Former special counsel Jack Smith told the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 29, 2026 that he stands by his decisions to bring criminal charges against Donald Trump. In his opening statement he said he made those decisions without regard to Trump's politics or his 2024 presidential candidacy, according to ABC News coverage of the hearing. Smith was the sole witness at a public oversight hearing in the Hart Senate Office Building, convened by Chairman Chuck Grassley under the title "Oversight of Jack Smith's Abuse of Authority and the Targeting of Republicans and Related Matters." A special counsel is a prosecutor appointed to handle a case the Justice Department judges it cannot credibly investigate itself; Smith held that role for the federal 2020 election interference and classified documents cases against Trump.
Table of Contents
- What Smith actually said under oath
- The Republican case against him
- Why the toll records were sought
- Be careful with the numbers
- What this hearing can and cannot change
- Frequently Asked Questions
What Smith actually said under oath
Smith's central claim was evidentiary rather than political. "Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in serious crimes against our nation," he told the panel, adding that grand juries in two districts agreed with the indictments, per CNN's live coverage of the testimony. A grand jury is a panel of citizens that reviews a prosecutor's evidence and votes on whether charges may be filed. He went further than defending the past.
Asked whether he would make the same call today, Smith said he would prosecute a former president on the same facts regardless of whether that president was a Republican or a Democrat, and that he would not be silenced by threats of prosecution against him, PBS NewsHour reported. That framing matters for how the testimony should be read. Smith did not argue the cases were winnable or well-timed. He argued the charging standard was met, which is the only question a prosecutor is supposed to answer.
The Republican case against him
Grassley opened by alleging that "Jack Smith's operation was a partisan weapon that broke the rules, lied to the court and engaged in bad faith throughout," and said the public should be outraged at the records Smith obtained on Republican lawmakers, officials and donors, NBC News reported. The substance of that charge is "Arctic Frost," the FBI investigation that collected phone toll records touching members of Congress.
Toll records are the metadata of a phone line — timestamps, call duration and the numbers on each end — not the content of calls or messages. Grassley's office has pressed two distinct claims: that Smith sought those records for members of Congress, and that he obtained member communications in breach of the Speech or Debate Clause, the constitutional provision shielding legislative acts from executive and judicial second-guessing. Smith's lawyers answer that his earlier House testimony was "unimpeachably truthful" precisely because it addressed toll records, which carry no message content, according to the committee's own release on the Arctic Frost documents.
Why the toll records were sought
Smith's explanation was narrow and factual. The congressional records were relevant, he said, because investigators had evidence that Trump and his allies contacted lawmakers while Congress prepared to certify Joe Biden's 2020 win, as the Washington Examiner reported from the hearing. That is a relevance argument, not a constitutional one.
It asserts the records bore on the conduct under investigation; it does not resolve whether obtaining them was lawful. Those are separate questions, and the hearing settled neither. Ranking member Dick Durbin defended the investigation outright, calling the Republican attacks petty, personal and political and accusing the majority of advancing baseless conspiracy theories about Smith, per CBS News live updates.
Be careful with the numbers
If you follow this story, the single most useful thing to know is that there is no agreed count of how many lawmakers were touched. Republican figures cited across 2026 have varied widely: These are not reconcilable descriptions of one measurement, and the hearing produced no joint factual record.
📨 Get Free Accountability Coverage Alerts
Free · No spam · Unsubscribe anytime
Any specific count you encounter should be attributed to whoever produced it rather than stated as settled fact — a point visible in the history of the Arctic Frost disclosures. The variation also tells you something substantive. The counts differ partly because they measure different things: subpoenas issued, members whose records appeared, and message content versus metadata are three different tallies.
- Toll records for 16 members of Congress
- A dozen senators, plus texts from 40-plus members
- 87 White House phone subpoenas touching 44 lawmakers
What this hearing can and cannot change
Smith's defense is retrospective. Both federal cases were dismissed after Trump's 2024 win, when Smith moved to drop them under longstanding Justice Department policy barring the prosecution of a sitting president. Nothing said on September 29 revives them.
What the hearing bears on is the possibility of prosecuting Smith himself, which Republican senators raised directly, as ABC owned stations reported. Smith's statement that he would not be silenced by threats of prosecution was a response to that exposure, not a rhetorical flourish. For a reader tracking government accountability, the practical reading is to separate three threads that the hearing deliberately blurred: whether the original charges were justified, whether the investigative methods were lawful, and whether Smith should now face charges. A finding on any one of them does not decide the others.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are the charges against Trump still pending?
No. Both federal cases — 2020 election interference and classified documents — were dismissed after the 2024 election, when Smith moved to drop them under Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president.
What is the difference between toll records and communications?
Toll records show timestamps, call length and the participants on a line. They do not include the content of calls or messages. Smith's lawyers rest his truthfulness defense on that distinction.
Is Jack Smith himself facing charges?
No charges have been reported. Republican senators raised the prospect at the hearing, and Smith said he would not be silenced by threats of prosecution against him.
You Might Also Like
- Trump Prosecution 2026 Guide: status, deadlines, and legal impact; Key Facts and Questions to Ask
- Why Trump Pharmaceutical Enforcement Decisions Is Back in Federal Court
- The Documents and Decisions Behind Trump Qatar Lobbying Connections