Jack Smith Tells Lawmakers Investigators Had Strong Evidence Against Trump

Former Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith has told US lawmakers that his investigative team believed it had proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Donald Trump engaged in criminal conduct, according to details from a closed door briefing revealed this week.

Speaking to members of Congress on Wednesday, Smith said his team had developed compelling evidence that Trump conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Portions of Smith’s opening remarks, obtained by the Associated Press, suggest investigators were confident they could meet the highest legal standard required for a criminal conviction before the case was ultimately abandoned.

Smith also addressed the separate investigation into Trump’s handling of classified documents. He told lawmakers that prosecutors had gathered what he described as powerful evidence showing Trump unlawfully retained sensitive government records from his first term at his Mar a Lago residence in Florida. According to Smith, the investigation also found evidence that Trump obstructed efforts by federal authorities to recover the documents after he left office.

The former special counsel stressed that his decisions were guided solely by the law and the facts, not by political considerations. He told lawmakers that he did not take into account Trump’s political affiliations, public activities, or his status as a candidate in the 2024 election when making charging decisions. Smith said his focus throughout the investigations was on whether the evidence supported criminal charges under established legal standards.

The briefing came after the charges brought by Smith’s office were dropped following Trump’s return to the presidency. While the cases never reached trial, Smith’s comments offer a rare window into the internal conclusions of the investigations and the level of confidence prosecutors believed they had in their evidence.

Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing related to both the election interference allegations and the classified documents case. He has described the investigations as politically motivated and part of a broader effort to undermine his presidency. His supporters have echoed those claims, arguing that the cases should never have been brought.

Legal analysts say Smith’s statements are significant because they underscore that the decision to abandon the charges was not based on a lack of evidence. Instead, they suggest the outcome was shaped by constitutional norms and Justice Department policy regarding the prosecution of a sitting president, rather than by doubts about the strength of the case.

The closed door nature of the briefing means many details of the investigations remain confidential. However, Smith’s remarks are likely to fuel ongoing political debate in Washington, especially as lawmakers continue to examine the boundaries of presidential accountability and the independence of the Justice Department.

The revelations also highlight unresolved questions about the long term implications of the investigations. While the legal cases have ended, the findings described by Smith may continue to shape public understanding of the events surrounding the 2020 election and the handling of classified materials.

For now, Smith has made clear that he stands by the work of his team. His message to lawmakers was that the investigations were conducted carefully, thoroughly, and without political bias, even though they ultimately did not result in a courtroom verdict.