A tense House hearing erupted into open confrontation Thursday after Republican Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) said former special counsel Jack Smith admitted under oath that critical information was withheld from a federal judge while his team sought surveillance-related records involving Republican lawmakers.
The moment came during Smith’s first-ever public testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, a Republican-led panel examining Smith’s conduct during his now-defunct investigations into President Donald Trump. Issa, visibly frustrated, pressed Smith over whether his office disclosed the names of senior Republican officials when seeking a nondisclosure order connected to phone-record subpoenas.
“Did you withhold the name of Kevin McCarthy, Speaker of the House, when you were seeking records on Kevin McCarthy… or Jim Jordan, the chairman of this committee?” Issa asked, after repeatedly clashing with the chair over time and interruptions.
“We did not provide that information to the judge when we requested a nondisclosure order,” Smith testified, adding that the request was “consistent with the law.”
“The amazing thing here today is that we have an admission,” Issa said, arguing that Smith’s response confirmed Republicans’ long-standing claims that his office concealed key facts from the judiciary. Issa went further, accusing Smith of creating a constitutional imbalance by allowing the executive branch to withhold information from the judicial branch while targeting members of Congress.
“We have the evidence that an Article I representative on behalf of the president withheld information from Article III,” Issa said before yielding back “in disgust of this witness.”
WATCH:
The explosive exchange unfolded during the Oversight of the Office of Special Counsel Jack Smith, held Thursday morning at the Rayburn House Office Building. Smith appeared to defend his Trump-related investigations, which were dropped after Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election. Republicans have long argued those probes were politically driven, while Democrats insist Smith followed the law.
Much of the hearing focused on Smith’s use of subpoenas to obtain phone metadata related to January 6, including records tied to Republican lawmakers. GOP members said the subpoenas amounted to spying on political opponents, while Smith defended them as routine investigative tools.
Chairman Jim Jordan criticized a “weaponized” justice system, accusing Smith of operating without adequate transparency or accountability. Democrats on the panel, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), pushed back, praising Smith’s career and arguing that his actions were lawful and justified by evidence.
“President Trump was charged because the evidence established that he willfully broke the very laws that he took an oath to uphold,” Smith said Thursday. “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 Democrat or a Republican.”
Republicans say Issa’s exchange with Smith cuts to the heart of their concerns: that judges were not fully informed when authorizing secrecy around records involving elected officials. Issa and others argue that omitting the names of then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy and senior Republicans deprived the court of crucial context and undermined constitutional safeguards. Smith, for his part, maintained that his actions complied with existing law and standard practice, and he denied any political motivation behind his work.
The criminal cases against Trump no longer active.
