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.

🚨MIC DROP: Jack Smith NUKES Rep. Kiley! Asked if he made mistakes or has regrets, Smith fires back: “If I have any regret… it would be not expressing enough appreciation for my staff… We follow the facts and the law.” Jack Smith is completely humiliating Republicans.

CALL TO ACTIVISM

1,214,020 subscribers

428,315 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Comedy News & Politics Health & Wellness

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Kiley: Do you have any regrets as to how you conducted this investigation? Smith: If I have any regret, it would be not expressing enough appreciation for my staff who worked so hard in these investigations. We followed the facts and the law. These people who work for me sacrificed endlessly and have endured way too much for just doing their job. So if anything, I wish that I had thanked them. Kiley: No mistakes. There's that humility Raskin: I'm just sorry that you had to be lectured about humility and restraint by a politician

Kiley: Do you have any regrets as to how you conducted this investigation? Smith: If I have any regret, it would be not expressing enough appreciation for my staff who worked so hard in these investigations. We followed the facts and the law. These people who work for me sacrificed endlessly and have endured way too much for just doing their job. So if anything, I wish that I had thanked them. Kiley: No mistakes. There's that humility Raskin: I'm just sorry that you had to be lectured about humility and restraint by a politician

Acyn

148,380 views • 8 months ago

Fun MAGA facts: *Jack Smith wanted to testify publicly. Republicans said “No” *Gym Jordan “can’t get into details” because they exonerate Smith and implicate Trump. *The transcript will not be made public. *Jack Smith never took the 5th. *Trump is a pedo.

Fun MAGA facts: Jack Smith wanted to testify publicly. Republicans said “No” Gym Jordan “can’t get into details” because they exonerate Smith and implicate Trump. The transcript will not be made public. Jack Smith never took the 5th. *Trump is a pedo.

BigBlueWaveUSA2026® 🇺🇸🌊🇺🇦

163,625 views • 9 months ago

Jim Jordan has to ask Jack Smith THREE TIMES if he ever confirmed his star witnesses' testimony. Fraud Jack Smith then admits no one could back up the insane claims made against President Trump. SMITH: "We interviewed another witness...who did not confirm..."

Jim Jordan has to ask Jack Smith THREE TIMES if he ever confirmed his star witnesses' testimony. Fraud Jack Smith then admits no one could back up the insane claims made against President Trump. SMITH: "We interviewed another witness...who did not confirm..."

RNC Research

163,802 views • 8 months ago

🚨 Texas Rep. Wesley Hunt says Republicans in Congress are ready to JAIL Biden Special Council Jack Smith: "Jack Smith is going to be the first person on this list. If he doesn't show up to Congress then he will be in jail. They put Steve Bannon in jail. Those are the rules..."

🚨 Texas Rep. Wesley Hunt says Republicans in Congress are ready to JAIL Biden Special Council Jack Smith: "Jack Smith is going to be the first person on this list. If he doesn't show up to Congress then he will be in jail. They put Steve Bannon in jail. Those are the rules..."

Benny Johnson

1,148,326 views • 1 year ago

Sean Davis Exploring Legal Options to SUE Jack Smith For SPYING on The Federalist "The people who do these things to our country have to be held accountable. We know that Jack Smith has a history of ignoring the law and of ignoring judges." "We at The Federalist are exploring every last option we have for holding corrupt thugs like Jack Smith accountable." Time for a lawsuit, Sean Davis

Sean Davis Exploring Legal Options to SUE Jack Smith For SPYING on The Federalist "The people who do these things to our country have to be held accountable. We know that Jack Smith has a history of ignoring the law and of ignoring judges." "We at The Federalist are exploring every last option we have for holding corrupt thugs like Jack Smith accountable." Time for a lawsuit, Sean Davis

Benny Johnson

105,256 views • 9 days ago

Jack Smith didn’t have an answer for me when I asked him how he thought my brother Lindsey or anyone else was going to destroy evidence not in their possession. You know why? It’s because Jack Smith was trying to bully allies of President Trump — and he weaponized our legal system to do it. The legal term for Jack Smith’s behavior would be obstruction of justice. But in South Carolina, we just call it a lie.

Jack Smith didn’t have an answer for me when I asked him how he thought my brother Lindsey or anyone else was going to destroy evidence not in their possession. You know why? It’s because Jack Smith was trying to bully allies of President Trump — and he weaponized our legal system to do it. The legal term for Jack Smith’s behavior would be obstruction of justice. But in South Carolina, we just call it a lie.

Darline Graham

426,098 views • 9 days 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 • 9 months ago

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Jack Smith has MET HIS MATCH, he was just STUNNED by Trump ally Rep. Harriet Hageman "You would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" 🔥🔥 HAGEMAN: Would you agree Hutchinson's testimony was hearsay?! SMITH: ...uh... HAGEMAN: "COME ON, you're an attorney. OF COURSE it was hearsay! And hearsay isn't admissible in a court of law, is it? Why? Because it is inherently unreliable and the target of a prosecution is not able to cross-examine. Isn't that correct?" "In fact, Mr. Smith, if you had attempted to walk into court with Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony, you would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" "No judge, no legitimate judge would have ever allowed the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson to be admitted in a court of law, would they?" SMITH: "...I disagree." HAGEMAN: "Well, we've already talked about your record, so I can understand why! I yield back." Bring an INDICTMENT against Jack Smith!

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Jack Smith has MET HIS MATCH, he was just STUNNED by Trump ally Rep. Harriet Hageman "You would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" 🔥🔥 HAGEMAN: Would you agree Hutchinson's testimony was hearsay?! SMITH: ...uh... HAGEMAN: "COME ON, you're an attorney. OF COURSE it was hearsay! And hearsay isn't admissible in a court of law, is it? Why? Because it is inherently unreliable and the target of a prosecution is not able to cross-examine. Isn't that correct?" "In fact, Mr. Smith, if you had attempted to walk into court with Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony, you would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" "No judge, no legitimate judge would have ever allowed the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson to be admitted in a court of law, would they?" SMITH: "...I disagree." HAGEMAN: "Well, we've already talked about your record, so I can understand why! I yield back." Bring an INDICTMENT against Jack Smith!

Eric Daugherty

972,122 views • 8 months ago

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Jack Smith has MET HIS MATCH, he was just STUNNED by Trump ally Rep. Harriet Hageman "You would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" 🔥🔥 HAGEMAN: Would you agree Hutchinson's testimony was hearsay?! SMITH: ...uh... HAGEMAN: "COME ON, you're an attorney. OF COURSE it was hearsay! And hearsay isn't admissible in a court of law, is it? Why? Because it is inherently unreliable and the target of a prosecution is not able to cross-examine. Isn't that correct?" "In fact, Mr. Smith, if you had attempted to walk into court with Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony, you would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" "No judge, no legitimate judge would have ever allowed the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson to be admitted in a court of law, would they?" SMITH: "...I disagree." HAGEMAN: "Well, we've already talked about your record, so I can understand why! I yield back." Bring an INDICTMENT against Jack Smith!

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Jack Smith has MET HIS MATCH, he was just STUNNED by Trump ally Rep. Harriet Hageman "You would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" 🔥🔥 HAGEMAN: Would you agree Hutchinson's testimony was hearsay?! SMITH: ...uh... HAGEMAN: "COME ON, you're an attorney. OF COURSE it was hearsay! And hearsay isn't admissible in a court of law, is it? Why? Because it is inherently unreliable and the target of a prosecution is not able to cross-examine. Isn't that correct?" "In fact, Mr. Smith, if you had attempted to walk into court with Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony, you would have been THROWN OUT on your EAR!" "No judge, no legitimate judge would have ever allowed the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson to be admitted in a court of law, would they?" SMITH: "...I disagree." HAGEMAN: "Well, we've already talked about your record, so I can understand why! I yield back." Bring an INDICTMENT against Jack Smith!

QUANTUM GUARD ™️

303,085 views • 3 months ago

—John Berman: "If he was not going to be president in six days, he would have been a convicted federal felon. That is the thrust of the final report" from Jack Smith. "It is an extraordinary document for posterity, if nothing else, and there will be nothing else."

—John Berman: "If he was not going to be president in six days, he would have been a convicted federal felon. That is the thrust of the final report" from Jack Smith. "It is an extraordinary document for posterity, if nothing else, and there will be nothing else."

Brian Stelter

593,619 views • 1 year ago

.@TedCruz RIPS Jack Smith for targeting conservatives. CRUZ: "Did your team subpoena the RNC?" SMITH: "It is very possible." CRUZ: "Did your team subpoena Turning Point USA?" SMITH: "I would have to look." CRUZ: "You have any idea who you subpoenaed?"

.@TedCruz RIPS Jack Smith for targeting conservatives. CRUZ: "Did your team subpoena the RNC?" SMITH: "It is very possible." CRUZ: "Did your team subpoena Turning Point USA?" SMITH: "I would have to look." CRUZ: "You have any idea who you subpoenaed?"

RNC Research

37,525 views • 9 days ago

Per MS NOW: Former Special Counsel Jack Smith says the Trump administration’s investigations into figures like James Comey, Letitia James, and Jerome Powell are driven by politics; not criminal evidence. “There’s not criminality here… The only reasonable explanation is the president has it out for these people.” Smith added that he believes officials are acting “regardless of the facts or the law.”

Per MS NOW: Former Special Counsel Jack Smith says the Trump administration’s investigations into figures like James Comey, Letitia James, and Jerome Powell are driven by politics; not criminal evidence. “There’s not criminality here… The only reasonable explanation is the president has it out for these people.” Smith added that he believes officials are acting “regardless of the facts or the law.”

Brian Allen

33,371 views • 3 months ago

Jack Smith: "I am not a politician and I have no partisan loyalties. My career has been dedicated to serving our country by upholding the rule of law."

Jack Smith: "I am not a politician and I have no partisan loyalties. My career has been dedicated to serving our country by upholding the rule of law."

Thomas Sowell Quotes

15,361 views • 8 months ago

Jack Smith spied on us, and there have to be consequences. I asked the U.S. Department of Justice to conduct a full investigation, and he should be disbarred in the states where he is licensed to practice law.

Jack Smith spied on us, and there have to be consequences. I asked the U.S. Department of Justice to conduct a full investigation, and he should be disbarred in the states where he is licensed to practice law.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn

58,125 views • 11 months ago

Jack Smith: James Comey, Letitia James, Jerome Powell. There's not criminality here. I mean, seashells?? The only reasonable explanation is the president has it out for these people. He has people who are his former personal lawyers who are going to do what he says, regardless of the facts or law

Jack Smith: James Comey, Letitia James, Jerome Powell. There's not criminality here. I mean, seashells?? The only reasonable explanation is the president has it out for these people. He has people who are his former personal lawyers who are going to do what he says, regardless of the facts or law

Acyn

74,927 views • 3 months ago

BREAKING: Special Counsel Jack Smith has just asked the Supreme Court to rule on whether a President has absolute immunity for crimes he/she committed while in office. Smith is trying to circumvent Trump’s appeal, which would possibly delay the trial until after the election. Smith has asked the SCOTUS to act quickly. If they do, it would likely mean that Trump would have to face trial in the January 6th case before the 2024 election. If they don’t, Trump might just get what he hopes for and delate the trial until after the election. (video from when the indictment against Trump was unsealed)

BREAKING: Special Counsel Jack Smith has just asked the Supreme Court to rule on whether a President has absolute immunity for crimes he/she committed while in office. Smith is trying to circumvent Trump’s appeal, which would possibly delay the trial until after the election. Smith has asked the SCOTUS to act quickly. If they do, it would likely mean that Trump would have to face trial in the January 6th case before the 2024 election. If they don’t, Trump might just get what he hopes for and delate the trial until after the election. (video from when the indictment against Trump was unsealed)

Ed Krassenstein

1,107,021 views • 2 years ago

Ted Cruz: “Do you have any regrets?” Jack Smith: “I regret that the people I worked with have been unfairly fired and vilified for doing their job.” Ted Cruz: “Congratulations, because you have succeeded…[in] weaponizing the DOJ and the federal government to go after your political opponents.”

Ted Cruz: “Do you have any regrets?” Jack Smith: “I regret that the people I worked with have been unfairly fired and vilified for doing their job.” Ted Cruz: “Congratulations, because you have succeeded…[in] weaponizing the DOJ and the federal government to go after your political opponents.”

Bulwark Clips

29,290 views • 9 days ago

Disgraced former special counsel Jack Smith just told the entire Senate Judiciary Committee that he would prosecute President Trump again. SMITH: “If asked whether to prosecute a former president today, based on the same facts, I would do regardless of whether that president was a Republican or a Democrat.” Smith is also claiming that he approached his role as special counsel as a nonpartisan actor, free of political bias. No one’s buying that. Smith is standing by his entire prosecution of Trump. This is the hill he’s chosen to die on.

Disgraced former special counsel Jack Smith just told the entire Senate Judiciary Committee that he would prosecute President Trump again. SMITH: “If asked whether to prosecute a former president today, based on the same facts, I would do regardless of whether that president was a Republican or a Democrat.” Smith is also claiming that he approached his role as special counsel as a nonpartisan actor, free of political bias. No one’s buying that. Smith is standing by his entire prosecution of Trump. This is the hill he’s chosen to die on.

Overton

22,579 views • 9 days ago