Jack Smith Defends His Indefensible Political Witch-Hunt; Even CNN's Legal Analyst Admits Smith Is Guilty

Want your blood to boil?

The Jack Smith Investigation cost taxpayers over $35 million.

$35,000,000

All based on a scam.

Targeting enemies.

With 65% of that $35million paying their salaries.

Jack and his team got rich for sedition.

Brandon Gill grilled Jack Smith on three points:

1, why he had sought the phone records of the incoming Speaker of the House, extending back a year, when he had just become speaker 16 days earlier. This makes it look very much look like a purely political witch-hunt, as Johnson did not have power to run interference for Trump before hand.

2, why he sought these phone records in defiance of a warning from a Biden attorney that doing so would be a violation of the Speech and Debate Clause. (A clause which says that no member of Congress shall be subject to legal process for any statement they make in Congress (later extended to cover any statement they make outside of Congress, so long as it's part of their work as a congressman.)

3, why he claimed that Mike Johnson was a "flight risk" when he told Johnson's phone company to hide the fact that his records had been granted to a third party. Jack Smith claimed that keeping this secret was necessary to make sure that Johnson did not take flight from prosecution.

He now admits that Johnson was no flight risk.

GO READ THE WHOLE THING. 

If you watch one moment from Jack Smith's testimony in Congress today, watch him get reduced to a stuttering, stammering mess when confronted with his own LIES:

GILL: "The subpoena covered the time period between November 2020 and January 2021. Is that right?"

SMITH: "Uh, I'm sorry, sir, could you say that again?"

GILL: "We're not gonna delay like this."

GILL: "How many days after Kevin McCarthy was sworn in as Speaker did you subpoena his records?

SMITH: "Uh, I don't recall, but those two things had nothing to do with one another."

GILL: "It was 16 days after becoming the highest ranking Republican in the House of Representatives, you subpoenaed his toll records. Do you agree that that might reasonably be considered a violation of the Speech or Debate Clause?"

SMITH: "Uh, I do not"

GILL: "At the time you, you secured those non-disclosure orders, was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?"

SMITH: "He was not."

GILL: "He was not. Then why did your non-disclosure order refer to him as a flight risk? It says right here, 'The court finds reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result in flight from prosecution.' You were using clearly false information to secure a non-disclosure order to hide from Speaker McCarthy and from the American people the fact that you were spying on his toll records."

.@RepBrandonGill is so good at this.

Congressional hearings with him are masterclasses in questioning

Short, easy to understand, and cutting pic.twitter.com/6GecDVYW8K

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 22, 2026

Even CNN is now turning on Jack Smith after his House Judiciary testimony.

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig zeroed in on the moment Republicans cornered Smith over rushing the Trump case right before the 2024 election — and Smith had no answer.

HONIG: “To your question, Brianna,… pic.twitter.com/JgLUKrU4nK

— Overton (@overton_news) January 22, 2026