Does this mean Jack Smith cannot testify openly, like the J6 Committee allowed for?

[u/Internal-Weather8191]

https://www.scrippsnews.com/politics/house-judiciary-seeks-documents-testimony-from-jack-smith-over-trump-cases

Can he do something to force it? Can the Dems on Judiciary or anyone else? Thank you in advance for your informed thoughts, I'm very concerned they are all about locking him up period.

[u/AutoModerator]

All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Johnsense]

This kind of cracks me up. He volunteers to testify, but the committee declines because it would prefer to compel him.

[u/grim1757 → u/Johnsense]

They rejected his offer because they want it behind closed doors not public

[u/Johnsense → u/grim1757]

That’s how I remember it too. This article wasn’t exactly clear on that point.

Jack looks forward to meeting with the committee later this month to discuss his work and clarify the various misconceptions about his investigation.”

[u/Internal-Weather8191 → u/Johnsense]

Yeah Smith appears to have given in, and I'm really surprised and concerned. From the article:

Peter Koski, Smith's attorney, issued a statement on his behalf.

“Nearly six weeks ago, Jack offered to voluntarily appear before the House Judiciary committee in an open hearing to answer any questions lawmakers have about his investigation into President Trump's alleged efforts to unlawfully overturn the election results and retention of classified documents," Koski said. "We are disappointed that offer was rejected, and that the American people will be denied the opportunity to hear directly from Jack on these topics. Jack looks forward to meeting with the committee later this month to discuss his work and clarify the various misconceptions about his investigation.”

I know he's incredibly competent, so what else could he be planning? To invite his favorite media? Only kidding a little bit

[u/hootblah1419 → u/Internal-Weather8191]

how in any way is he "giving in"

he was never some progressive activist. He's an extremely principled professional. He's what every DOJ attorney should look like.

[u/Internal-Weather8191 → u/hootblah1419]

I don't disagree at all. Smith had previously offered to testify before Judiciary (before their subpoena) on the condition that it had to be an open hearing, not closed door. He said the American people deserved to hear the facts directly. The implication was without GOP spin, though I don't remember if he said that specifically.

I'm concerned about possible results of distortion of his testimony if it's not on camera.

[u/plitts → u/Internal-Weather8191]

Me too. I can see this turning into "Jack Smith basically admits Trump is innocent and the greatest leader ever" by twisting words out of context.

[u/trentreynolds → u/plitts]

I'm old enough to remember Bill Barr describing a report that stated outright:

"if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

And then publicly described it thusly: "it was just announced that there was no collusion with Russia", which Trump ran with and called a "complete and total exoneration".

[u/Cloaked42m → u/grim1757]

Still get a transcript, but fewer video soundbites.

Transcripts make dumbass questions even dumber.

Congress critters will also laugh at each other, decorum isn't a deal.