BREAKING: Jack Smith says he would prosecute Trump again, believes proof was ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’: unsealed deposition

During his opening statements, Smith said he and his team "developed powerful evidence that showed that President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January of 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a ballroom and a bathroom. He then repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents."

He later added, "I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump's political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 Presidential election. We took our actions based on the facts and the law, the very lessons I learned early in my career as a prosecutor. We followed Justice Department policies and observed legal requirements."

"If asked whether to prosecute a former President based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that President was a Republican or a Democrat," Smith said.

He claimed that recent reports about his team’s work "are false and misleading, including stories about our collection of toll records. Toll records were sought for historical telephone routing information, collected after calls had taken place, identifying the incoming and outgoing call numbers, the time of those calls, and their duration. Toll records do not include the content of calls. Those records were lawfully subpoenaed and were relevant to complete a comprehensive investigation."

He said that the events of January 6, 2021 at the Capitol building were "an attack on the structure of our democracy in which over 140 heroic law enforcement officers were assaulted. Over 160 individuals later pled guilty to assaulting police that day. Exploiting that violence, President Trump and his associates tried to call Members of Congress in furtherance of their criminal scheme, urging them to further delay certification of the 2020 election."

A person whose name was not released asked in the hearing, "You just made some pretty definitive statements about your belief that 3 President Trump was guilty of these charges. Is that correct?" Smith replied, "yes, I believe we had proof beyond a reasonable doubt in both cases."

The person asked, "And doesn't the Justice Manual prohibit prosecutors from asserting that a defendant is guilty of something before a jury makes a determination?" Smith said, "when a case is pending, yes."

The person asked whether Smith thought he was free from the Justice Manual rules once a case is dismissed, to which Smith replied, "No, I think that it's important to state clearly the amount of evidence we had and the basis for why we proceeded. Why we proceeded as we did is because we had a strong case, as I set forth in the final report."

After a back-and-forth, the person said, "But your report differs, you know, if you look at Special Counsel Hur's report and Special Counsel Mueller's report. The language that you use and the way you describe the things that you believe President Trump committed, you know, is different. You know, Hur was careful to use words like jurors could find or might, at most, would likely conclude, whereas the language you use is pretty definitive."

Smith replied, "The Hur report states his assessment of the evidence. Mine does as well. And as I said, I feel—and feel to this day—that we had a very strong case, and so I communicated that."

The person asked whether Smith agreed that "it’s the role of a jury, not the special counsel, to weigh the facts and determine guilt," to which Smith replied, "ultimately, yes."

Jack Smith Deposition by Hannah Nightingale