Former Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith appeared before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, where he was questioned over his two criminal indictments of President Donald Trump. One former prosecutor is now arguing that Smith missed a major opportunity to both defend his investigations and bolster his credibility as an investigator.
During a Thursday segment on CNN, Brendan Ballou — who worked in the Biden administration's DOJ — observed that Smith was repeatedly questioned by Republicans on the committee about why he pressed to have Trump's trial take place before the 2024 election. Several Republicans pressed Smith on not giving Trump enough time to review all of the documents investigators had submitted as evidence. Ballou argued that Smith's instincts were correct, but that he didn't defend them properly before the committee.
"I think it's prettyclear from Jack Smith's actionsthat he wanted an ultimatedisposition on this trial beforethe 2024 election," Ballou said. "Now, thatisn't illegitimate. There's a strong argument to bemade that the public deserves toget a hearing on these issuesbefore the election, and that itactually would be more unfair tothe president to have this sortof specter of criminalityoverhanging him on election day."
Elie Honig — who was an assistant U.S. attorney under both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations — agreed with Ballou's point. He added that he was confused about why Smith didn't plainly state the reason for his rush to get to a public trial before voters cast their ballots in 2024, given the immense public interest in a presidential candidate facing criminal charges.
"Of course, Jack Smith was trying to hurry thatcase to get it in before theelection. That's been reported," Honig said. "But why has Jack Smith never, ever admitted that?He asked courts many times over, 'please expedite.' And they wouldsay, 'you have to give us areason.' And he would never say, 'because I want it before the election,' because he knew that would look political."
"Instead, he gave this mush-mouth generality about, well,speed is good, but he shouldhave just said what Brendan justsaid," he added. "That would have been trueand that would have saved his credibility."