By Sarah K. Burris / AlterNet / January 22, 2026
Former special counsel Jack Smith spoke to the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday where he clarified some details that Republicans have tried to use as talking points against him.
Legal, analyst, reporters and commentators took to social media to attack the questioning of Smith.
“Republicans on House Judiciary don’t want answers from Jack Smith. They keep on interrupting him as he responds to their questions,” said legal analyst Katie Phang.
“Jack Smith reminds us that the cases against Trump were dismissed ‘without prejudice.’ Meaning they could be brought again,” legal analyst and podcast host Allison Gill, of @MuellerSheWrote pointed out.
National security analyst Marcy Wheeler cited Rep. “Hank Johnson still has it: While we’re deposing Marshall Miller (the guy who got Jack Smith hired) perhaps we can depose Donald Trump why he hired his personal lawyer to run DOJ.”
At one point, she noted, “So far Jack Smith is getting his a– handed to him by the 5-minute rule and Dem ineffectiveness.”
MS NOW producer Kyle Griffin pointed out a key quote from Smith:
“Donald Trump was not looking for honest answers about whether there was fraud in the election. He was looking for ways to stay in power. And when people told him things that conflicted with him staying in power, he rejected them.”
Reporter Adam Cochran wrote:
“Rep Lofgren points out: * Most of Jack Smith’s case is built on the testimony of *REPUBLICANS* * As well as many of the Presidents closest allies in sworn testimony * Including @LindseyGrahamSC who said he told the President he lost, and that Trump would have blamed ‘martians’ for stealing the election.”
Sociologist and educator Dr. DaShanne Stokes posted, “What we already knew, and what Jack Smith confirms, is that Trump is guilty of sedition, treason, incitement of violence, incitement of insurrection, an attempted coup, obstruction of justice, fraud, and election tampering. Trump remains ineligible to hold office and should be imprisoned.”
Wheeler cited a comment from Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calf.) who claimed that multiple Republicans frequently trash Trump to Democrats behind closed doors. In one case, Swalwell said, “Matt Gaetz used to make fun of Trump on the Hill. [Swalwell] can’t impugn his still-colleagues. But he can say stuff about disgraced former House member Gaetz.”
New York Times reporter Glenn Thrush commented on Judiciary chairman, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who attacked Smith saying that the DOJ changed its policies about obtaining phone toll records about members of Congress.
“Context,” wrote Thrush on X, “The Trump administration essentially scuttled the public integrity section — getting rid of all but 2-3 of its 35 prosecutors.”
“Jim Jordan clearly doesn’t realize that Jack Smith is smarter, more honorable, and in better shape than he can ever even imagine being,” remarked film and TV producer Franklin Leonard.
The American people need to hear this, over and over: Trump would be in prison if we had a fair judicial system.
I watched the entire testimony. This wasn’t the result of an “unfair judicial system.” The court dismissed the case, without prejudice, because of a DOJ “memo” that establishes that a sitting president cannot be tried, and that “memo” has never been legally challenged. With all due respect Frank the judicial system held; “without prejudice” means the case can be re-opened.
Have to disagree; if we had a just judicial system, Trump would have been tried and convicted and then jailed like the dictator in Brazil.
It’s not indicative of a “system wide judicial system” failure is my only point. The timing of the charges filed in the case brought against Trump coincided with an election victory. At the time of the case dismissal a “president elect” could not be charged, not by a constitutional law; but because there is a Department of Justice “memo” that states a sitting president cannot be prosecuted. This DOJ memo has never been legally challenged.
January 6th was an extraordinarily critical moment that would have provided grounds to challenge that “memo” legally; but I guess we want to keep that “memo” in tact in case the next Democrat President needs to skulk behind it. This is “our” problem, personal enrichment has trounced the public good, tenfold.
In a just world, go to prison, but not in the “United States of I’m Getting Mine”.
Conveniently the Biden administration failed to prioritize closing any loopholes to prevent further abuses of power. Maybe the Democratic party was planning on “getting to that” after the 2024 election because they were so convinced they would win so handily. But once again this shows a failure of policy by corrupted decision makers, and is not a system or an constitutional failure. That should be something we all take heart in.