Episodios

  • Headline: Special Counsel Shares Insights on January 6 Probe Cooperation

    Headline: Special Counsel Shares Insights on January 6 Probe Cooperation
    Jan 6 2026
    Former Special Counsel Jack Smith recently detailed his office's communications and cooperation with the House January 6 Committee during testimony from last month, as highlighted in a Forbes breaking news segment aired on January 6, 2026[1]. Smith addressed questions about strategies for prosecuting cases involving Donald Trump, firmly stating there were no direct consultations with the committee on those tactics[1]. He emphasized full transparency, noting that his team disclosed all materials received from the January 6 investigation to Trump's defense counsel[1].

    In the testimony, Smith recounted adjustments made around the Christmas holidays to accommodate Trump's legal team's preferences regarding conditions for reviewing evidence, following a letter of complaint from the defense[1]. This came after Trump's federal cases were dismissed in November, yet the committee continued reviewing Smith's final report to refine their positions[1]. Smith affirmed that every piece of information provided by the committee was promptly shared with the defense, underscoring a commitment to due process[1].

    Listeners may recall Smith's role in probing Trump's handling of classified documents and efforts to challenge the 2020 election results. He described coordinating with the FBI to streamline Trump's review of classified materials at a secure facility in Miami, making the process more convenient[1]. This collaboration aimed to facilitate defense access without compromising security[1].

    The testimony sheds light on the behind-the-scenes interplay between federal probes and congressional inquiries amid ongoing political tensions. While Trump's cases were dropped, the disclosures reveal persistent scrutiny through committee work and Smith's final report[1]. Legal observers note this could influence future accountability efforts or defenses in related matters. As of early 2026, no new indictments have emerged, but Smith's account reinforces patterns of cooperation across investigations targeting the former president[1].

    This development keeps the saga in the spotlight, blending prosecutorial rigor with bipartisan oversight. Listeners following the Trump legal battles will find Smith's measured responses a key window into resolved yet resonant disputes[1]. (Word count: 312)

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
  • Explosive Revelations: Former Special Counsel Jack Smith Defends Prosecutions Against Trump in Newly Released Testimony

    Explosive Revelations: Former Special Counsel Jack Smith Defends Prosecutions Against Trump in Newly Released Testimony
    Jan 3 2026
    The House Judiciary Committee recently released a transcript and video of former special counsel Jack Smith's closed-door deposition from December, where he vigorously defended his prosecutions against President Donald Trump.[1] Smith, who led investigations into Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents, resigned in late 2024 after Trump's reelection led to the cases being dropped.[1]

    In the nearly 300-page transcript and accompanying video, made public on New Year's Eve, Smith described Trump as "by a large measure, the most culpable and most responsible person in this conspiracy," insisting the January 6 Capitol attack would not have occurred without him.[1] He rejected accusations of political bias, stating, "I entirely disagree with any characterization that our work was in any way meant to hamper him in the presidential election."[1] Smith expressed confidence that his election interference case, built partly on testimony from Republicans who prioritized country over party, would have resulted in a conviction.[1]

    The deposition, conducted by the Republican-led House Oversight and Judiciary Committees, probed Smith's tactics, including his team's collection of Senate phone records—limited to timestamps of calls between lawmakers and Trump aides around January 6, not contents.[1] Smith attributed the calls to Trump's directions, noting, "Donald Trump directed his co-conspirators to call these people to further delay the proceedings."[1] While phone toll records are a standard investigative tool, the move sparked debates over Justice Department overreach against members of Congress.[1]

    Smith was more reserved on the classified documents probe, citing a federal judge's order barring further disclosure, though he indicated willingness to share more if allowed.[1] CNN covered the release on January 3, 2026, featuring analysis from former U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Tom Dupree and justice correspondent Evan Perez, framing it as insights into the "failed prosecutions."[2]

    This development reignites scrutiny of Smith's tenure amid Trump's return to the White House, highlighting enduring partisan divides over the investigations' legitimacy. Listeners tuning in will find Smith's unfiltered remarks a rare window into the behind-the-scenes battles that defined these high-stakes cases.[1][2]

    (Word count: 348)

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
  • Headline: Special Counsel Smith Grilled by GOP, Defends Probes into Trump's Misdeeds

    Headline: Special Counsel Smith Grilled by GOP, Defends Probes into Trump's Misdeeds
    Dec 23 2025
    Former Special Counsel Jack Smith recently faced an intense eight-hour grilling from Republican lawmakers over his past investigations into Donald Trump, prompting Smith to request a public hearing to defend his work. In his opening statement, Smith asserted that his team uncovered proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 election results and repeatedly obstructed justice to conceal retention of classified documents discovered during an FBI search at Mar-a-Lago.[1] This closed-door session, detailed in reports from MSNBC's MS NOW on December 20, 2025, highlighted deep partisan tensions as Trump allies on the House Judiciary Committee sought to expose what they view as prosecutorial overreach.[1]

    Listeners tuning into coverage from Senior Capitol Hill reporter Ali Vitali and New York Times Justice Department correspondent Glenn Thrush heard accounts of Democrats like Representatives Jamie Raskin and others appearing giddy post-session, buoyed by Smith's firm defense after months of Trump-led attacks demanding his prosecution.[1] Republicans, however, expressed reluctance to let Smith appear before cameras, fearing it would amplify his narrative. Thrush noted Trump's strategy: not necessarily conviction, but public shaming through the same scrutiny Trump endured, including probes into "affinity fraud"—a con scheme leveraging shared group ties, allegedly mirroring tactics in Trump's election challenges.[1]

    The hearing underscores ongoing fallout from Smith's probes, dismissed after Trump's 2024 reelection victory granted him broad authority to end federal cases against himself. Smith reiterated his findings on Trump's election interference and documents mishandling, countering GOP claims of bias. Vitali raised the prospect that next year, with Republicans controlling Congress, they might face pressure to allow a public forum, potentially shifting dynamics as Smith pushes back.[1]

    Trump has amplified calls for Smith's accountability, framing the special counsel as part of a weaponized Justice Department. Yet the session revealed no new evidence against Smith, only reinforcing his position that evidence against Trump was overwhelming. As debates rage, this episode signals Republicans' intent to revisit and discredit the investigations through oversight, while Smith seeks transparency to set the record straight for listeners following the saga.[1] (Word count: 348)

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
  • Headline: Showdown Looms as House GOP Summons Special Counsel Jack Smith for Closed-Door Testimony

    Headline: Showdown Looms as House GOP Summons Special Counsel Jack Smith for Closed-Door Testimony
    Dec 6 2025
    Former special counsel Jack Smith has been subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee to provide a deposition on December 17 as part of the committee's ongoing investigation into federal prosecutions of former President Donald Trump. This subpoena, issued by Representative Jim Jordan, marks a significant development in the inquiry into Smith's investigations concerning Trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents and the alleged attempt to interfere with the 2020 presidential election results. Smith is expected to testify behind closed doors, with his legal team affirming their cooperation with the committee. This deposition follows Republican demands for transparency about the Department of Justice's decisions, including the authorization of search warrants such as the FBI raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate[1].

    Despite Smith’s willingness to testify publicly — an offer he made several weeks ago that Republicans ultimately rejected — the planned deposition remains confidential. Smith’s legal team expressed disappointment over the rejection of an open hearing, stating that such a hearing would have provided the public a direct opportunity to hear from Smith about his investigations into Trump’s alleged election interference and classified documents retention. However, Republican leadership, including Jim Jordan, appears reluctant to hold a public session, reportedly fearing that Smith could make a compelling case for the indictments against Trump that might be politically damaging. This suggests the GOP may prefer to control the narrative by limiting Smith's public exposure[2].

    In the latest public statements, Trump has paradoxically indicated he would prefer Smith to testify publicly. Nevertheless, given Jordan’s stance and the committee's apparent preference for secrecy, the upcoming deposition is expected to remain a closed-door event. This maneuvering underscores the political tension surrounding Smith’s investigations and the broader battle over how to handle allegations against Trump, with Republicans aggressively attacking Smith and attempting to shift the spotlight away from the substance of the investigations to questions about perceived bias or overreach in the Justice Department[1][2].

    The subpoena and forthcoming testimony highlight ongoing Republican efforts to challenge the legitimacy of Smith’s investigations while simultaneously exerting pressure on Trump’s legal adversaries. The developments set the stage for further confrontation on Capitol Hill as both sides navigate the complex political and legal fallout from Trump-related prosecutions.

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
  • "Georgia Drops Election Interference Case Against Trump and Allies"

    "Georgia Drops Election Interference Case Against Trump and Allies"
    Nov 29 2025
    The latest news involves the dismissal of the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump and co-defendants, including several Republican electors. This development occurred after a new special prosecutor, Peter Skandalakis, who took over the case following the sidelining of previous Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis for ethical reasons, recommended dropping the charges. Skandalakis argued that the electors, including Sen. Shawn Still, acted on the advice of a qualified elections attorney and without criminal intent. The trio had cast electoral votes for Trump in the 2020 election, which Joe Biden won, but they did so relying on legal counsel aimed at preserving electoral votes rather than overturning the election[1][2].

    Sen. Still expressed relief that the charges were dismissed, stating he believed Willis initiated the case knowing there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing on his part. He also noted that he felt he was fulfilling his responsibilities as an elector and was never informed why some electors were indicted while others were not. The dismissal referenced similar observations made by U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith, who, in a separate election-related case against Trump, noted that some co-conspirators had been deceived about how their votes would be used, which was key to labeling them as "fraudulent electors"[1].

    The decision to dismiss the charges, however, drew criticism from Democratic leaders like Sen. Harold Jones II, who argued it allowed Trump and his co-conspirators to escape accountability for what Jones described as a coordinated effort to overturn Georgia's election results. Jones called the dismissal a setback for justice, underscoring the ongoing political and legal divisions surrounding the 2020 election and Trump's conduct[1].

    In summary, the Georgia prosecution related to alleged election interference by Trump and aligned electors has been dropped due to a lack of prosecutable intent, as determined by the newly assigned special prosecutor, ending this chapter of legal proceedings in Georgia. This outcome has been welcomed by some defendants but condemned by political opponents who view it as a failure to hold leaders accountable.

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
  • Headline: "Explosive Showdown: Special Counsel Jack Smith Relentlessly Pursues Trump, Fueling Intense Political Clash"

    Headline: "Explosive Showdown: Special Counsel Jack Smith Relentlessly Pursues Trump, Fueling Intense Political Clash"
    Nov 25 2025
    The latest news highlights an intense legal and political confrontation involving Jack Smith, the special counsel appointed to investigate Donald Trump, and the former president himself. Jack Smith has been advancing a landmark criminal case against Trump, presenting detailed filings that portray Trump as actively trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. Smith's filings include evidence such as digital records, meeting transcripts, and testimonies pointing to Trump's direct involvement in schemes like the fake elector plan and attempts to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject Electoral College votes on January 6, 2021. These filings argue that Trump acted as a private candidate rather than using presidential immunity, undermining Trump's legal defenses. They also reveal efforts by Trump’s team to manipulate the Justice Department into publicly endorsing false claims of election fraud, and Trump’s consideration of removing officials who refused to cooperate[1].

    Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers, led by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, are intensifying scrutiny over Smith’s investigations, viewing them as politically motivated overreach by the Justice Department under the Biden administration. Jordan has sent letters to major banks requesting information related to subpoenas issued during Smith's inquiry, alleging improper seizure of private financial data. The probe also includes the subpoena of private phone records of multiple GOP lawmakers, which has fueled claims of excessive government surveillance. Jordan is pushing for transparency about the scope and scale of Smith’s investigative methods, leading to a standoff where Smith has declined some congressional requests but offered to testify publicly under conditions[2][3].

    This political friction extends into legislative efforts, with GOP members attempting to challenge Smith’s authority and push back against what they term politically weaponized investigations. The House recently blocked a GOP provision aimed at suing the Biden Justice Department and holding Smith accountable in this context, exacerbating partisan tensions[4][5].

    In summary, Jack Smith’s aggressive investigation into Donald Trump, centered on actions taken to overturn the 2020 election, is proceeding with mounting legal documentation and political controversy. Republicans, led by Jordan, are simultaneously launching counter-investigations into Smith’s investigative conduct, creating a major front in the ongoing post-presidential legal saga that remains highly partisan and subject to evolving developments.

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
  • "Special Counsel Smith Faces Scrutiny as Trump Legal Saga Intensifies"

    "Special Counsel Smith Faces Scrutiny as Trump Legal Saga Intensifies"
    Nov 24 2025
    The latest developments in the ongoing legal saga involving Jack Smith and Donald Trump have captured national attention. Jack Smith, the special counsel who led investigations into former President Donald Trump, is now facing scrutiny himself. A recent complaint filed by a Republican senator has prompted an investigation into Smith's conduct during his tenure as special counsel. This move comes amid heightened political tensions and ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump's actions both during and after his presidency.

    Smith's investigations focused on two major cases involving Trump: the handling of classified documents and efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. In the classified documents case, Smith has been pushing back against legal challenges from Trump's defense team. A recent court hearing saw the judge reject Trump's motion to dismiss the case, allowing Smith's prosecution to move forward. Legal experts say this ruling is a significant development, as it keeps the focus on Trump's alleged mishandling of sensitive government materials.

    Meanwhile, the investigation into Smith centers on allegations of potential misconduct during his time as special counsel. The Republican senator who filed the complaint claims there were irregularities in Smith's handling of evidence and communications with the Department of Justice. Supporters of Smith argue that the investigation is politically motivated, designed to undermine the credibility of the ongoing cases against Trump. Critics, however, say it is important to ensure all parties involved in high-profile investigations act with integrity and transparency.

    Trump has continued to deny any wrongdoing in both the classified documents case and the election interference probe. His legal team has repeatedly challenged the legitimacy of Smith's investigations, arguing that they are biased and politically driven. The latest court rulings, however, have largely upheld the validity of the charges against Trump, keeping the legal pressure on the former president.

    As these investigations unfold, listeners are reminded that the outcomes could have far-reaching implications for both Trump and Smith. The legal battles are expected to continue for months, with each new development closely watched by the public and political observers alike. The situation underscores the complex and often contentious nature of high-stakes legal proceedings involving prominent political figures.

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
  • "Explosive Allegations: Special Counsel Accuses Trump of Orchestrating Deliberate Effort to Overturn 2020 Election"

    "Explosive Allegations: Special Counsel Accuses Trump of Orchestrating Deliberate Effort to Overturn 2020 Election"
    Nov 18 2025
    Special Counsel Jack Smith has escalated his legal pursuit of former President Donald Trump with a dramatic new court filing that alleges Trump orchestrated a knowing and deliberate effort to overturn the 2020 election results despite being aware that the claims of voter fraud were false. According to this public filing, Trump planned in advance to reject the loss, coordinated false fraud narratives, pressured then-Vice President Mike Pence to violate his constitutional duties, and organized fake electors in multiple states. Smith’s filing emphasizes that Trump personally directed this campaign while privately acknowledging the fraud allegations were unfounded, supported by evidence that his closest advisers also told him the claims were false[1].

    This development marks a shift from previous investigations as Smith moves from gathering evidence to aggressively presenting a case that could prove serious federal crimes. The filing is not subtle, openly challenging Trump’s entire post-election narrative with the confidence that comes from solid evidence as the case heads toward trial. Trump's response has been to dismiss the filing as unconstitutional and politically motivated, avoiding substantive engagement with the evidence, signaling the high stakes involved[1].

    Special Counsel Smith is also preparing to bring two separate cases against Trump — one involving allegations of mishandling classified documents and another focused on the efforts to subvert the election outcome. He has indicated readiness to present extensive evidence to the public, countering claims that Trump is an innocent victim of politicized attacks. This aggressive stance by Smith has unsettled Republican circles, raising concerns about the potential impact on upcoming elections and political dynamics[2].

    Meanwhile, controversy has grown on Capitol Hill regarding a Senate provision granting senators the right to sue the government if their phone records are subpoenaed without prior notification. This provision emerged amid revelations that Smith subpoenaed phone records as part of his "Arctic Frost" investigation into election interference, including records of ten Republican senators. House Republicans have criticized this as a special privilege that undermines equal justice, while Senate Republicans, including Lindsey Graham—whose records were subpoenaed—argue the provision protects civil liberties and is exploring expanding such rights beyond senators. Legal experts warn this could hamper law enforcement’s work by tipping off targets of investigations[3].

    Overall, Jack Smith’s current legal actions against Donald Trump represent one of the most intense and public phases yet in the prosecution of alleged election interference. The dramatic court filings and political reverberations underscore the ongoing national debate over accountability for former presidents and the balance of law and politics in America’s most consequential legal battles[1][2][3].

    This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI
    Más Menos
    3 m
adbl_web_global_use_to_activate_DT_webcro_1694_expandible_banner_T1