A Republican lawmaker Thursday had an unexpected reaction after he asked former special counsel Jack Smith about President Donald Trump's threats.
Rep. Ben Cline (R-VA) was questioning Smith during the House Judiciary Committee hearing — the first time Smith has testified publicly on the probes against Trump — when he asked about the gag order the prosecutor sought against the president.
"Mr. Smith, America was founded on the principle that the government doesn't silence political speech, in particular speech, before it happens," Cline said. "You sought a prior restraint against President Trump without a single violation of pretrial release. In fact, there was no real world harm that you could articulate, justified giving the federal government the power to silence him as a presidential candidate was there."
Smith fact-checked Cline.
"The court granted those motions and found that the prosecutor did not have to wait until someone was harmed to make such a motion," Smith said.
Cline responded, pausing for a moment and stumbling on his words.
"Actually, the request was rejected when the case was actually when when you actually were not able to, it was restricted. Correct? The gag order was restricted, correct?" Cline said.
Smith clarified what actually happened.
"Well, we we filed for an order in the district court. The district court granted an order," Smith said. "Mr. President Trump appealed that order. The court of appeals absolutely agreed that there was a basis and that the threats to witnesses that came from the targeting by Donald Trump were real, and that we had a duty to protect them. You are correct in that the court of appeals narrowed the order. So the order covered witnesses, court staff, the judge and my staff. The difference was that it didn't cover me anymore, which I was fine with."
Cline asked Smith if he had any evidence that Trump had threatened him or intimidated witnesses to prevent them from coming forward.
"I had evidence that he said, 'if you come after me, I'm coming after you,'" Smith said. "He asked — he suggested a witness should be put to death. The courts found that those sort of statements not only deter witnesses who've come forward, they deter witnesses who have yet to come forward."
Cline asked Smith if he was able to identify a witness who might have been intimidated by Trump — that's when Smith set the record straight.
"We had extremely thorough evidence that his statements were having an effect on the proceedings," Smith said. "That is not permitted in any court of law in the United States."
Cline tried to push back and argue that he should have reconsidered the gag order. Smith had a sharp response to the suggestion.
"Both courts upheld the orders, and it is not incumbent on a prosecutor to wait until someone gets killed before they move for an order to protect the proceedings," Smith said.
Cline tried to argue that the gag order could have infringed on Trump's First Amendment rights.
"My recollection is that we, of course, discussed First Amendment issues regarding this application because I and my staff respect the First Amendment, but the First Amendment does not allow one to make statements that interfere with the administration, administration of justice, and a judicial proceeding," Smith said.
"My interpretation was supported and agreed upon by the district court and the court of appeals in terms of the phenomena of the statements being made, targeting individuals, causing threats to happen to them, I would I would also add, sir, that in the days after Donald Trump made some of these statements, the district court in this case received vile threats, threats to the district court's life in that environment," Smith added. "I felt a duty as a prosecutor to make that motion, and I make no apologies."
Smith, a career federal prosecutor, was appointed as a special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland in November 2022 to investigate Trump's handling of classified documents and his role in the events surrounding the Insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021.
Smith led high-profile criminal investigations and prosecutions against Trump on multiple counts, including obstruction of justice and violations of the Espionage Act related to classified materials at Mar-a-Lago, though the cases faced significant legal challenges and delays, with Trump ultimately avoiding trial on these charges following his 2024 election victory.
