00:00Thank you, Chairman. And Mr. Smith, thank you for appearing today to speak publicly about the
00:04major issues that you handled as special counsel. Your work on election interference in my home
00:10state is especially important, as Georgia still today remains ground zero for voting rights.
00:16My state has a long history of voter suppression, including violent tactics and legislation that
00:22has actively disfranchised our voters. In fact, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against
00:28Georgia in 2023, challenging recently passed voter suppression legislation. That lawsuit was later
00:35withdrawn by Donald Trump's attorney, General Pam Bondi. But this is not the first time that Donald
00:42Trump has encouraged voter suppression. In the 2020 presidential election, which many have accepted
00:48that he lost, he pressured his party members to overturn a legal election. Thankfully, several
00:55public servants upheld our constitutional process and respected the voice of the people. Your
01:02investigation revealed how far he is willing to go. In your final report, you wrote that, and I'm
01:10quoting, the through line of all Mr. Trump's criminal efforts was deceit, knowingly false claims of fraud.
01:18Mr. Smith, what did your investigation reveal about President Trump's interactions with Georgia's
01:24officials regarding his fraud claims?
01:30As I sit here now, I can recall two specific officials. The first was the Secretary of State,
01:38who is a fellow Republican. My understanding, he voted for and supported Donald Trump in the election,
01:46but told Donald Trump in a conversation that was recorded, in no uncertain terms,
01:52the results of the election and debunked many of the fraud claims that Donald Trump had to him in real
02:00time. In addition to that, I recall that Donald Trump also spoke firsthand with the Attorney General
02:09of your state, also a Republican who informed Donald Trump that he had supported him and voted for him
02:15twice in the past. He also told Donald Trump he did not see outcome-determined fraud in that state.
02:23I have an audio from a phone call between Trump and the Georgia Secretary of State regarding the 2020 election.
02:29Could you please play the audio?
02:31The people of the country are angry, and there's nothing wrong with saying that, you know, that you've recalculated.
02:40Well, Mr. President, the challenge that you have is the data you have is wrong.
02:46So, look, all I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one
02:58more that we have,
03:00because we won the state.
03:01Mr. Smith, you explained in your deposition that Georgia Secretary of State was one of the witnesses
03:06who disabused President Trump's false claims. How did Georgia Secretary of State push back against
03:13Trump's efforts?
03:15I think my recollection is in this same call, President Trump repeatedly raised fraud claims,
03:24and the Secretary of State repeatedly explained not only that they weren't true, but I believe,
03:31my recollection is in several instances, explained why they weren't true. And I believe that call ended,
03:39my recollection is that it ended with President Trump, in essence, threatening the Secretary of State
03:46that he might be a target for criminal prosecution if he didn't do what President Trump wanted him to do.
03:53So, see, that raises a very critical point. President Trump didn't just spread lies about the election.
03:59In your words, and I'm quoting, he preyed on, end quote, Republican officials in Georgia and other states
04:06who believed would help him. Mr. Smith, Donald Trump thought these officials would break the law
04:13out of party loyalty. And when those officials, his own political allies, told him the truth,
04:19he dismissed them and continued to spread the lies anyway. Is that correct?
04:24That is correct.
04:25Mr. Smith, if your case had gone to trial, would the evidence from Georgia have helped prove that
04:31President Trump knowingly engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 election?
04:38Yes. After an investigation, following the facts and the law, we believed we had proof beyond a reasonable
04:44doubt to prove those charges. And in your deposition, you mentioned a fake elector witness
04:50in Georgia who you thought would have been a very powerful witness at trial. Can you tell us a little
04:56bit more about that in a very limited amount of time? Sure. It was a witness who had been made
05:01to
05:02understand that his electoral vote, his alternative electoral vote, would only be used if they won in
05:10court, if they won in litigation. That didn't happen. And President Trump and his co-conspirators
05:16tried to use those alternative fake elector certificates to get Mike Pence.
05:23Mr. Chairman, regular order.
05:24Okay. Well, Mr. Smith, thank you so much for the work that you and your team of career
05:28prosecutors have put forth in covering this evidence. The American people need to know what
05:33happened, and they need to know how their president pressured Georgia state officials to overturn their
05:39government. The gentleman from Alabama has the unanimous consent request. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
05:45December 6, 2025, Atlanta News First. Fulton County admits to verifying 315,000 votes in the
05:522020 without poll worker signatures. I yield back. Without objection, the chair now recognizes for five
05:58minutes, the gentleman from Arizona. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Smith, isn't it true that for a federal
06:04criminal conspiracy charge, it requires more than one individual? In other words, you're making a
06:11contractual agreement of some kind with somebody other than yourself, right?
06:16That is correct. There has to be an agreement.
06:18And so when you made the determination to charge President Trump with conspiracy,
06:25you surely knew that you had somebody else that he had must have agreed upon somewhere to engage in this
06:35act that generated the conspiracy, right? That's correct. We alleged specific individuals in the
06:42indictment as co-conspirators. And so when you, so you knew who you were going to do when you, who
06:49you
06:49were going to charge when you pursued the indictment, you had the, you knew who the agreeing parties were,
06:57but you chose to list them as co-conspirators, but you didn't indict them. How often have you done
07:03that in the past? In the past, I have had a number of cases where I have charged some members
07:11of the
07:12conspiracy and not charged others. No, no, no. One member of the conspiracy. How many times have you done
07:16that? Charged some, one member of the conspiracy and let everybody else off the hook?
07:22I'm sure that's happened. That is not an uncommon. You don't remember doing that?
07:26That is not an uncommon thing to do in an investigation.
07:31In my book. So, so, okay. I, I, I dispute that, but we're going to leave that as, as, as
07:38it may. But let's just get to
07:39this. If a member of Congress moves to decertify states electors, that would not be a crime, would it?
07:46When you say to decertify. You make a motion to decertify
07:50on that January 6th, that we, every four years, that's not a, uh, that's not a crime, right?
07:58Correct. And if another elected official urged someone to join them in that decertification,
08:03that's not a crime either, right?
08:06As you stated, it's not. Several members of Congress get together over breakfast. They say,
08:11this is, this is the normal path. We watched it because we saw the Democrats do it for every
08:16Republican president. So we, I'm not sure how to do it. We've never done it before. That's not a crime
08:22to sit down at breakfast to talk about that or any other time together to talk about decertification,
08:27is it? No, it's not a crime to talk about that over breakfast. In your deposition, you talked
08:35about, uh, you made the argument that an elected official who's been deemed to have lost could not
08:41knowingly make false statements about election fraud to target a love, a lawful government operation.
08:47Isn't that true? That's what you said in your deposition. Page 27. I believe it's a lawful
08:51government function is. Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah. Lawful government function. That's what you said.
08:55You remember saying that? Uh, I said lawful government function. Could you read back what
09:00you said again? I'm sorry. Yeah. An elected, it is, uh, see, an elected official who's been deemed
09:06to have lost could not knowingly make false statements about election fraud to target a lawful
09:11government function. You said that would be illegal. Remember that page? Do you want me to actually
09:16read this back? Surely you remember that position. I'm not denying it and I apologize. I'm just trying
09:22to listen to you closely. Okay. Let's, let's just go right from, from the, from this. You said
09:28there's, uh, as we said in the indictment, he was free to say that he thought he won the election,
09:32right? That is correct. He's even free to say falsely, falsely that he won the election, correct?
09:40That's correct. What you said is he was not free to do was violate federal law and use knowing,
09:47knowingly false statements about election fraud to target a lawful government function.
09:53That is correct. Yeah. And for you, the, that lawful government function is, uh, the,
10:00the certification process, I suppose on January 6th. Well, it's, it's a slightly broader than that.
10:06It's the collecting counting, uh, and certifying of the votes. Uh, our view of the evidence is that
10:11begins from the point of time, uh, that the electors are, uh, certified through the counting of the votes.
10:17So that would be. So the entire, so the entire certification process from the state to the feds,
10:23my recollection, as it's played in the indictment, as I sit here, I don't have it in front of me,
10:26but I believe it's from, um, December 14th. I think that was the day through the voting.
10:34Okay. So, so you can't recall, but for you, it's from the certification moving forward to the sort of
10:39actual ratification of the certification process in, uh, on inaugural day. My recollection,
10:45that's what we pled in the indictment. Okay. So, so you've managed to filibuster us right out of this
10:51thing, but, uh, your, your beef was, you said that president Trump, uh, engendered a level of
10:59distrust. You said he made false statements to state legislators to his supporters of all sorts,
11:04and somehow you discerned that his supporters were angry and that that was somehow related
11:09to a criminal offense. I find that absolutely weak. I think it's misdirected. And time of the
11:17gentleman, time of the gentleman's expired.
11:21Subscribe to one India and never miss an update.
11:26Download the one India app now.
