Former Special Counsel Jack Smith was in the hot seat in front of Congress on Thursday to defend his politically motivated investigations into President Donald Trump.
Anyone who’s been paying attention to Smith’s investigations knew Republicans were going to grill him like a murder suspect, which is why Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin (MD-8) tried to preempt the impending attacks in his opening statement.
The lawmaker told Smith that “if any of our colleagues foolishly choose to attack you and vilify you today…they will only be revealing their own ignorance of what prosecutors do and their own indifference to what the rule of law requires in America.”
“They will only be stroking the wounded ego of a lawless, twice-impeached, convicted felon President who not only unleashed a mob against Congress and his own vice President, but is now pardoned and released into our communities hundreds of extremists, insurrectionists, and cop-beating felons who have proceeded to commit dozens more crimes against the American people since they were pardoned,” he added.
Dem Rep. Jamie Raskin tries to discredit any criticism of Jack Smith and his investigation before his testimony even begins:
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) January 22, 2026
"If any of our colleagues foolishly choose to attack you and vilify you today...they will only be stroking the wounded ego of a lawless, twice-impeached… pic.twitter.com/ghvd0BA6cw
Smith’s hearing was contentious, with Republicans questioning the political motivation behind his investigations — which were both dropped after Trump won the 2024 presidential election. But Raskin’s contention that Smith does not deserve to be criticized is ludicrous when the facts enter the room.
Smith charged Trump with disputing the outcome of the 2020 election, claiming he defrauded the American people. The problems with this allegation were obvious from the start. A person can express any opinion they wish — including a president. Trump’s speech was clearly protected by the First Amendment.
When Congress asked Smith during a prior hearing whether the president engaged in constitutionally protected speech, Smith said “absolutely not” because his comments were false and aimed at influencing the government.
If this is the case, I suppose CNN and Democratic politicians also deserve to be prosecuted, right?
The timing of Smith’s investigation also reveals the true reason for the charges. Former Attorney General Merrick Garland waited almost two years after the 2020 election to appoint Smith as special counsel to go after Trump. This came just three days after Trump announced he would seek a second term in office. The indictments came during the 2024 campaign season.
I wonder why?
Even further, the former special counsel filed a major motion about new evidence of Trump’s supposed wrongdoing just weeks before the 2024 election, which violated the Justice Department’s rule about taking such action within 60 days of an election.
Smith’s cases crumbled like a sand castle in a tsunami under judicial scrutiny. The Supreme Court rejected Smith’s argument that Trump had no immunity whatsoever. It ruled 6-3 that presidents have immunity for official acts, which forced the former special counsel to remove major charges from his indictment because they involved the president’s communications with the Justice Department.
In another ruling, the Supreme Court decided that Smith had misused the obstruction statute in his case against Trump. The statute only applied to evidence tampering, not to the type of interference Smith accused Trump of.
In the end, Smith was merely an instrument for Democrats who sought to leverage the criminal justice system against Trump to prevent him from returning to the White House and deserves every ounce of scorn directed at him.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member