I think that Jack Smith is an evil person that should be in prison for what he did.
Unfortunately, he will not be prosecuted for what he did to President Trump.
Special Counsel cases (appointed November 2022)
Attorney General Merrick Garland assigned Smith two preexisting investigations. Smith obtained grand-jury indictments in both; neither went to trial. He submitted a final report in January 2025 concluding the evidence met the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, then resigned. Volume 1 (election case) has been discussed publicly; Volume 2 (documents case) remains under a court injunction blocking release. Election-interference case (D.D.C.)
August 2023 indictment charged four felonies: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights. Prosecutors alleged a scheme involving false fraud claims, fake electors, and pressure on Vice President Pence, state officials, and the Justice Department after the 2020 election. The Supreme Court in July 2024 recognized presidential immunity for official acts and remanded the case. Smith filed a superseding indictment that dropped certain official-act allegations. After Trump’s 2024 victory, Smith moved to dismiss, citing longstanding DOJ policy against prosecuting a sitting president. Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the case without prejudice in late 2024. The statute of limitations will expire before 2029. Classified-documents case (S.D. Fla.)
Attorney General Merrick Garland assigned Smith two preexisting investigations. Smith obtained grand-jury indictments in both; neither went to trial. He submitted a final report in January 2025 concluding the evidence met the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, then resigned. Volume 1 (election case) has been discussed publicly; Volume 2 (documents case) remains under a court injunction blocking release. Election-interference case (D.D.C.)
August 2023 indictment charged four felonies: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights. Prosecutors alleged a scheme involving false fraud claims, fake electors, and pressure on Vice President Pence, state officials, and the Justice Department after the 2020 election. The Supreme Court in July 2024 recognized presidential immunity for official acts and remanded the case. Smith filed a superseding indictment that dropped certain official-act allegations. After Trump’s 2024 victory, Smith moved to dismiss, citing longstanding DOJ policy against prosecuting a sitting president. Judge Tanya Chutkan dismissed the case without prejudice in late 2024. The statute of limitations will expire before 2029. Classified-documents case (S.D. Fla.)
June 2023 indictment charged Trump (and later aides Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira) with dozens of counts under the Espionage Act for willful retention of national-defense information, plus conspiracy to obstruct justice and false statements. Prosecutors alleged Trump kept hundreds of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago after leaving office and obstructed efforts by the National Archives and FBI to retrieve them. In July 2024 Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the entire case, ruling Smith’s appointment as Special Counsel violated the Appointments Clause. Smith appealed. After the 2024 election the Justice Department dropped the appeal as to Trump and later as to the co-defendants; the Eleventh Circuit formally ended the remaining case in February 2025. Cannon later issued a permanent injunction blocking public release of Smith’s Volume 2 report, citing fairness and the presumption of innocence after dismissal; that ruling is on appeal.
Context of current scrutiny
Smith has testified that the investigations used standard tools (including toll records of congressional phone calls, not content) and that he would bring the same charges against a president of either party on the same facts. Republican senators have focused on the scope and timing of subpoenas, alleged Speech or Debate Clause issues, and an earlier “Arctic Frost” inquiry into members of Congress. Both cases ended without a jury verdict; legal disputes over the reports and appointment authority continue.
Smith has testified that the investigations used standard tools (including toll records of congressional phone calls, not content) and that he would bring the same charges against a president of either party on the same facts. Republican senators have focused on the scope and timing of subpoenas, alleged Speech or Debate Clause issues, and an earlier “Arctic Frost” inquiry into members of Congress. Both cases ended without a jury verdict; legal disputes over the reports and appointment authority continue.
