of that, that no one should be above the law and that we should apply that principle around the world, I think that's a good one we should aspire to.

And and that would be the same uh international criminal court that has threatened to uh prosecute american soldiers is that right

uh i am not aware of a single american soldier ever being prosecuted by the international criminal court

i didn't say they'd been prosecuted i said they'd been threatened

and uh i can tell you during my time at the court which was a short period of time it was about a year and a half

yeah

uh i don't recall any threats to prosecute american soldiers i don't

you you don't get around much do you um when when president or when when president trump defeated secretary clinton you were bitterly disappointed weren't you

uh i i don't recall that

you don't recall at all um mrs. smith was wasn't she

i'm uh i'm not gonna talk about my family what i can share is that i accepted a position in the trump administration as the acting us attorney in tennessee after that election and then i accepted a second position in the trump administration as a war crimes prosecutor