Speaking on Fox News Thursday, Jordan highlighted the contrast between Smith and several members of his former team. “He did not take the Fifth like some of his deputies did,” said the Ohio Republican, underscoring a point GOP investigators have repeatedly emphasized as they probe Smith’s conduct.
During the lengthy session, Smith defended both federal investigations he led into then-former President Donald Trump, telling lawmakers that his charging decisions were based on evidence, not politics. Smith and his attorneys have said he welcomed the opportunity to address what they view as persistent mischaracterizations of his work.
Jordan said the committee has already interviewed multiple members of Smith’s inner circle, with sharply different results. “We’ve deposed three of his deputies,” he said. “We got more coming in, and one of them took the Fifth 70-some times.” Jordan added that the committee referred that individual for potential obstruction.
Two of Smith’s deputies—Jay Bratt and Thomas Windom—have already appeared for closed-door testimony and invoked their Fifth Amendment rights. The committee has made a criminal referral to the Justice Department regarding Windom for declining to answer certain questions.
What comes next for Smith remains uncertain. Jordan suggested the committee could move toward a public hearing, even though Smith’s own request to testify openly was not granted this time. Wednesday’s marathon session remained private.
Asked whether the panel might pursue legal action against Smith himself, Jordan declined to elaborate. “I don’t want to get into that, and I can’t get into the details of the conversation,” he said.
The committee is pressing ahead regardless, sending interview requests this week to four additional deputies who worked on Smith’s investigations. “We may look to have a public hearing where we bring Mr. Smith in front of the committee,” Jordan said. “But we’re going to just keep moving through that.”
Democrats on the panel strongly disagreed with the closed-door approach. Ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin and other Democratic lawmakers spoke with reporters midway through Smith’s testimony, again calling for transparency.
“Every other special counsel has been able to come here and testify,” Raskin said, citing Robert Mueller and Robert Hur as examples. He added that, in his view, Smith had answered “every single question to the satisfaction of any reasonable-minded person in that room.”
Jordan subpoenaed Smith earlier this month, accusing him of pursuing “partisan and politically motivated prosecutions” against Trump. Smith oversaw two high-profile federal cases: one involving Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, and another focused on efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
Despite the testimony, Jordan said his conclusions remain unchanged. “Nothing yesterday changed my overall belief that this was driven by politics,” he said, pointing to the timing of charges and specific legal filings as ongoing concerns.
As the investigation continues, the clash over Smith’s legacy—and the broader debate over politics and prosecution—shows no sign of cooling down.
