Jack Smith tells Congress he wants to testify publicly

[DonGlock26]

He has the power to tell them to suck it and not testify to anything other than repeatedly reciting the Fifth Amendment.

Not a good look for a hero of the Democrats.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Thread 'Maybe it's time for a refresher regarding trump's indictment for trying to subvert the election.'

Nov 3, 2025

The subject of Jack Smith's request to testify publicly so he can refute allegations made against him, primarily by House Repub's, has caused trump devotees to once again assume a defense crouch. Essentially denying the evidence in Smith's indictments. Refusing to read the documents, despite my best efforts, he has released in support of the case against Don.

So, I thought a walk down memory lane might be in order.

A. Mr. Trump's Pressure on State Officials

One of Mr. Trump's efforts to change the results of the election involved targeting the electoral process at the state...

• berg80
• Replies: 35
• Forum: Politics

• 
• 
• 

Yes . . . go on . . .

 

[Lockback]

Not reading the evidence of trump's crimes presented in Smith's report won't make the facts go away. It just makes you ignorant of them.

What a giant, flaming crock of shit. Smith has zero credibility. The Democrats who persecuted and prosecuted Trump have zero credibility. It was an attempted coup that failed. Smith is a sleazy partisan hack, nothing more.

 

[berg80]

What a giant, flaming crock of shit. Smith has zero credibility. The Democrats who persecuted and prosecuted Trump have zero credibility. It was an attempted coup that failed. Smith is a sleazy partisan hack, nothing more.

I see you've chosen to remain ignorant. In case you change your mind......

https://www.justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump_23_cr_257.pdf

 

[Lockback]

I see you've chosen to remain ignorant. In case you change your mind......

https://www.justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump_23_cr_257.pdf

Anything that was churned out by the Biden-era incredibly corrupt, Soviet-style DOJ should never be taken seriously.

I prefer to concentrate on the REAL criminals.

 

[berg80]

Anything that was churned out by the Biden-era incredibly corrupt, Soviet-style DOJ should never be taken seriously.

All this nonsense you keep polluting the board with has no factual basis. Something that can't be said about the indictments of trump by Smith.

 

[Lockback]

All this nonsense you keep polluting the board with has no factual basis. Something that can't be said about the indictments of trump by Smith.

As the old saying goes, "You can indict a ham sandwich."
Attorneys whose opinions I trust think the cases were so weak they never should have been brought at all.
Smith is a hack. Period.

 

[berg80]

As the old saying goes, "You can indict a ham sandwich."
Attorneys whose opinions I trust think the cases were so weak they never should have been brought at all.
Smith is a hack. Period.

The documents case against trump was a slam dunk based on the irrefutable evidence presented by Smith. The novelty of the case he brought for trump's treasonous behavior regarding the plot to steal the election was less cut and dry but once again the evidence was overwhelming.

Your personal opinion of Smith does not make a compelling case in defense of the orange messiah.

Here's a book, "Injustice," you should read if you want to challenge the lies you believe.

Bureaucratic inertia! Paralysis by analysis! Caution on steroids! These sound like less-than-scintillating premises for a book, but that’s the story that the journalists Carol Leonnig and Aaron C. Davis discovered in “Injustice,” a painfully accurate account that focuses on the Biden years at the Department of Justice. But the tale does get more dramatic. The Biden story is bookended by the authors’ study of the department during the first and second Trump administrations — what the authors describe as a bad-to-worse carnival of incompetence and corruption.

Leonnig and Davis are both Pulitzer winners who covered events at the Justice Department under both presidents for The Washington Post. (Sadly, Leonnig is now part of the post-Bezos diaspora from the newspaper.) The authors’ great frustration is that, over the past half-decade, the department has lurched from extreme to extreme. The shabby partisanship of the first Trump term was followed, in their view, by an overreaction, with a department led by an attorney general, Merrick Garland, who was so fearful of accusations of partisanship that he did little at all until it was too late.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/03/books/review/injustice-carol-leonnig-and-aaron-davis.html

 

[Lockback]

The documents case against trump was a slam dunk based on the irrefutable evidence presented by Smith. The novelty of the case he brought for trump's treasonous behavior regarding the plot to steal the election was less cut and dry but once again the evidence was overwhelming.

Your personal opinion of Smith does not make a compelling case in defense of the orange messiah.

"He swallows this crap whole! 'Orange messiah'! You can't make this shit up!"

 

[berg80]

"He swallows this crap whole! 'Orange messiah'! You can't make this shit up!"

You're a carbon copy of the other nitwit trumpers posting silly memes and photos as a substitute for an inability to make a cogent argument based on facts.

Conversing with you is a waste of time.

 

[Lockback]

You're a carbon copy of the other nitwit trumpers posting silly memes and photos as a substitute for an inability to make a cogent argument based on facts.

Conversing with you is a waste of time.

I make cogent arguments based on facts all the time.
But my "silly memes" sometimes help make a point to those who are less intelligent, hence my use of it for you.

 

[berg80]

I make cogent arguments based on facts all the time.
But my "silly memes" sometimes help make a point to those who are less intelligent, hence my use of it for you.

Here's my challenge. Read the first 20-30 pages of this.......

https://www.justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump_23_cr_257.pdf

.........and then feel free to factually refute anything you read.

 

[Lockback]

Here's my challenge. Read the first 20-30 pages of this.......

https://www.justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump_23_cr_257.pdf

.........and then feel free to factually refute anything you read.

**** no.
I don't have time for that garbage.

 

[IM2]

Anything that was churned out by the Biden-era incredibly corrupt, Soviet-style DOJ should never be taken seriously.

I prefer to concentrate on the REAL criminals.

Then you need to concentrate on Trump.

 

[IM2]

**** no.
I don't have time for that garbage.

You don't want to take the time.

Because it destroys the narrative you want to believe.

 

[whitehall]

Why isn't it always public?

 

[Lockback]

Then you need to concentrate on Trump.

Translation: "I've got nothin'. I keep protecting thugs and crooks but I'll try to divert to Trump."

 

[IM2]

Translation: "I've got nothin'. I keep protecting thugs and crooks but I'll try to divert to Trump."

Trump is the thug and crook.

 

[Dragonlady]

Here's hoping.

I'll be shocked if they let him. The congressional Republicans aren't stupid. They're craven and shameless, but they're not stupid.

Smith has also said he looks forward to his jury trial on charges that he lied to Congress.

There is no one in the Justice Department or on Jordan’s so called “Oversight Committee” that has the ability to take on a lawyer of Jack Smith’s stature or experience.

 

[IM2]

Smith has also said he looks forward to his jury trial on charges that he lied to Congress.

There is no one in the Justice Department or on Jordan’s so called “Oversight Committee” that has the ability to take on a lawyer of Jack Smith’s stature or experience.

They won't let Smith testify because when he does, Trump is done.