Jack Smith Under Investigation By Special Counsel

[Wilson23]

Smith resigned from his position in January after completing two criminal investigations into Donald Trump which he later said would've seen the president convicted of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States had he not won the election.

Now, Smith faces an investigation into whether he was engaging in political activities during the investigation which OSC Senior Counsel Charles Baldis said in an email obtained by The New York Post will be investigated by their Hatch Act Unit.

Seems like it would have been impossible for a DOJ attorney to handle the case at all WITHOUT violating the Hatch Act in the sense they mean.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Jack Smith Admits Star January 6 Witness Relied on Hearsay​

We all knew Cassidy Hutchinson filled her 2022 testimony with hearsay as it was going on.

Posted by Mary Chastain Wednesday, December 31, 2025 at 06:00pm

Former Jack Smith dropped a bomb during a deposition with Congress.

Smith admitted that January 6 star witness Cassidy Hutchinson relied on hearsay for her testimony.

From Fox News:



https://legalinsurrection.com/2025/12/jack-smith-admits-star-january-6-witness-relied-on-hearsay/

Enjoy Eric Swalwell speaking the truth.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/783807947331187/?mibextid=9drbnH

https://www.facebook.com/reel/783807947331187/?mibextid=CDWPTG

 

[Lazaran]

Enjoy Eric Swalwell speaking the truth.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/783807947331187/?mibextid=9drbnH

https://www.facebook.com/reel/783807947331187/?mibextid=CDWPTG

More of that, please.

 

[DeluxAuto]

 

[DeluxAuto]

https://www.facebook.com/reel/897385016099587/?mibextid=CDWPTG

@repswalwell: “Mr. Smith, I want you to have the utmost confidence in what you did. You did everything right. Harry Dunn, Danny Hodges, Sergeant Gonell, Mike Fanone, they did everything right.”

 

[stxjimmy]

New Docs Reveal Jack Smith Intentionally Violated Congressional Republicans’ Constitutional Rights​

By: Margot Cleveland
December 01, 2025
6 min read

Margot Cleveland
Visit on Twitter@ProfMJCleveland

The Biden Administration okayed Special Counsel Jack Smith’s subpoenaing congressional phone records knowing the subpoenas were unconstitutional, emails released last week revealed. That same trove of documents also established the illegality of the nondisclosure orders issued by the courts to prevent the telecommunication providers from alerted the members of Congress of the unconstitutional seizure of their toll records.

Last week, as the nation turned its attention ahead to travel and turkey, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, released another two dozen documents related to the Arctic Frost investigation into President Donald Trump and Special Counsel Jack Smith’s subpoenaing of congressional phone records. A May 17, 2023 email from the Biden Administration’s Department of Justice to Smith’s team proves explosive, with the Public Integrity Section “concur[ring] in the subpoenas for toll records for the identified Members of Congress.”

This email may represent the first public evidence that the Biden Administration’s DOJ knew the special counsel’s office planned to subpoena congressional Republicans. But the scandal is even greater because in “concurring” in Smith’s use of subpoenas to target communications of members of Congress, the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section expressly acknowledged the unconstitutionality of the proposed course of action.

“As you are aware, there is some litigation risk regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a Member’s legislative calls violates the Speech or Debate Clause in the D.C. Circuit,” Principal Deputy Chief of the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section John Keller wrote in a May 17, 2023 email to two top members of the special counsel’s team. Significantly, that email then cited the controlling precedent of United States v. Rayburn House Office Building, 497 F.3d 654, 662 (D.C. Cir. 2007), citing that appellate court decision’s holding that under the Speech or Debate Clause, “[t]he bar on compelled disclosure is absolute.” That email also cited In re Grand Jury Investigation, 587 F.2d 589, 594 (3d Cir. 1978) as establishing “[t]he caselaw is clear that a legislator asserting the invasion of the Speech or Debate Clause privilege by use of a grand jury subpoena to a third party may intervene and oppose such use.”

More here: https://thefederalist.com/2025/12/0...gressional-republicans-constitutional-rights/

So if allegedly corrupt politicians can’t be investigated or impeached, what is to be done with them?

Bolstered of course by the use of pardon as a last resort.

Are they to be unchallenged?

 

[DeluxAuto]

https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3mczoswv6yh2a

 

[eric_erosfan]

View attachment 2591792

I saw the confrontation with the bald Nazi election-denier. If anyone should get the next Charlie Kirk it is that bald Nazi nutjob.