So, former special counsel Jack Smith, the man behind the federal government’s Jan. 6 case, testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday. In case you missed it, Jack Smith sends his deepest thanks.
Suffice it to say, if you missed it, things did not particularly go well for Smith. He was grilled by Republicans over actions he took as special counsel that were pretty much prima facie violations of the Speech and Debate Clause of the Constitution — namely, using the powers of the Department of Justice to subpoena the phone records for members of Congress and was acting not as an impartial arbiter but a Trump-seeking missile tasked by then-President Joe Biden to destroy his political opposition.
“Smith chose to target President Trump, and only President Trump, in his electors case — setting aside other targets so that he could secure an indictment of President Trump in advance of the election,” the House Judiciary Committee said in a statement ahead of the hearing.
The hearing went no better for Smith, either — with one woman, in particular, visibly pained for him during his testimony in footage that went viral.
The exchange in question involved Rep. Brandon Gill, a Texas Republican, grilling him about his decision to subpoena the toll records — phone records who show who was on the call and how long it lasted — of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy just 16 days after McCarthy became the top-ranking Republican in the House.
Gill, not incorrectly, believed this violated the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution, which gives lawmakers broad immunity from legal liability or questioning regarding their role as legislatures.
However, when Gill asked a rather halting Smith whether he considered this a violation, he said, “I do not, and I want it clear–”
“You were collecting months’ worth of phone data on the Republican speaker of the House, the leader of the opposition, right after he got sworn in as speaker, all around the time of a major vote,” he said.
“That sounds like a flagrant violation of the Speech or Debate Clause to me, and I think most people agree with me, and Speaker McCarthy had no recourse, did he? Because you issued a non-disclosure order ensuring that neither he nor any of the American people knew about these subpoenas. Is that right?”
Smith, again trying to stall, gave a very long permutation of a response that could have been TL;DR-ed as: “Yeah.”
This goes about as well as you might think, but I want you to watch the woman in red flanking him on his left and the man in the suit flanking him on his right as he stammers about the lies that went into securing these non-disclosure orders on the toll-record subpoenas:
Brandon Gill reduces Jack Smith to a stammering mess by catching him in several lies pic.twitter.com/nC3JFaQHhL
GILL: You knew there was a risk you were violating the Speech or Debate clause, is that right?
SMITH: The subpoenas we secured were with the concurrence of the Public…
— Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) January 22, 2026
Do you remember when the audience cries “mercy!” as William Wallace is disemboweled at the end of “Braveheart”? The looks on their faces are the same as these two, particularly the woman.
I don’t know who she is — rumors are flying on social media, but social media rumors are worth the paper they’re printed on — but her rictus is like watching someone find out their hero is actually a villain in real time — as if she were a Yankees fan who just found out Joe DiMaggio fixed games, say. Or maybe she’s really pulling a Bill Clinton here and legitimately feeling his pain at that moment.
The man on the right, meanwhile, looks like a guy nursing an atomic hangover and who’s just been told that while he was blackout drunk, he set fire to his best friend’s living room and now has a restraining order against him. Which, somehow, seems slightly easier for him than the woman on the right. That’s how invested in Smith being a political savior she apparently was, from appearances.
Naturally, all of this could have been avoided if the hero worship of a special counsel trying to pin crimes on Donald Trump for exercising his First Amendment rights and executive prerogative by violating the Speech and Debate Clause with his subpoenas wasn’t directly encouraged by the Democrats and their surrogates.
For instance, does anyone remember this glorious spectacle on CNN, when the network broke into regular coverage to announce breathlessly that he went to — gasp! — Subway?
John King marvels, “Jack Smith going to Subway today is a message to Donald Trump. … Jack Smith with no words and a simple $5 sub in his hand saying ‘I’m not going anywhere.’” Dana Bash adds “the imagery was intentional and spoke volume.” (2/2) pic.twitter.com/nDmd952R2c
— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 18, 2023
“Jack Smith going to Subway today is a message to Donald Trump,” John King said, in that beautiful time capsule from the halcyon days of 2023.
“Donald Trump tries to intimidate people, he tries bullies people, he tries to scare you away. That was Jack Smith with no words and a simple $5 sub in his hand saying ‘I’m here. I’m not going anywhere.’”
Well, yes he was, John. First, he was going out of the office of special counsel once Trump got back into the White House, and then he was going before the House Judiciary Committee to answer for his abuses committed in his former role. And let me tell you, I can see at least two more frowns than footlongs in that clip alone, without even counting Smith’s glum face.
You hate to see it. Tuna on whole wheat, anyone?
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
The post She Hurt for Him: Priceless Video Shows Woman Behind Jack Smith Looking Like She’s in Physical Pain as GOP Reps Repeatedly Expose Him as Fraud appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.