Donald Trump can’t get Jack Smith out of his mind. And, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim “Gym” Jordan wants to do something about it. On July 21st, Jordan made a criminal referral against Smith to the U.S. Department of Justice. The grounds? Lying to Congress.
Jordan’s six page letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is worth reading. It repeats a litany of complaints against Smith. Read it here.
Much easier to read is the House Judiciary Committee Democrats’ response to Jordan’s action. Read it here and below:
Washington, D.C. (July 22, 2026)—Today, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, issued the following statement after Chairman Jim Jordan sent a baseless and vindictive criminal referral of former Special Counsel Jack Smith to the Department of Justice (DOJ):
“With today’s referral of Jack Smith to DOJ, Chairman Jordan and the Republican Congress have embarrassed themselves again in this investigation. Jack Smith was clear and consistent in his testimony, and he told the truth. When asked if his subpoena for Members’ toll records sought the content of either Member’s phone calls or messages, he truthfully replied that they did not. That statement was true when he said it, and it is true today. It seems Republican Members of Congress are lashing out because they just realized their communications with the White House became presidential records preserved at the National Archives as required by the Presidential Records Act (PRA). This referral deliberately distorts and misstates the facts, including what questions the Republicans actually asked at Mr. Smith’s interview. The Republicans fault Mr. Smith for not reading the minds of congressional investigators and for not volunteering information they didn’t ask for. This is absurd. Mr. Smith may be telegenic but he is not telepathic.
“Wishing that you had asked different questions while you had the opportunity to examine a witness is not a proper basis for a referral of a witness for criminal prosecution. Congressional Republicans never asked Jack Smith about presidential records. Not during his 9-hour closed-door testimony or his 4-hour public hearing. At no point during Mr. Smith’s 13-hours before this Committee did Republicans ask whether Member messages were found on other Executive Branch officials’ phones. Nor did they ask Mr. Smith whether presidential records that the Special Counsel subpoenaed from the National Archives included communications from congressional Members. They did not even ask whether Mr. Smith’s team had ever reviewed text messages from Members. Jack Smith could not have lied because Republican Members never even asked the question their theory is based on.
“This referral, if ever brought before a judge, will get laughed out of court. But success on the merits is not the goal. It is meant to harass Jack Smith. It is meant to please their Fox News viewership. It is meant to whitewash their own participation in a scheme to overthrow our elections. And above all, it is meant to create a distraction so Republicans on Senate Judiciary can feel just a little more comfortable confirming the architect of the Epstein cover-up and lawless Trump slush fund and super pardon, Todd Blanche, to the post of Attorney General. We will not fall for this ludicrous distraction. Neither will the American people.”
Former federal prosecutors ridiculed Jordan’s letter, saying it failed to identifying a crime for which Jack Smith could be prosecuted.
Smith himself has defended his actions as Special Counsel looking into Donald Trump’s role in the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol his handling of government records, including classified documents, including documents taken to Mar-a-Lago and left in insecure locations.
President Trump has sought to seek revenge against career prosecutors, FBI agents, and support staff, simply for having worked on these cases. To vilify and seek retribution against these people is wrong.
Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity. If asked whether to prosecute a former President based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that President was a Republican or a Democrat.
The Department of Justice is expected to pursue a criminal indictment of Jack Smith. No surprise here.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.