Trump’s Investigator Breaks His Silence

Summary

The Daily (New York Times)

Episode: Trump’s Investigator Breaks His Silence
Date: January 23, 2026
Hosts: Michael Barbaro
Guest: Glenn Thrush (Reporter), Testimony from Special Counsel Jack Smith

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on Jack Smith, the special counsel who led two major criminal investigations into Donald Trump. For the first time, Smith breaks his silence by publicly testifying before Congress, three years after his appointment and after being unable to prosecute his cases due to DOJ policy and Trump’s return to the presidency. The episode explores what Smith told Congress, the political stakes, the dynamics of the hearing, and the implications for the rule of law in the Trump era.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Context: Jack Smith’s Role and the Stakes

• Jack Smith’s Appointment (02:00-03:51)

  • Appointed in late 2022 by Attorney General Merrick Garland due to a conflict of interest.
  • Investigated two major cases: Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election (Jan. 6) and mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
  • Smith obtained grand jury indictments, but cases were paused due to Trump’s reelection and DOJ policy prohibiting prosecution of a sitting president.

• Smith’s Vanishing Act (04:50-05:16)

  • After Trump’s inauguration, Smith retreated from public life, anticipating political retribution.

2. The Political Reason for Smith’s Testimony

• Trump’s Continued Targeting (05:32-06:28)

  • Trump pressed for Smith to testify publicly, not behind closed doors, believing it would be an opportunity to discredit and possibly prosecute him.
  • Many Republicans were reluctant, fearing it would backfire or amplify Trump’s grievances.

• The High-Stakes Atmosphere (07:16-08:25)

  • Both Republicans and Democrats saw the hearing as a proxy battle: Republicans tried to discredit Smith; Democrats aimed to showcase the case against Trump and defend Smith’s integrity.

3. Inside the Hearing Room

• Smith’s Demeanor (08:32-09:20)

  • Triathlete, stoic, visibly energized by support from Capitol Police officers present.

• Opening Statement Highlights (09:41-10:29)

  • Smith: “I am not a politician and I have no partisan loyalties. My career has been dedicated to serving our country by upholding the rule of law.” (10:00)
  • Affirms he stands by the decision to bring charges against Trump.

Smith’s Core Argument:

“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity.” (Jack Smith, 10:32)

• Emphasized duty to uphold the law and rejected the idea that anyone—including a president—is above it.

4. Republicans' Line of Attack

• Challenging Smith’s Legitimacy (12:42-14:22)

  • Questioned the legality of Smith’s dual oath-taking and challenged the legitimacy of his appointment.
  • Example: Rep. Lance Gooden pressed Smith: “Why'd you need to do it twice?” (13:28)

• Scrutiny Over Investigation Tactics (14:31-18:18)

  • Focused on payments to FBI informants and, especially, Smith’s subpoenas for lawmakers’ phone toll records, including Speaker McCarthy and Rep. Chip Roy.
  • Implied Smith “spied” on Congress and suggested lack of transparency with judges.

“Did you target my records and subpoena my phone toll records?” (Rep. Chip Roy, 17:37)
Smith replied: “My understanding is your records were subpoenaed by prosecutors before I became special counsel.” (17:43)

• Republicans’ Main Argument:
  • Tried to frame Smith's investigation as partisan and overreaching, but lacked concrete evidence of collusion with the Biden administration.

5. Smith’s Responses and Discipline

• Unfazed Under Pressure (19:19)
  • When asked about regrets, Smith replied, “If I have any regret, it would be not expressing enough appreciation for my staff who work so hard in these investigations.” (Jack Smith, 19:23)
  • Refused to concede any missteps in his investigation.

6. Democrats’ Strategy: Elevating Smith and Refocusing on Trump

• Portraying Smith as a Hero (21:45-22:23)

  • Democrats framed Smith as a principled, patriotic defender of democracy.
  • Rep. Raskin: “Your willingness to speak directly... is professional, courageous, and it's patriotic.” (21:57)

• Clarifying Legal Process (22:34-24:27)

  • Demystified standard prosecutorial tools like toll record subpoenas and justified their necessity.
  • Rep. Ted Lieu: “You never, in an investigation, go and try to get someone's toll records or phone records and then tell them, hey, dude, we're about to get your phone records. Of course you wouldn't tell them.” (24:17)

• Reiterating Trump’s Alleged Crimes (25:13-26:11)

  • Rep. Pramila Jayapal walked through Smith’s indictment, confirming each step:
    • “Did your investigation find that Donald Trump attempted to manufacture fraudulent slates of presidential electors?” (25:26)
    • Smith: “Yes.” (25:38)
    • Jayapal: “Did he pressure state officials to ignore true vote counts…?” Smith: “Yes.”
    • Jayapal: “Did he spread lies and conspiracies…?” Smith: “Yes.”
    • Jayapal: “Did he pressure DOJ officials to stop the certification…?” Smith: “He did.”

• The Big Question for Democracy (26:11-26:52)

  • Jayapal: “How would you describe the toll on our democracy if we do not hold a president accountable for attempting to steal an election?” (26:11)
  • Smith:

    “If we do not hold the most powerful people in our society to the same standards of the rule of law, it can be catastrophic… It can endanger our election process… and ultimately our democracy.” (26:23)

7. Dramatic Trump Intervention During Hearing

• Trump’s Social Media Outburst (27:22-28:15)
  • During the hearing, Trump issued real-time social media posts ordering Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute Smith.
  • Smith’s reaction: “I will not be intimidated. I think these statements are also made as a warning to others what will happen if they stand up.” (28:33)
  • Smith maintained, “We followed the facts and we followed the law... I'm not going to pretend that didn't happen because he's threatening me.” (28:49)
  • When asked if he expected prosecution, Smith said: “I believe they will do everything in their power to do that because they've been ordered to by the President.” (29:15)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Jack Smith, Principle of the Rule of Law:

  “No one, no one should be above the law in this country. And the law required that [Trump] be held to account.” (10:51)

• Rep. Chip Roy’s pointed questioning:

  “Did you target my records and subpoena my phone toll records?” (17:37)

• Smith on Facing Political Retribution:

  “I will not be intimidated. I think these statements are also made as a warning to others what will happen if they stand up.” (28:33)

• Michael Barbaro on episode’s irony:

  “[Republicans suggest] Jack Smith was this out of control prosecutor… But suggesting that by Republicans is a little hard to accept… given that President Trump… is totally redefining the relationship between the President and the Department of Justice and very explicitly targeting people for prosecution…” (30:37)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment Description | |------------|------------------------------------------------------------------| | 01:31 | Glenn Thrush reports live from the Capitol after hearing | | 09:41 | Jack Smith’s opening statement and apolitical positioning | | 10:32 | Smith asserts evidence of Trump’s criminal conduct | | 14:31 | Republicans question Smith about toll records and FBI informants | | 17:37 | Rep. Chip Roy’s personal question on being targeted | | 19:23 | Smith’s only “regret” is appreciation for his staff | | 22:34 | Democrats guide Smith to clarify and defend investigation | | 25:26 | Rep. Jayapal’s point-by-point confirmation of Trump actions | | 26:23 | Smith on consequences for democracy if president isn’t held accountable | | 27:36 | Trump’s live “Truth Socialing” arises in the hearing | | 28:33 | Smith’s refusal to be intimidated by Trump’s threats | | 29:15 | Smith expects prosecution under current DOJ | | 30:06 | Barbaro/Thrush reflect on hearing’s implications |

---

Episode Conclusion

• The hearing provided Jack Smith with the public platform he never had in court—delivering both his legal argument and a warning about threats to rule of law.
• Republicans failed to produce evidence of Smith’s partisanship or wrongdoing, despite aggressive questioning.
• Democrats highlighted the factual basis of the Trump investigations and the importance of accountability.
• The episode underscored the irony and danger of Trump’s current efforts to use the Justice Department as a tool of vengeance, while denying those motives in Smith’s own tenure.
• Smith’s testimony—and continued resolve—may foreshadow ongoing political and legal battles over the boundaries of presidential power and the justice system.

---

Summary prepared to provide a comprehensive, engaging recap for listeners who missed the episode or seek a detailed understanding of this pivotal Congressional hearing.

Transcript

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

This podcast is supported by the Capital One Venture X Card. Venture X offers the premium benefits you expect, like a $300 annual capital one travel credit for less than you expect. Elevate your earn with unlimited double miles on every purchase, bringing you one step closer to your next dream destination. Plus, enjoy access to over 1,000 airport lounges worldwide. The Capital One Venture X Card what's in your wallet? Terms apply. Lounge access is subject to change. See capitalone.com for details.

[Michael Barbaro]

From the New York Times, I'm Michael Balbaro. This is the Daily. On Thursday, three years after his appointment as special counsel, Jack Smith finally delivered the legal argument against President Trump that he was never allowed to make in court today. What Smith told Congress and why his message is likely to make him Trump's next target for prosecution. It's Friday, january 23rd. Glenn, can you just describe exactly where you are? It's somewhere in the Capitol complex.

[Glenn Thrush]

Yes. I am in the Byzantine maze of the United States Capitol, and I've just come out of the hearing room where Jack Smith spent approximately four, four and a half hours being grilled by the House Judiciary Committee.

[Michael Barbaro]

Thank you for sticking around after the hearing to talk to us. We appreciate it. I want to begin with the context for this hearing, the backstory behind why we're finally hearing from Jack Smith, a special counsel who ended up overseeing these two sprawling criminal investigations into President Trump in between his first and second term. And it just seems worth saying this is a prosecutor on whose shoulders in a lot of ways, rested the very question of whether Trump could ever be president again or might he have ended up in prison. I mean, he's just so central to the entire story of the Trump era in a lot of ways.

[Glenn Thrush]

Look, for about a year late 2022 to late 2023, Jack Smith was arguably one of the most important figures in the country. And his road to this committee room was a pretty torturous path in late 2022. Just to refresh people's memories, Merrick Garland, then the ATT is really in a corner. He can't personally investigate all the allegations against Donald Trump because he was appointed by Trump's political adversary, Joe Biden.

[Michael Barbaro]

Right. Like a classic conflict of interest.

[Glenn Thrush]

Right? So he appoints Jack Smith, who at this point was serving as a war crimes prosecutor in the Hague, to take over the two investigations into Donald Trump, one of which is a little bit more amorphous but probably more consequential. Whether or not Donald Trump sicced the Mob on the U.S. capitol on January 6, 2021, and attempted to obstruct the election of Joe Biden as president. The other one was more simple. So simple, in fact, it's defined by one image, this picture of boxes in Donald Trump's bathroom at Mar A Lago of classified material.

[Michael Barbaro]

Right? One is basically, did he conspire to overturn an election? And the other is, did he conspire to hide classified documents that he allegedly knew the government wanted back?

[Glenn Thrush]

One big, one small in terms of the issues. But had he been convicted, the consequences were the same. Donald Trump would not have been allowed to serve as President of the United States. So Jack Smith throws himself into these two cases. A lot of the evidence had already been collected before he ever walked in the door. But he was known as a hard driving prosecutor, more like a manager. Think of him as like a baseball manager who has a very aggressive managing style. He kind of takes the players that he inherited, but he moves them forward propulsively because there is a sense that he's got to move fast before the political season catches up to him. Long story short, he doesn't really make it. He successfully gets two grand jury indictments, but then the investigations timetable slams into the timetable of the 2024 election, right? Donald Trump gets elected, and then Smith has to drop both cases because of the DOJ policy against prosecuting a sitting president because it would interfere with the president's capacity to govern. So Donald Trump gets sworn in as president, and Jack Smith disappears just about as quickly as he popped onto the scene. He keeps a low profile. He knows he's a target of Trump and Trump supporters. He doesn't even do anything in terms of his career. He just kind of stays at home, keeps his head down, tries to avoid the spotlight, doesn't want to give Trump or anybody in Congress any justification for going after him, and essentially vanishes.

[Michael Barbaro]

I think a few of us imagined that he would pretty much remain disappeared under a Republican controlled government because they would rather the entire chapter he represented just be buried in the history books.

[Glenn Thrush]

Yeah, you'd think so, right? But Donald Trump can't let this go. Jack Smith is the person who represents what Donald Trump thinks is this big, grand persecution against him. It's the whole rationale and the energy behind his reelection campaign and his drive for vengeance against his enemies. So Trump keeps picking at it, picking at it, going on truth, social, accusing Jack Smith of being deranged. This is one of the real burning issues for him. And let me tell you, there are a lot of Republicans on Capitol Hill who never want to talk about this again and think that this is a big mistake as they head into the midterms and frankly think that it's a self destructive impulse on the part of President Trump's. But he insisted on it. And ultimately that is why Jack Smith testified in public today.

[Michael Barbaro]

And when you say Trump insisted on it, you mean Trump wanted Smith to be brought before Congress.

[Glenn Thrush]

Yes, Republicans, I think, would have been satisfied with Jack Smith testifying behind closed doors. But Donald Trump made a point of saying that he wanted Jack Smith, his enemy, to testify in public because Trump presumed that this would be a great opportunity to attack him. And perhaps Smith would make a mistake in the course of this testimony that would warrant what Trump wanted most of all, which is a criminal prosecution of Jack Smith.

[Michael Barbaro]

But as risky as this testimony no doubt must have seemed for Jack Smith as he prepared for it, perhaps he also saw it as an opportunity to finally make the case that he and his team spent so much time building but were never given a chance to ever lay out.

[Glenn Thrush]

Yeah, I mean, what he really wanted to do was to stand in a courtroom and make this case to a jury. This isn't quite the same thing, but it gave him an opportunity to make a lot of the points that he would have made in court. Smith wasn't the only one incurring risk here. House Republicans were very concerned about giving him a public forum to make the case against Trump because Smith is the best informed, the most disciplined and most credible accuser Trump has really ever faced. So everybody involved kind of viewed this as a trial. The Republicans wanted to make the case against Smith, to impugn his motives, to sort of color some of these public disclosures in such a way that it made Smith look like he was in cahoots with the Biden administration to destroy Trump, even though they didn't really have evidence to prove that. But for Democrats, it was another opportunity to put Trump back on trial and actually to identify Republicans on the committee as kind of unindicted co conspirators who enabled Donald Trump to get away with this. And we're now, in the view of Democrats, unconscionably defending him by attacking Jack Smith.

[Michael Barbaro]

Well, Glenn, with all that in mind, take us into the actual hearing room on Thursday morning.

[Glenn Thrush]

So you have this scene which you've seen a million times on tv. Packed committee room, lots of cameras around, people waiting for Smith to show up, and he kind of walks in. And let me just point out, he strikes a different figure than most politicians or even prosecutors. He is a triathlete. He's dressed in this slim cut blue suit. He has this almost Old Testament face with a salt and pepper beard. And his general vibe is kind of stony and unapproachable. So he stands around awkwardly for a couple of minutes until he turns around and notices these four Capitol Police officers in the front row who were attacked on January 6. And suddenly he smiles, makes eye contact with them. And that seemed to fortify him, right?

[Michael Barbaro]

Because it felt like those former Capitol Police officers were there to perhaps support him.

[Glenn Thrush]

Exactly. So he sits down at the witness table.

[Michael Barbaro]

We welcome our witness today. We'll begin by swearing you in. Would you please rise and raise your right hand?

[Glenn Thrush]

Then he gets sworn in. And a few minutes later, he begins to deliver his opening statement.

[Jack Smith]

Chairman Jordan, Ranking Member Raskin, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss my work as special counsel. For nearly three decades, I've served as a career prosecutor in both Republican and Democratic administrations.

[Glenn Thrush]

He starts off by going through his resume.

[Jack Smith]

I am not a politician and I have no partisan loyalties. My career has been dedicated to serving our country by upholding the rule of law.

[Glenn Thrush]

He emphasizes that everything he has ever done in his career has been apolitical and not motivated by any partisan animosity.

[Jack Smith]

As I testify before the committee today, I want to be clear. I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump.

[Glenn Thrush]

And then he gets to the heart of his argument.

[Jack Smith]

Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity.

[Glenn Thrush]

One, that Donald Trump, according to the evidence that he collected, was guilty in both cases, definitively in his view. And then he makes the larger point about rule of law.

[Jack Smith]

If asked whether to prosecute a former president based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that president was a Democrat or a Republican. No one, no one should be above the law in this country. And the law required that he be held to account. So that is what I did. To have done otherwise on the facts of these cases would have been to shirk my duties as a prosecutor and as a public servant, of which I had no intention of doing that.

[Glenn Thrush]

Holding Trump accountable, which obviously he was not able to do, was fundamental for ensuring that people in power played by the same rules that all other Americans played by.

[Michael Barbaro]

Right. He seems to be doing a number of things here simultaneously. He's very clearly saying the case that we built is sound and in his mind would have led to a conviction. And he's linking this case that never got to be, that never was to this bigger question. Of whether in the Trump era, the rule of law is going to survive 100%.

[Glenn Thrush]

He's defending the evidence that he collected and his process for collecting that evidence. But he's also defending his decision to prosecute. He's defending the principle upon which the Trump prosecutions were based, that no one is above the law, and that letting Trump off the hook would embolden Trump to violate the law if he ever regained power.

[Michael Barbaro]

Right. And then after Smith is done, comes the questioning from members of this Oversight Committee. And I wonder, Glenn, if we can start with the Republicans, who are, of course, running this entire thing.

[Glenn Thrush]

So, Michael, the predicate here is that the Republicans can't prove their one big point, which is that Jack Smith knowingly colluded with the Biden administration to destroy Donald Trump. They don't have any evidence of that. So in the absence of that kind of information, they're going after smaller elements of Smith's investigation. And a good example of that is Lance Goodman.

[Michael Barbaro]

The gentleman from Texas is recognized for five minutes.

[Glenn Thrush]

This Republican from Texas asked about this document that Smith signed, attesting that he was sworn in.

[Michael Barbaro]

You signed it on 20th November, 2022, but there was no witness, which, I mean, you have to agree, it's a little odd.

[Glenn Thrush]

Months later, Smith had another swearing in. So Gooden asked Smith why he was sworn in twice.

[Michael Barbaro]

So why did you take the oath of Office again on the 14th of September of the following year? When you say you took the office in November of 2022, why'd you need to do it twice?

[Jack Smith]

My recollection is that I took the oath of office, as you said it was the 18th or the 20th, and felt I was under the oath of office. I believe if you have it in front of you, I think I signed an oath.

[Michael Barbaro]

You signed it, but there was no witness. There was supposed to be either notarized or a witness. And apparently Attorney General Garland thought it was significant enough to have you do another oath 11 months later. This strange, right?

[Jack Smith]

I don't know why they asked me to sign it again. I don't recall ever discussing this issue with Attorney General Garland.

[Michael Barbaro]

Well, that is just wild to me.

[Glenn Thrush]

So they weren't only trying to undermine the legitimacy of his actions, but they were actually attempting to undermine the legal legitimacy of his appointment.

[Michael Barbaro]

How much money did you spend in the investigating President Trump?

[Glenn Thrush]

Another line of questioning revolved around a recent revelation that the FBI paid informants to examine some of the people in the crowd on January 6th.

[Michael Barbaro]

We know you gave 20,000 to someone. It Just got reported last week. How much more money did you pay confidential people, people we don't know about, with American tax money, going after the.

[Glenn Thrush]

Guy we elected president with the suggestion, of course, that Smith had to pay off people to collect dirt on his investigative targets.

[Jack Smith]

My recollection regards the $20,000, which was not a payment from me. It was me approving a payment by the FBI to a confidential human source who was reviewing video and photographic source. I do not know the identity of the source.

[Michael Barbaro]

How many other payments went to this source or other sources?

[Glenn Thrush]

The most substantial issue the Republicans raised and the one they spent the most time on at the hearing was this matter of the toll records. The metadata that Jack Smith and his team obtained on phone conversations between Trump, Trump's team, Rudy Giuliani, and nine lawmakers on Capitol Hill that Trump was pressuring to overturn the 2020 election.

[Michael Barbaro]

And Glenn, what makes Smith's efforts to get that data so controversial for these Republicans? And perhaps here you do need to do just a little bit of explaining about what exactly Smith did, how he did it.

[Glenn Thrush]

So toll records are not wiretaps of phone calls, as some Republicans have claimed. What they are are just simple records of calls. The duration the two phone numbers involved, the time that they took place. Smith's team wanted this information so that they could establish a timeline of efforts to pressure lawmakers into overturning the 20. But they also did something else. Smith's team asked a federal judge in Washington not to disclose to the targets that he was obtaining this information. Now, there are a bunch of investigative reasons for doing that, according to former prosecutors. But Republicans seized on this to make the point that Smith's team were doing something shady, underhanded, and that they had already concluded that they were going after President Trump.

[Michael Barbaro]

Mr. Smith, in January of 2023, did you subpoena then speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy's toll records?

[Jack Smith]

Yes, sir, we did.

[Glenn Thrush]

Two Republicans from Texas really drove this point home. One of them, Brandon Gill, really put Smith on the hot seat.

[Michael Barbaro]

How many days after Kevin McCarthy was sworn in as speaker, did you subpoena his records?

[Jack Smith]

I don't recall. But those two things had nothing to.

[Michael Barbaro]

Do with, what, 16 days after becoming the highest ranking Republican in the House of Representatives, you subpoenaed his toll records.

[Glenn Thrush]

But an even more extraordinary moment came when Chip Roy, his colleague, asked Smith why Smith's team had obtained his own phone records.

[Michael Barbaro]

Did you target my records and subpoena my phone toll records?

[Jack Smith]

My understanding is your records were subpoenaed by prosecutors Before I became special counsel.

[Michael Barbaro]

I'm thankful for the great staff who discovered the email where I learned for the first time a few weeks ago that my phone records were indeed targeted. We called AT&T and we've learned that they were given to the Department of Justice. As this email indicates, this happened four years ago in May of 2022. And I couldn't object because I didn't know. I didn't know until about three weeks ago. Basically, they're asking, did Smith and his staff spy on Republican members of Congress?

[Glenn Thrush]

Right. This really felt like the one moment where Republicans really had Smith on the defensive.

[Michael Barbaro]

You also sought orders from judges making it so those who were having their records seized would not know about it. And you even didn't tell those judges that it was members of Congress whose records you were going after. If you sought to do that today, would you be able to get away with that? When we.

[Jack Smith]

Secured these 20 record subpoenas, it was done consistent with department policy. You're correct in that that policy has since changed.

[Michael Barbaro]

They changed the policy based upon the actions that you took. Glenn, as best you can tell, did this Republican strategy work?

[Glenn Thrush]

I'll tell you this. Smith's discipline, and that's kind of the hallmark of his management style, really paid off for him. There was this moment where Kevin Kiely, a Republican from California, asks Smith, do.

[Michael Barbaro]

You believe that you made any mistakes? Do you have any regrets as to how you conducted this investigation?

[Glenn Thrush]

Can you tell me any kind of mistake that you made? Is there anything that you regret?

[Jack Smith]

If I have any regret, it would be not expressing enough appreciation for my staff who work so hard in these investigations.

[Glenn Thrush]

Smith wasn't going for that. All he responded with was that he hadn't thanked his staff sufficiently. He seemed determined not to give Republicans an inch. But when Democrats questioned him, he was a good deal more expansive.

[Michael Barbaro]

We'll be right back.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

This podcast is supported by the Capital One venture X card. VentureX offers the premium benefits you expect, like a $300 annual capital one travel credit for less than you expect. Elevate your earn with unlimited double miles on every purchase, bringing you one step closer to your next dream destination. Plus, enjoy access to over 1,000 airport lounges worldwide. The Capital One Venture X Card. What's in your wallet? Terms apply. Lounge access is subject to change. See capitalone.com for details.

[Michael Barbaro]

This podcast is supported by the American Petroleum Institute. Energy is all around today. America's natural gas and oil keeps the country moving, growing, and building and makes every day a little easier. But energy demand is growing. And the infrastructure built today will help secure a more affordable, reliable future with enough energy to go around. When America builds, America wins. I'm David Marchese.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

And I'm Lulu Garcia Navarro.

[Jack Smith]

And we're the hosts of the Interview.

[Michael Barbaro]

From the New York Times.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

David and I have spent our careers interviewing some of the most interesting and.

[Michael Barbaro]

Influential people in the world, which means we know when to ask tough questions and when to just sit back and listen.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

And now we've teamed up to have.

[Jack Smith]

These conversations every week.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

We'll try to reveal something about the people shaping our world.

[Michael Barbaro]

And we'll get some great stories from them, too.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

It's the Interview from the New York Times. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

[Michael Barbaro]

Glenn, talk us through how the Democrats approach Smith with their questions.

[Glenn Thrush]

The Democrats basically wanted to paint Smith as a hero.

[Michael Barbaro]

I want to thank you for your service.

[Jack Smith]

I think you're a great American as.

[Glenn Thrush]

Somebody who risked Donald Trump's ire.

[Michael Barbaro]

Your willingness to speak directly to us and to the American people about your investigation is professional, is courageous, and it's patriotic.

[Glenn Thrush]

Somebody who is willing to stand up to Donald Trump and hold him accountable.

[Jack Smith]

Please know that I and my colleagues on the Democratic side and even my Republican colleagues when they speak privately, have nothing but respect and appreciation for what you tried to do and how you did it. You, unlike many here, are a man.

[Glenn Thrush]

Of honor and they were also eager to protect him and to clean up any doubts people might have about his activities.

[Jack Smith]

Let's go to the toll record since that's been raised, Mr. Smith, and that.

[Glenn Thrush]

Was why they dove right into this question of the toll records that the Republicans brought up.

[Michael Barbaro]

Right, those phone records.

[Glenn Thrush]

Jamie Raskin, who is the top Democrat on the committee, jumped in to give Smith the chance to explain himself.

[Michael Barbaro]

It's perfectly lawful what you did explain.

[Jack Smith]

Why did you want those toll records, the conspiracy that we were investigating, it was relevant to get toll records to understand the scope of that conspiracy. Who they were seeking to coerce, who they were seeking to influence, who was seeking to help them to make the.

[Glenn Thrush]

Point that all of this was just.

[Jack Smith]

Standard investigative practice in conducting a criminal investigation. Securing non content toll records, as you described, is a common practice in almost any complex.

[Michael Barbaro]

Okay, let's go to something. Right. And as I recall it, Congressman Ted Lieu, another Democrat, basically does the same thing. Gives Smith a chance to explain why it is he would subpoena the phone records of sitting members of Congress. I just want to say a little.

[Jack Smith]

Bit about what the Republic brought up.

[Michael Barbaro]

About these phone toll records. Do you Believe the Speaker of the House is above the law?

[Jack Smith]

No, I don't believe anybody should be above the law.

[Michael Barbaro]

And members of Congress are not above the law, right? No.

[Jack Smith]

Yeah, that's right, because we're not. And what Republicans are trying to argue.

[Michael Barbaro]

Is somehow, if you're doing an investigation, you can't do stuff to senators or members of Congress.

[Jack Smith]

Get out of here.

[Michael Barbaro]

We're just.

[Glenn Thrush]

Lou, at this moment, makes the basic point that you don't share all these details about investigations because you need secrecy to do your job.

[Michael Barbaro]

This is so stupid.

[Glenn Thrush]

I'm a former prosecutor.

[Michael Barbaro]

You never, in an investigation, go and try to get someone's toll records or phone records and then tell them, hey, dude, we're about to get your phone records. Of course you wouldn't tell them.

[Glenn Thrush]

They wanted to give Smith the chance to rebut all of these Republican accusations, which have been out in the ether for weeks, that somehow all of this stuff was sinister. This was the basic strategy of Democrats to kind of walk Smith through, point by point, the conduct of his investigation, to kind of demystify it and to give him an opportunity, which he really hasn't had before, to explain why he.

[Michael Barbaro]

Did what he did.

[Glenn Thrush]

And their other objective was to move the spotlight off of Smith and back onto Donald Trump.

[Michael Barbaro]

My Republican colleagues keep trying to rewrite history. They claim that somehow Trump's words and actions did not legally rise to the level of criminal activity, that he did not directly cause violence at the Capitol. And so I want to set that record straight with you right now.

[Glenn Thrush]

And the Democrat who really drove this home was Congresswoman Jaya Paul from Washington, who essentially asked Smith to go over his indictment of the president point by point by point by point.

[Michael Barbaro]

Did your investigation find that Donald Trump attempted to manufacture fraudulent slates of presidential electors in seven states that he lost?

[Jack Smith]

Yes.

[Michael Barbaro]

Did he pressure state officials to ignore true vote counts in those states?

[Jack Smith]

Yes.

[Michael Barbaro]

Did he spread lies and conspiracies to his followers to make them believe that the election had been illegally rigged against him?

[Jack Smith]

Yes.

[Michael Barbaro]

Did he pressure DOJ officials to stop the certification of the election?

[Jack Smith]

He did.

[Glenn Thrush]

And Jaya Paul ends her questioning by asking Smith, probably the most important question of all.

[Michael Barbaro]

How would you describe the toll on our democracy if we do not hold a president accountable for attempting to steal an election?

[Glenn Thrush]

What this all means to democracy and the rule of law.

[Jack Smith]

My belief is that if we do not hold the most powerful people in our society to the same standards of the rule of law, it can be catastrophic. It sends a message that those crimes are okay, that Our society accepts that. I believe that if we don't call people to account when they commit crimes in this context, it can endanger our election process. It can endanger election workers and ultimately our democracy.

[Michael Barbaro]

Glenn, it feels like I should probably explain to the listener that neither the Democrats nor Republicans really spend all that much time talking about the second Smith investigation into classified documents kept at Mar a Lago. That's in part because of a gag order that a federal judge issued that made it pretty hard for Smith to talk about that case. So it's not like we're deliberately avoiding the subject. The lawmakers themselves avoided it.

[Glenn Thrush]

Absolutely.

[Michael Barbaro]

At a certain point, as this hearing is starting to wrap up, President Trump does something kind of dramatic that puts him, in a real sense, in this hearing room.

[Glenn Thrush]

It was like a real wow moment that really undercut the Republican argument that Smith was totally unjustified in investigating Trump. He goes on truth social, and he essentially orders Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate and prosecute Smith. You can't make this stuff up. It's as if Trump himself had elbowed his way into the hearing room to make the point that he wanted these guys to go after Smith even harder. I don't know if you're aware of.

[Jack Smith]

This, that President Trump is live tweeting live. I guess you call it truth socialing as we speak.

[Glenn Thrush]

Are you aware of this about this hearing?

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

No.

[Glenn Thrush]

Adding to the surreality of this moment, a Democratic lawmaker tells Smith that this is just happening. And then a few minutes later, another Democrat gives him a chance to respond to it.

[Jack Smith]

I will not be intimidated. I think these statements are also made as a warning to others what will happen if they stand up.

[Glenn Thrush]

And Smith basically says, it doesn't matter to me. The President can intimidate me, like he's intimidating other people.

[Jack Smith]

We followed the facts and we followed the law. And that process resulted in proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed serious crimes. I'm not going to pretend that didn't happen because he's threatening me.

[Michael Barbaro]

And Mr. Smith, do you believe that President Trump's Department of Justice will find some way to indict you?

[Jack Smith]

I believe they will do everything in their power to do that because they've been ordered to by the President.

[Michael Barbaro]

We'll take it all under advisement. As we said, that concludes today's hearing. We thank the witness for appearing before the committee today. Without objection, the hearing is adjourned. Eventually, of course, this hearing does come to an end. As you said, after four and a half hours of back and forth, it was a long hearing. And when it ended, I wonder how you were thinking about the two strategies of the Democrats and Republicans and their competing efforts to hold these kind of trials. The trial of Jack Smith and the trial of Donald Trump.

[Glenn Thrush]

It's tough to do the winners and losers thing at congressional hearings. But I'll tell you this. I think Republicans that I talked with after the thing ended don't think that they really succeeded in diminishing Jack Smith's stature or really making the case for prosecuting him. Now, all that stuff might happen anyway, but I get the general sense that Democrats felt very positively about Jack Smith's performance in the spotlight, and Republicans were more, meh.

[Michael Barbaro]

Glenn. For me, anyway, there was this really striking irony hovering over this whole hearing, which is that throughout it, you had Republicans claiming that Jack Smith was this out of control prosecutor out to get the target of his prosecution. And there isn't really evidence of that. I mean, he was a special counsel, so some independence was built into his very job. But suggesting that by Republicans is a little hard to accept with a straight face at the moment, given that President Trump, a Republican, is totally redefining the relationship between the President and the Department of Justice and very explicitly targeting people for prosecution and more or less saying, even if there's not much evidence that they should be prosecuted, that they should be indicted. And that's actually happening. And so that just seemed to be very present in this hearing.

[Glenn Thrush]

This is why Jack Smith is so important to Trump. Trump needs to prove that Jack Smith acted in bad faith, or he can't really justify turning the Justice Department right now into the implement of his vengeance campaign against his enemies. But the hearing ended where it started. There isn't any concrete evidence that Jack Smith colluded with the Biden administration or anyone else to go after Trump politically. He may have made a misguided judgment in prosecuting Trump, but that's not what was litigated here. This hearing was about Republicans proving that Jack Smith had done Donald Trump dirty. And it doesn't seem like they were able to accomplish that on Thursday. And that just makes it harder for Donald Trump to justify obliterating the independence of the Justice Department and the FBI to go after the people that he.

[Michael Barbaro]

Has identified as targets, including, if you believe, Trump's threats, Jack Smith himself.

[Glenn Thrush]

Exactly.

[Michael Barbaro]

Well, Glenn, thank you very much.

[Glenn Thrush]

Thank you.

[Michael Barbaro]

We'll be right back.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

Brought to you by the Capital One Savor card. With Savor, you earn unlimited 3% cash back on dining, entertainment, and at grocery stores. That's unlimited cash back on ordering takeout from home or unlimited cash back on tickets to concerts and games. So grab a bite, grab a seat and earn unlimited 3% cash back with the Savor card. Capital One what's in your wallet? Terms apply. See capitalone.com for details.

[Michael Barbaro]

This podcast is supported by the American Petroleum Institute. Energy is all around today. America's natural gas and oil keeps the country moving, growing and building, and makes every day a little easier. But energy demand is growing, and the infrastructure built today will help secure a more affordable, reliable future. With enough energy to go around when America builds, America wins. Here's what else you need to know today. Europe loves to discuss the future, but.

[Jack Smith]

Avoids taking action today, action that defines.

[Michael Barbaro]

What kind of future we will have. In a blunt speech on Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky denounced European leaders for failing to stop Russian aggression and for their timid response to President Trump's threats of seizing Greenland instead of taking the lead in defending freedom worldwide, especially when America's focus shifts elsewhere. Europe looks lost trying to convince the US President to change.

[Glenn Thrush]

But he will not change.

[Michael Barbaro]

The speech amounted to a stinging rebuke of Zelenskyy's own allies, since European governments have replaced the United States as Ukraine's most reliable partner in its battle against Russia. And the Times reports that a major winter storm arriving this weekend will blanket the American south with ice and dump as much as a foot of snow in the Northeast. The fact that we have roughly 1800 miles nonstop of winter storm alerts, watches, warnings from Arizona all the way to the east coast shows just how big this storm is. The massive storm is expected to affect about half the country's population, hitting states like New Mexico and Colorado today, technically Texas and Tennessee on Saturday, then Washington, D.C. and New York on Sunday. So given the forecast, I'd say bundle up, make sure you have everything you need for about three to five days off the grid.

[Glenn Thrush]

Make sure you're taking care of elderly.

[Michael Barbaro]

Vulnerable neighbors, loved ones, and ultimately having a plan to hunker down for days on end. Today's episode was produced by Alex Stern, Stella Tan, Mary Wilson and Moo Zaidy. It was edited by Brendan Klenkenberg and Michael Benoit. Contains music by Dan Powell, Rowan amisto and Pat McCusker, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. That's if the daily I'm michael balbaro. See you on Sunday.

[Podcast Sponsor/Announcer]

This podcast is supported by the Capital One Venture X Card. Venture X offers the premium benefits you expect, like a $300 annual Capital One travel credit for less than you expect. Elevate your earn with unlimited double miles on every purchase, bringing you one step closer to your next dream destination. Plus, enjoy access to over 1000 airport lounges worldwide. The Capital One Venture X Card what's in your wallet Terms apply. Lounge access is subject to change. See capitalone.com for details.