Sen. Darline Graham (R-SC) got more than she bargained for while questioning former special counsel Jack Smith.
The South Carolina Republican pressed the former Department of Justice appointee to explain the search warrants his team executed to obtain phone call logs for her brother, the late Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), as part of his investigation into Donald Trump's role in the Jan. 6 insurrection.
"You alleged to afederal judge that my brother Lindsey, a patriot who haddedicated over 30 years of hislife wearing the uniform of hiscountry in the United States Air Force, a sitting United States senator and a chairmanof this very committee, had thepotential to destroy evidence,intimidate witnesses and causeserious jeopardy to your shamof an investigation," Graham said.
"In fact,in a separate gag order, youlisted flight risk as a reasonfor obtaining a gag order forthe Speaker of the House, aconstitutional officer secondin the presidential line of succession, and let me pointout something for everyone.This subpoena wasn't being wasbeing sent to Verizon forrecords that Verizon had intheir own possession."
"How thehell was Lindsey going totamper with evidence he didn'teven have in his possession?" she added. "How was a member of Congress aflight risk? The legal term foryour behavior would beobstruction of justice. But in South Carolina, we just call ita lie. This was undeniably afishing expeditionby you and your team tointimidate the president'sallies in Congress."
Graham, who was appointed to serve the remainder of her brother's term and is now running for re-election in November, pointed out that Verizon had complied with the subpoenas but AT&T challenged them, and Smith's team did not contest that.
"They asked you to explainhow this request was incompliance with the Constitution, and you didn'thave an answer," she said. "In fact, youdidn't even respond, and younever followed up with AT&Tbecause you knew what you weredoing was wrong. It doesn'tmake sense unless the onlymotivation you had was to takedown President Trump and hisallies one by one before theelection. So, Mr. Smith, do youreally believe that Lindsey wasgoing to destroy evidence thatwas not even in his possession?"
Smith's answer seemed to catch Graham off guard.
"No, I believe your brotherwas a patriotic public servant," Smith said. "He was not a target of ourinvestigation, and in fact, helikely would have been awitness in our case. Yourbrother investigated the claimsthat Donald Trump was making [about the 2020 election.]He found them to be false. Hesaid so on the House floor."