Former Special Counsel Jack Smith raises his hand to swear in, before the House Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., January 22, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
One federal prosecutor thinks that Rep. Jim Jordan's (R-Ohio) efforts to bring down former special counsel Jack Smith won't make it, regardless of how determined Jordan is during the Tuesday hearing.
Jack Smith will be on Capitol Hill again Tuesday to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee over what he told Jordan earlier this year.
Republicans cornered Smith in a previous hearing after discovering that Smith saw call logs between President Donald Trump and lawmakers. While Republicans railed against it as "overreach" by the former Joe Biden administration, it became clear that the information didn't come from spying on GOP lawmakers.
“I stand by my testimony before the House of Representatives,” Smith will say before Jordan's hearing, according to his opening statement, which he has released. “I will not be silenced by the continued threats of prosecution from the president or others.”
Smith will also make it clear that he would prosecute Trump again today, whether he were a Republican or Democrat.
Jordan thinks that Smith lied to them and Republicans want to prosecute him, but CNN legal analyst Ankush Khardori poured cold water on Jordan's efforts.
"So, first of all, he absolutely did not lie under oath when he testified before the House Judiciary Committee. What happened is, he did not affirmatively disclose a separate mechanism that they pursued to get messages that Republican members of Congress had in the White House," said Khardori.
Host Audie Cornish asked if that was a lie of omission, but Khardori said that under federal law it is not a lie.
"He was asked a question about how, you know, whether certain messages were obtained through a certain mechanism. He answered that question truthfully," the ex-prosecutor explained. "Jim Jordan is angry, and Republicans are angry that he did not disclose separately that his team had acquired some communications from the National Archives, communications that were actually from the White House. Not retrieved from members or their devices."
Khardori made it clear that Jordan has no shot at prosecuting Smith.
"If there is any effort to prosecute Jack Smith on the basis of the exchange that Jim Jordan has been invoking here, it will fail miserably," he said. "I would be surprised if it gets past a grand jury. And even if they did manage to indict him, my guess is a judge would throw it out. That is how tenuous Jim Jordan's allegation is."
Republican political strategist Ashley Davis said that she doubts anyone from the Republican base will even pay attention to this.
"I think it's personal," she said.
"Yeah, well, I don't know," confessed Khardori. "I mean, we're a month out from the election. There's a lot of interesting stuff going on in the country. There's a major hack of FBI agents, information that ordinarily you would expect the Senate Judiciary Committee to maybe care about."
He thinks it is a "reminder to people who are angry with this administration heading into the November elections, that Trump could have been in prison right now if the Republican Party had not prevented the Justice Department from" doing its job.
Khardori said that it's clear the Justice Department, and Attorney General Todd Blanche in particular, desperately want to investigate Smith.
"By the way, you know, I've spoken with members of Smith's team over the course of the year. None of this fazes them," Khardori said. "They understand and believe that this is a wholly political process. Jack Smith, you'll notice, is not taking the fifth. I believe this is the third time, actually, he will testify in front of Congress."
