Well played by House R's.

[berg80]

Read: Jack Smith deposition transcript​

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Wednesday released the transcript of the panel’s deposition with former Special Counsel Jack Smith concerning his team’s investigations and prosecutions of President Trump.

Earlier this month, Smith’s attorneys sent a letter to Jordan requesting that his closed-door deposition be made public. In the testimony, Smith defended his decision to bring charges against Trump for attempting to overturn the 2020 election.

Loading…

thehill.com

A tried and true tactic for releasing material you don't want the public to pay attention to is to do so leading in to a weekend or a holiday. Jordan checked that box.

Will it succeed in insuring it slips by unnoticed? Not a chance.

 

[marvin martian]

Read: Jack Smith deposition transcript​

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Wednesday released the transcript of the panel’s deposition with former Special Counsel Jack Smith concerning his team’s investigations and prosecutions of President Trump.

Earlier this month, Smith’s attorneys sent a letter to Jordan requesting that his closed-door deposition be made public. In the testimony, Smith defended his decision to bring charges against Trump for attempting to overturn the 2020 election.

Loading…

thehill.com

A tried and true tactic for releasing material you don't want the public to pay attention to is to do so leading in to a weekend or a holiday. Jordan checked that box.

Will it succeed in insuring it slips by unnoticed? Not a chance.

That's how the crooked Dems "passed" Obamacare.

 

[Mac1958]

 

[berg80]

It's time for trumples to cover their eyes and ears.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Glad they released it, but I doubt it will be anything but Smith lying and obfuscating.

It is nearly impossible to prove a prosecution effort had bad motives.

Better that Trump is giving Dems theircown medicine than trying to corner the warfare hawks into an admission.

 

[berg80]

Glad they released it, but I doubt it will be anything but Smith lying and obfuscating.

Is it your contention he perjured himself? Or just doing the usual, throwing shit on the wall?

 

[yidnar]

That's how the crooked Dems "passed" Obamacare.

the Dems are known for shady tactics when it comes to advancing legislation they are in favor of .. there's no honesty left in the Democratic socialist party of America ...formerly known as the Democratic party ..

 

[gipper]

the Dems are known for shady tactics when it comes to advancing legislation they are in favor of .. there's no honesty left in the Democratic socialist party of America ...formerly known as the Democratic party ..

“They make you hate your neighbor so you never question your master,"

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Glad they released it, but I doubt it will be anything but Smith lying and obfuscating.

As you are programmed to say. Per your programming, you will not watch it, just as you obeyed and did not watch the Jan 6 hearings.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

One of the interesting parts is when he was asked why he didn't first charge lower level coconspirators, in the election fraud case.

Smith told them it was because he didn't need any of the lower level toadies as witnesses, due to the overwhelming quality and quantity of evidence against Trump.

 

[struth]

It's time for trumples to cover their eyes and ears.

One of the interesting parts is when he was asked why he didn't first charge lower level coconspirators, in the election fraud case.

Smith told them it was because he didn't need any of the lower level toadies as witnesses, due to the overwhelming quality and quantity of evidence against Trump.

That doesn’t make sense, since it doesn’t actually answer the question

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That doesn’t make sense, since it doesn’t actually answer the question

It directly answers the question. It answers why he didnt charge them before charging the leader of the criminal conspiracy. Doesn't mean they wouldn't be charged eventually.

 

[struth]

It directly answers the question. It answers why he didnt charge them before charging the leader of the criminal conspiracy. Doesn't mean they wouldn't be charged eventually.

No actually it doesn’t answer it at all

Weather or not they needed as witnesses isn’t relevant to why someone wasn’t charged

 

[Seymour Flops]

Is it your contention he perjured himself? Or just doing the usual, throwing shit on the wall?

Well, if you don't mind, I'll read the transcript before I judge that.

I expressed doubt about what will be in it, I didn't predict what would.

EDIT: After answering questions about whether he had been given access to what he needed to prepare, he started obfuscating on the first somewhat substantial question. Asked if he agreed with something he himself had referenced, he answered "yes, I agree that . . . " and gave a very watered down version of what they had read to him.

Not that I blame him. I don't blame him for going into defensive mode. He's bound to feel in danger testifying under oath to the very people whose rights he violated in his witch hunt.

I blame him for the witch hunt that put him in this position.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, if you don't mind, I'll read the transcript before I judge that.

I expressed doubt about what will be in it, I didn't predict what would.

Hahaha

No you won't.

 

[berg80]

the Dems are known for shady tactics when it comes to advancing legislation they are in favor of

Such as...................................

 

[berg80]

Well, if you don't mind, I'll read the transcript before I judge that.

I expressed doubt about what will be in it, I didn't predict what would.

EDIT: After answering questions about whether he had been given access to what he needed to prepare, he started obfuscating on the first somewhat substantial question. Asked if he agreed with something he himself had referenced, he answered "yes, I agree that . . . " and gave a very watered down version of what they had read to him.

Not that I blame him. I don't blame him for going into defensive mode. He's bound to feel in danger testifying under oath to the very people whose rights he violated in his witch hunt.

I blame him for the witch hunt that put him in this position.

You know other people (like me) can listen to the testimony too, right? So I know what you just wrote is bullshit. He's being very careful, no doubt at the advice of counsel, to be precise in his language so as not to fall in to a perjury trap the R's want badly to happen. Why? So they can continue to try to discredit his investigations and subsequent grand jury indictments. Which is what the charade is all about.

The House Judiciary Committee has already made a criminal referral of one of Mr. Smith’s top deputies, Thomas Windom, to the Justice Department for not fully answering similar questions. Mr. Windom, now Mr. Smith’s law partner, has denied wrongdoing.

Loading…

www.nytimes.com

I especially liked when Smith told the person questioning him that not all of what trump said about the election was protected speech because of the exception for fraud.

As he did repeatedly during the interview, Mr. Smith laid responsibility for the investigation on Mr. Trump and specifically the president’s decision to pressure members of his party to delay or reverse the results of the 2020 election.

“I did not choose those members, President Trump did,” Mr. Smith said.

He accused Trump and allies of “exploiting” the confusion and violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 to further their “criminal scheme.”

According to the transcript, Mr. Smith pushed back hardest when Republicans suggested Mr. Trump’s public statements after the 2020 election were protected under the First Amendment.

“Fraud is not protected by the First Amendment,” he said in the interview.

Mr. Smith bristled when a Republican staff member, whose name was redacted in the transcript, pressed that point, citing a long list of disputed elections “where candidates believed they were wronged” and made allegations of voter fraud.

“There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case,” Mr. Smith responded.

 

[Seymour Flops]

You know other people (like me) can listen to the testimony too, right? So I know what you just wrote is bullshit. He's being very careful, no doubt at the advice of counsel, to be precise in his language so as not to fall in to a perjury trap the R's want badly to happen. Why? So they can continue to try to discredit his investigations and subsequent grand jury indictments. Which is what the charade is all about.

Of course he is following advice of counsel. Other than counsel's advice to not testify at all and simply take the fifth. He's obfuscating and trying hard to not to be pinned down on a substantive answer that would incriminate him and/or be perjury. He's also keeping his eye on the partisan ball, as is every other person in the room.

His counsel is not going to tell him to just "tell the truth and let the chips fall."

 

[berg80]

Other than counsel's advice to not testify at all

You mean the same counsel who wrote a letter to the R controlled committee requesting that Smith be allowed to testify publicly? Shouldn't you have made a resolution not to lie in the new year?

 

[Oddball]

Read: Jack Smith deposition transcript​

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Wednesday released the transcript of the panel’s deposition with former Special Counsel Jack Smith concerning his team’s investigations and prosecutions of President Trump.

Earlier this month, Smith’s attorneys sent a letter to Jordan requesting that his closed-door deposition be made public. In the testimony, Smith defended his decision to bring charges against Trump for attempting to overturn the 2020 election.

Loading…

thehill.com

A tried and true tactic for releasing material you don't want the public to pay attention to is to do so leading in to a weekend or a holiday. Jordan checked that box.

Will it succeed in insuring it slips by unnoticed? Not a chance.

Long and the short of it: Smith claims to be a mind reader.