Bulwark Takes – Jack Smith Testifies, Republicans Insult Our Intelligence

Podcast: Bulwark Takes
Date: January 23, 2026
Host: Will Saletan (The Bulwark)

Overview

In this episode, Will Saletan breaks down the highly charged congressional testimony of Special Counsel Jack Smith, who investigated Donald Trump’s election interference, and exposes how House Republicans used the hearing. Rather than seeking the truth, Saletan argues, Republicans took the opportunity to smear Smith and defend Trump—often constructing arguments that Saletan calls misleading or dishonest. Through audio clips and commentary, Will unpacks six major Republican talking points from the hearing and counterpoints them with fact-based analysis, sarcasm, and frustration.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Republicans Accuse Smith of Spying on Congress

Segment: [01:33–05:00]

• Main Argument: Republican congressmen claim Smith “spied” on Congress by subpoenaing phone records—including those of Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
• Saletan’s Rebuttal:
  • Smith subpoenaed toll records (call logs), not wiretap content.
  • Law enforcement routinely subpoenas records when there’s reason to suspect involvement in a crime, regardless of office.
  • McCarthy was a direct witness to Trump’s inaction during Jan 6 (citing McCarthy’s own account of his call with Trump).
  • Quote: “The whole point of the law is you’re supposed to investigate anyone who’s suspected of violating the law, no matter what office they hold—even if they are the President.” — Will Saletan [04:05]

2. Allegation of Targeting Conservatives

Segment: [05:00–07:11]

• Main Argument: Smith’s subpoenas were political retribution against conservatives, not investigations of criminal wrongdoing.
• Saletan’s Rebuttal:
  • The investigation distinguished between law-abiding conservatives and those who sought to overturn the election (referencing Brad Raffensperger, a pro-Trump Republican, as a witness).
  • Scott Perry’s significant involvement in the Jan 6 scheme justified the investigation into contacts with him.
  • Quote: “There was good reason to be going after Scott Perry’s phone and anybody who was talking to him.” — Will Saletan [05:35]

3. Claim of Election Interference by Jack Smith

Segment: [07:11–09:06]

• Main Argument: Smith broke DOJ precedent by bringing charges during an “active election cycle,” allegedly to harm Trump’s campaign.
• Saletan’s Rebuttal:
  • DOJ policy restricts actions 60 days before an election; Smith acted outside that window.
  • Trump’s early campaign announcement doesn’t create perpetual immunity from investigation.
  • Quote: “So Trump gets to just announce for president and from that point on nobody can investigate him. That’s totally absurd.” — Will Saletan [07:57]

4. Labeling Smith as a Partisan Prosecutor

Segment: [09:06–11:38]

• Main Argument: Republicans claimed Smith only prosecuted Republicans—implying political bias.
• Saletan’s Rebuttal:
  • Smith prosecuted prominent Democrats (John Edwards, Bob Menendez).
  • Republicans deliberately omit party info to shape their narrative.
  • Notably, Rep. Jeff Van Drew (NJ) claimed “not one Democrat” ever prosecuted, contradicting prior testimony.
  • Quote: “Jack Smith prosecuted Democrats, not just Republicans—but Tiffany doesn’t want to make a big deal about that because that undermines the whole spin.” — Will Saletan [09:21]
  • Memorable Moment: Saletan highlights the cynicism of Van Drew, who is from the same state as Menendez, pretending not to know about the prosecution [10:06].

5. Why Only Charge Trump?

Segment: [11:38–13:34]

• Main Argument: Republicans argue Smith’s focus on Trump reveals partisan motives.
• Saletan’s Rebuttal:
  • Smith stated: “At the time of the conclusion of our work…we did have proof to charge other people. I was in the process of making that determination when our work was concluded.” [12:02]
  • Investigation ended due to Trump’s re-election and DOJ policy, not lack of charges against others.
  • Quote: “He said we did have the proof to charge other people, and I was in the process of making that determination when our work was so rudely interrupted.” — Will Saletan [12:09]

6. Cutting Off Smith’s Answers

Segment: [13:34–15:28]

• Main Argument: Republicans repeatedly interrupted Smith, preventing substantive answers.
• Example:
  • Rep. Glenn Grothman asks if Trump believed he lost the election. Smith begins a nuanced response, Grothman cuts him off, “No way. That’s enough.” [13:46]
• Saletan’s Rebuttal:
  • Smith would have explained Trump was repeatedly told he lost but chose to ignore it, instead listening to those who claimed the opposite, regardless of evidence—constituting dishonesty.
  • Quote: “Smith has a really interesting answer to that question, if they would let him finish it.” — Will Saletan [13:48]

7. Claim That the 2024 Election Exonerates Trump

Segment: [15:28–20:09]

• Main Argument: Rep. Troy Nehls claims, “The American people saw right through it. They rejected, sir, your witch hunt loud and clear in November, handing President Trump a commanding victory…Now, sir, that is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the crap you were shoveling did not pass the smell test with the American people.” [15:28–16:24]
• Saletan’s Rebuttal:
  • Voter decisions and propaganda are not substitutes for a jury’s fact-finding.
  • Elections and jury trials function differently; propaganda influences voters, not juries.
  • Republicans have constructed a perpetual shield around Trump: immunity as president, can’t be impeached as private citizen, can’t be investigated while running, and if he wins, all proceedings must stop.
  • Quote: “This hearing doesn’t prove that Donald Trump was exonerated. What it proves is that Donald Trump’s buddies in Congress are still in power and they’re still helping him cover it all up.” — Will Saletan [19:55]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “The whole point of the law is you’re supposed to investigate anyone who’s suspected of violating the law, no matter what office they hold—even if they are the President.” – Will Saletan [04:05]
• “There was good reason to be going after Scott Perry’s phone and anybody who was talking to him.” – Will Saletan [05:35]
• “So Trump gets to just announce for president and from that point on nobody can investigate him. That’s totally absurd.” – Will Saletan [07:57]
• “Jack Smith prosecuted Democrats, not just Republicans—but Tiffany doesn’t want to make a big deal about that because that undermines the whole spin.” – Will Saletan [09:21]
• “No way. That’s enough.” – Rep. Glenn Grothman, cutting Smith off [13:46]
• “This hearing doesn’t prove that Donald Trump was exonerated. What it proves is that Donald Trump’s buddies in Congress are still in power and they’re still helping him cover it all up.” – Will Saletan [19:55]

Key Timestamps

• [01:33–05:00] — Republicans accuse Smith of “spying” on Congress—Saletan explains and rebuts.
• [05:00–07:11] — “Targeting conservatives” claim debunked.
• [07:11–09:06] — “Election interference” accusation and DOJ policy clarified.
• [09:06–11:38] — Republicans’ shifting narrative on Smith’s alleged partisanship.
• [11:38–13:34] — Discussion on why only Trump was charged; Smith’s explanation.
• [13:34–15:28] — Example of Smith being cut off; deeper look at the evidence of Trump’s intent.
• [15:28–20:09] — The myth that Trump’s election victory means exoneration; analysis of GOP’s defense mechanisms.

Tone & Style

Will Saletan’s delivery oscillates between exasperation, humor, and sharp logic. He doesn’t shy from labeling Republican arguments as “BS” or outright dishonest, providing listeners with a mix of direct refutation, sarcasm, and in-the-moment fact-checking. The tone is urgent yet accessible, intended for listeners who value critical breakdowns of political spin.

Summary Prepared For: Listeners seeking a thorough and clear guide to the real substance—and spin—of Jack Smith’s congressional hearing, and insightful commentary on its implications for law, accountability, and democracy.