Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Jack Smith: “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity. 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 should... show more

The Bulwark

237,696 subscribers

46,147 views • 6 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Jack Smith: Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in criminal activity. 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 should be above the law in this country.

Jack Smith: Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in criminal activity. 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 should be above the law in this country.

FactPost

13,087 views • 6 months ago

Smith: I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he engaged in criminal activity. 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.

Smith: I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he engaged in criminal activity. 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.

Acyn

85,083 views • 6 months ago

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 Republican or a Democrat.

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 Republican or a Democrat.

Acyn

98,833 views • 7 months ago

BREAKING: Super powerful words from Jack Smith just now: "The investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity… No one should be above the law in this country and the law required he be held to account.” Every American needs to hear this

BREAKING: Super powerful words from Jack Smith just now: "The investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity… No one should be above the law in this country and the law required he be held to account.” Every American needs to hear this

Brian Krassenstein

513,353 views • 6 months ago

JACK SMITH publicly testifies for the first time: "I want to be clear: I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump..." "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."

JACK SMITH publicly testifies for the first time: "I want to be clear: I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump..." "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."

Fox News

162,859 views • 6 months ago

JACK SMITH: “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity.”

JACK SMITH: “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity.”

The Tennessee Holler

79,165 views • 6 months ago

"Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity." –Jack Smith testifying before Congress.

"Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity." –Jack Smith testifying before Congress.

Pod Save America

20,181 views • 6 months ago

Former special counsel Jack Smith told a House committee Thursday that he stands by the decisions he made in that role, "including the decision to bring charges against President Trump." In a hearing focused on Smith's investigations into President Donald Trump's mishandling of classified documents and role in efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Smith said his investigation developed proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Trump had engaged in criminal activity. "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 Republican," Smith said. "No one should be above the law in this country," he added. The hearing is an opportunity for the career prosecutor to publicly offer his inside perspective on the investigations, which both led to unprecedented indictments. Both were scuttled once it was clear that Trump would return to the Oval Office; Department of Justice policy prevents prosecution of a sitting president. Republicans and the president have accused Smith of pursuing a politically motivated case against the president. Trump has denied wrongdoing while attacking Smith, calling him a "criminal" who ought to be investigated and "put in prison." Smith defended his investigations in an hourslong closed-door meeting with lawmakers in December, saying he said he had "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" of what his investigations laid out. He's denied accusations of bias.

Former special counsel Jack Smith told a House committee Thursday that he stands by the decisions he made in that role, "including the decision to bring charges against President Trump." In a hearing focused on Smith's investigations into President Donald Trump's mishandling of classified documents and role in efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Smith said his investigation developed proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Trump had engaged in criminal activity. "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 Republican," Smith said. "No one should be above the law in this country," he added. The hearing is an opportunity for the career prosecutor to publicly offer his inside perspective on the investigations, which both led to unprecedented indictments. Both were scuttled once it was clear that Trump would return to the Oval Office; Department of Justice policy prevents prosecution of a sitting president. Republicans and the president have accused Smith of pursuing a politically motivated case against the president. Trump has denied wrongdoing while attacking Smith, calling him a "criminal" who ought to be investigated and "put in prison." Smith defended his investigations in an hourslong closed-door meeting with lawmakers in December, saying he said he had "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" of what his investigations laid out. He's denied accusations of bias.

PBS News

13,485 views • 6 months ago

Former special counsel Jack Smith: “I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity.”

Former special counsel Jack Smith: “I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity.”

Republicans against Trump

78,167 views • 6 months ago

Whether you're a friend or an enemy of our former president, what the #January6thCommittee hearings have made clear is that he broke the law. No one is above the law. The committee should move forward w/ criminal referrals to the Justice Department.

Whether you're a friend or an enemy of our former president, what the #January6thCommittee hearings have made clear is that he broke the law. No one is above the law. The committee should move forward w/ criminal referrals to the Justice Department.

Seth Moulton

119,966 views • 3 years ago

Smith: For nearly three decades I have been a career prosecutor. I have served during both Republican and Democratic administrations and I've been guided by those principles in every role I've held. I continued to honor those principles when I was appointed to serve as special counsel in November of 2022. The decision to bring charges against President Trump was mine, but the basis for those charges rests entirely with President Trump and his actions, as alleged in the indictments returned by grand juries in two different districts. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power. Our investigation also developed powerful evidence that showed that President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January of 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a ballroom and a bathroom. He then repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents. I remain grateful for the counsel, judgment, and advice of my team as I executed my responsibilities. I am both saddened and angered that President Trump has sought revenge against career prosecutors, FBI agents, and support staff simply for doing their jobs and for having worked on those cases. These dedicated public servants are the best of us, and they have been wrongly vilified and improperly dismissed from their jobs. I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump's political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 Presidential election. We took our actions based on the facts and the law, the very lessons I learned early in my career as a prosecutor. We followed Justice Department policies and observed legal requirements. The timing and speed of our work reflects the strength of the evidence and our confidence that we would have secured convictions at trial. 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 Republican or a Democrat.

Smith: For nearly three decades I have been a career prosecutor. I have served during both Republican and Democratic administrations and I've been guided by those principles in every role I've held. I continued to honor those principles when I was appointed to serve as special counsel in November of 2022. The decision to bring charges against President Trump was mine, but the basis for those charges rests entirely with President Trump and his actions, as alleged in the indictments returned by grand juries in two different districts. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power. Our investigation also developed powerful evidence that showed that President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January of 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a ballroom and a bathroom. He then repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents. I remain grateful for the counsel, judgment, and advice of my team as I executed my responsibilities. I am both saddened and angered that President Trump has sought revenge against career prosecutors, FBI agents, and support staff simply for doing their jobs and for having worked on those cases. These dedicated public servants are the best of us, and they have been wrongly vilified and improperly dismissed from their jobs. I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump's political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 Presidential election. We took our actions based on the facts and the law, the very lessons I learned early in my career as a prosecutor. We followed Justice Department policies and observed legal requirements. The timing and speed of our work reflects the strength of the evidence and our confidence that we would have secured convictions at trial. 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 Republican or a Democrat.

Acyn

213,321 views • 7 months ago

JACK SMITH: “Donald Trump willfully broke the law.” “Two separate grand juries supported these findings” “We developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he engaged in criminal activity” “Trump engaged in criminal scheme to overturn results & prevent transfer of power. After leaving office Trump illegally kept classified docs…repeatedly tried to obstruct justice…NATSEC info held in a ballroom & bathroom”

JACK SMITH: “Donald Trump willfully broke the law.” “Two separate grand juries supported these findings” “We developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he engaged in criminal activity” “Trump engaged in criminal scheme to overturn results & prevent transfer of power. After leaving office Trump illegally kept classified docs…repeatedly tried to obstruct justice…NATSEC info held in a ballroom & bathroom”

Maine

29,828 views • 6 months ago

.Rep. Jamie Raskin to Jack Smith: "Everybody here knows what you did wrong in Donald Trump's eyes and why he says you belong in prison...You found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election."

.Rep. Jamie Raskin to Jack Smith: "Everybody here knows what you did wrong in Donald Trump's eyes and why he says you belong in prison...You found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election."

CSPAN

208,390 views • 6 months ago

🚨 Former Special Counsel Jack Smith, in a closed-door House Judiciary Committee hearing: “The decision to bring charges against President Trump was mine, but the basis for those charges rests entirely with President Trump and his actions, as alleged in the indictments returned by grand juries in two different districts.” “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power”

🚨 Former Special Counsel Jack Smith, in a closed-door House Judiciary Committee hearing: “The decision to bring charges against President Trump was mine, but the basis for those charges rests entirely with President Trump and his actions, as alleged in the indictments returned by grand juries in two different districts.” “Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power”

Republicans against Trump

185,834 views • 7 months ago

This is why the House GOP refused Jack Smith's request that he be allowed to testify in public: Smith said he had proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 election and prevent the transfer of power. Also, he'd charge him again.

This is why the House GOP refused Jack Smith's request that he be allowed to testify in public: Smith said he had proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 election and prevent the transfer of power. Also, he'd charge him again.

Bill Madden

25,462 views • 7 months ago

Campbell: We truly say no one is above the law, then no one should be deemed above the law. And instead, what we're seeing is a president who thinks he is above the law and an administration that thinks they are above the law, undermining and dismantling an agency that is critical to maintaining the sense of justice in this country

Campbell: We truly say no one is above the law, then no one should be deemed above the law. And instead, what we're seeing is a president who thinks he is above the law and an administration that thinks they are above the law, undermining and dismantling an agency that is critical to maintaining the sense of justice in this country

Acyn

29,179 views • 6 months ago

JACK SMITH: “We had proof beyond a reasonable doubt Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election, prevent the peaceful transfer of power, retained classified docs, obstructed justice… I’d charge an ex president again regardless of party.”

JACK SMITH: “We had proof beyond a reasonable doubt Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 election, prevent the peaceful transfer of power, retained classified docs, obstructed justice… I’d charge an ex president again regardless of party.”

The Tennessee Holler

234,015 views • 7 months ago

WATCH: Former House Oversight Chair Jason Chaffetz GOES OFF on former President Obama. "I cannot even express how stunning this is. The President of the United States was engaged in a conspiracy...that's the allegation." He adds, "That guy on the screen was lying to us and was part of concocting a conspiracy to deceive the American people! It doesn't get worse than that. How many times did I get a lecture from the Democrats about, "Nobody is above the law, nobody is above the law?"....They were all lying to us!....I want to see some people in handcuffs. THEY HAVE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE."

WATCH: Former House Oversight Chair Jason Chaffetz GOES OFF on former President Obama. "I cannot even express how stunning this is. The President of the United States was engaged in a conspiracy...that's the allegation." He adds, "That guy on the screen was lying to us and was part of concocting a conspiracy to deceive the American people! It doesn't get worse than that. How many times did I get a lecture from the Democrats about, "Nobody is above the law, nobody is above the law?"....They were all lying to us!....I want to see some people in handcuffs. THEY HAVE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE."

DeVory Darkins

398,728 views • 1 year ago

Hannity: Does there need to be an investigation? Blanche: I think they should be held to account and those congressmen should be required to answer questions about why they did what they did and the American people deserve that, and so does President Trump.

Hannity: Does there need to be an investigation? Blanche: I think they should be held to account and those congressmen should be required to answer questions about why they did what they did and the American people deserve that, and so does President Trump.

Acyn

229,348 views • 8 months ago