Jim Jordan refers Jack Smith to DOJ over key deposition omissions

Jack Smith, the Biden administration’s former special counsel, has finally faced legal liability for his abuse of power in his failed attempt to defeat President Donald Trump’s candidacy with two trumped-up federal indictments. As part of this process, Smith testified to Congress by deposition and omitted important information necessary for the proper exercise of congressional oversight. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan referred Smith to the Justice Department for potential investigation, and Smith should be seriously concerned.

18 USC § 1001 prohibits knowingly making false statements in official proceedings. Telling a half-truth is tantamount to making a false statement; a witness cannot omit material information and then claim that his or her statement is technically correct. The congressional investigators who dismissed Smith warned him of his obligation, consistent with the standard oath taken by all witnesses: To tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

After President Trump left office, the Biden Department of Justice seized the text message contents of 44 members of Congress, including 20 senators and 24 representatives. Among those members was then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, the most powerful Republican in the government. The government seized the content while reviewing phone records between President Trump, his associates, and members of Congress related to the deeply troubling 2020 election.

BIDEN SPECIAL ADVISER’S ‘RUNWAY TRAIN’ OBTAINED SENSITIVE PROXY INFORMATION: ‘ABUSE OF POWER’

During his deposition, Smith claimed that he sought toll records through search warrants. But toll records only reveal who called whom and when. They do not disclose the content of the conversations. When asked if he obtained the contents of the communications through a search warrant, Smith flatly denied doing so. What he conveniently neglected to mention was that he obtained the contents of these texts through the National Archives. One of Smith’s men, Thomas Windom, obtained the contents of the communications without subjecting them to proper review by a “fault squad” to ensure that Smith would not receive privileged communications under the Constitution’s Speech and Debate Clause.

Smith and his defenders boldly argue that he should not be expected to read the minds of his questioners. Smith said he did not obtain the texts through a search warrant, his minions claimed, and that was all he had to say. This argument makes a mockery of the “whole truth” part of the oath. Smith obtained the texts through a separate, improper channel that Congress uncovered last month through private investigation by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley. This information was unquestionably necessary for congressional oversight. Congress should know that the National Archives provided Smith with the contents of congressional transcripts and that Smith improperly reviewed them.

Smith and his supporters also allege that the referral was part of a retaliatory investigation plan against him, citing President Trump’s repeated calls for Smith to be held accountable. These calls are perfectly reasonable, as Smith is trying to imprison Trump for the rest of his life for exercising his First Amendment right to object to a questionable election. Smith sought to undermine the Executive Branch by harshly using presidential immunity, a principle that the Supreme Court gratefully upheld in 2024. Requesting that the Department of Justice investigate an alleged crime is not retaliation; It complies with the principle of the rule of law.

JACK SMITH SENTENCED AS GOP Moves Toward Prosecuting Speech Fight

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD FOX NEWS APPLICATION

Some also argue that prosecuting Smith would threaten the Justice Department’s institutional independence. However, the Ministry of Justice is not independent; It is part of the Executive Branch and therefore under the control of the president. Second, Smith allegedly committed a crime while a private citizen. It is unthinkable how holding him legally responsible for this behavior would threaten the Department of Justice. Third, just as it is appropriate to hold law enforcement officers accountable for crimes Smith allegedly committed while serving as special counsel, such as conspiracy to violate constitutional rights under 18 USC § 241, it is also appropriate to hold prosecutors criminally liable for unlawful conduct. If a police officer unlawfully beats a suspect without cause and violates his or her civil rights, that officer will face legal accountability. Holding him accountable is not a threat to law enforcement; It complies with the principle of the rule of law. The same goes for rogue prosecutors like Smith.

Chairman Jim Jordan watches a hearing with the House Judiciary Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, DC, on September 3, 2025. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Jack Smith is an insult to the federal government and the legal profession. He tried and failed to change the outcome of the 2024 presidential election by trying President Trump on two absurd indictments in two jurisdictions. Later, while testifying at the congress, he hid material information, that is, he lied. This information only came to light thanks to Mayor Chuck Grassley. Smith’s best hope now is to try the Clintonesque “it depends on what it means” defense and let a dozen jurors decide whether to accept that defense.

CLICK FOR MORE FROM MIKE DAVIS