Jack Smith Senate testimony: Key moments & CNN's first reactions

[0:00] pictures of former special counsel Jack Smith fielding questions from the Senate Judiciary [0:05] Committee about his investigations into President Trump. We're hearing about classified documents, [0:10] 2020 election lies, and the January 6th attack on the Capitol. That day has already been mentioned [0:17] more than 20 times, and Smith is defending his decision to dozens of felony charges [0:23] against President Trump. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt [0:30] that President Trump engaged in serious crimes against our nation. If asked whether to prosecute [0:38] a former president today based on the same facts, I would do so regardless of whether that president [0:45] was a Republican or a Democrat. Remember, this is all happening five weeks before an election with [0:54] dozens of Republicans across the country locked in competitive races. Not so sure they want their [1:00] party relitigating the president's old grievances when they could be addressing what's driving voters [1:05] right now, like the rising cost of living. CNN's Evan Perez is on Capitol Hill following all of the [1:12] developments in this hearing. Evan, senators, or at least some of them, seem to be trying to get new [1:18] information out of Jack Smith. Is that happening? No. You know, I think much of this hearing is not so much about [1:28] getting new information from Jack Smith as much as it is about reframing what happened during the Jack Smith [1:36] investigations, reframing what happened on January 6th itself, the attack on the U.S. Capitol, and of course the [1:42] classified documents investigation. And part of the work here, behind me, just a few minutes ago, Senator Ted Cruz [1:50] had a poster board listing the number of Republican entities that were being investigated or that [1:56] or were subpoenaed, their records were subpoenaed. Well, you know, the issue here is that the president [2:01] was trying to overturn an election, and of course the people he was communicating with and people like [2:06] Rudy Giuliani were communicating with were, of course, Republicans. They weren't talking to Democrats. [2:11] That's the reason why those records were sought. Here's an example of the of the kind of exchange [2:17] you have between Republican senators and Jack Smith about the work that went on during that [2:21] investigation. Listen. You saw the phone records of a bunch of U.S. senators, right? We saw the toll [2:34] records, non-content records. Any Democrats or just Republicans? If President Trump had reached out [2:43] to Democrats. Yeah, but I'm just trying to get the facts. And so that's the sense that that's sort of [2:50] like the the type of exchanges we're hearing today, Dana, because, you know, I think senators want to [2:56] make this about the records that were sought. Again, there was no content from those records. [3:01] It is the typical way investigations are done. Yeah. And hanging over all of this is the fact that the [3:07] current Trump Justice Department is investigating Jack Smith and other Trump perceived enemies, [3:15] political enemies. How is that playing into Smith's testimony, particularly given the fact that he [3:23] knows that these Republicans are trying to catch him in in a contradiction that they could use against [3:32] him to claim that he perjured himself? Yeah, look, I mean, I think that is very much part of the [3:37] influence of what's happening behind me. Jack Smith is limited on talking about the classified [3:43] documents case because the the report, that part of his report, the volume two, is still under lock [3:49] and key because Judge Eileen Cannon down in Florida has said that that cannot be released. So he cannot [3:55] speak about some of the things that he did in that investigation. And as you pointed out, he is also [4:00] still under investigation by the current Justice Department, which believes that there might have been a [4:06] a vast conspiracy that stretches from 2016 to 2024. And that's one of the cases that they've been [4:13] pursuing behind the scenes, Dana. Evan, don't go anywhere. I want to bring in our colleague Nia [4:18] Maliga Henderson and also Mariana Sotomayor to talk more about this. I want to play a little bit of [4:25] what Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary, said at the top of the hearing. [4:32] This is the result of the President Trump's campaign, aided and abetted by many congressional [4:37] Republicans to whitewash the history of the 2020 election and the January 6th insidious attack [4:45] on this Capitol building. Nia, starting with you, just sort of again, kind of on the politics of [4:53] where we are right now in this election cycle. I personally have talked to Republicans, even those [5:00] who are publicly, you know, gung-ho on pushing on Jack Smith and pushing on January 6th issues. [5:08] Privately, people even around them say, this is not what voters want. [5:12] Right. Listen, it's not even clear that it's what Republican voters want, right? I mean, the idea here, [5:21] you know, if you're the president of Republicans there is that, you know, you play the same old hits [5:27] and you get the MAGA crowd dancing again, right, and voting for the Republicans who are on the ballot. [5:33] The problem now is affordability has moved ahead in terms of some of those animating issues among [5:41] the MAGA faithful. You know, if you are sort of fighting the last war as a party, it is usually a [5:50] losing gambit, right? Voters want to look forward. They want to see promises fulfilled, right? [5:57] In terms of affordability, in terms of making their lives better. There's so much anxiety across [6:02] the country about prices, obviously, about AI, for instance, about data centers, so many other [6:08] issues trump what we're hearing today. And also, one of the takeaways, I think, from this hearing is [6:14] if you at least listen to the Democrats and listen to Jack Smith, I mean, Jack Smith's statement was [6:19] Trump engaged in serious crimes against our nation, right? I don't know that that is necessarily [6:26] what Trump and Republicans want to have out there right now as they're trying to get voters, [6:32] particularly independent voters, to rally around Republicans and this president. [6:37] That's right, which is a big part of why you have seen President Trump lead the charge to try to [6:43] disqualify Jack Smith, call him partisan, despite the fact that there is no evidence of that, as Evan [6:50] can tell us as well. I mean, he's a career prosecutor with no political skin in the game. [6:57] And just on the whole question of perjury traps, there was a moment, Mariana, where the Republican [7:05] senator from Missouri, Eric Schmidt, rather, tried to catch Jack Smith in either a lie or something that [7:16] looked untoward on face value, didn't go as Senator Schmidt planned. Let's watch. [7:25] I definitely did not go to a Hawks game. I'm sure of that. [7:28] Did you ever meet Nathan Wade or Fannie Willis in your time at special counsel? [7:33] No. [7:34] What would you say if I had a series of text messages from your team that said you were in [7:38] Atlanta at a Warrior Hawks game on February 3rd, 2024, the day after Willis and Wade announced their [7:44] affair? I don't think you know that we have this stuff. [7:53] So I'll give you a second to process it so you don't perjure yourself. [7:58] You just took it down really quick. If I could look at that again. [8:04] So here's what happened. It was actually a text exchange about Jack Smith going to an Iowa [8:12] Hawkeyes game. So this is, of course, to see the phenom, Caitlin Clark, play basketball at the [8:22] University of Maryland. It had nothing to do with what Senator Schmidt thought he was really nailing [8:28] Jack Smith on. [8:32] Yeah, that is correct. And it was a moment where everyone who was paying attention and watching [8:38] it in the room were like, what is he trying to say here? What is the point that Schmidt is trying [8:44] to prove? And, you know, this is one of those moments where as much as Senate Republicans today [8:51] are justifying this hearing as, you know, them trying to provide oversight. Well, this just adds [8:58] to, I think, the perception already in the public that hearings are just, just get out of hand. They're [9:06] not serious. And it really doesn't add to that argument of the Republicans are trying to make [9:11] that this is an opportunity for them to talk to Jack Smith and try to nail him on potential [9:17] contradiction. Democrats today at varying points have brought up the fact that Jack Smith had been [9:23] willing to testify, not just this year, but this entire Congress, raising the question as to why [9:29] Republicans want to do this in the final week before the election. And as everyone is more [9:36] or less pointed out, there is a lot of speculation as to why, like, Republican voters aren't talking [9:41] about this. And Republicans could make the argument that they really need to gin up that base, make sure [9:47] that those voters turn out. But this is already an issue that's been baked one way or the other, [9:52] especially among like the mad faithful. Real quick final, final thought, Evan. No, look, I mean, I think I [9:59] was like, it was like watching a Three's Company episode. Dana, you and I might remember that [10:04] television show, but it was literally, it was the whole premise was just false. And then it was like, [10:09] oops, never mind. Right? Well, maybe they'll all get a drink at the Regal Beagle afterwards. [10:14] Thank you guys. I mean, Jesus, I hope so.