Senator Chuck Grassley is out here claiming that former Special Counsel Jack Smith told Congress one thing about snooping on lawmakers' text messages while apparently doing something very different behind the scenes. If true, that is what legal scholars and your mother both call "a really bad look."
As Conservative Brief reported, Grassley says newly obtained Justice Department information shows that Smith's team actually accessed the contents of text messages belonging to members of Congress during the FBI's Arctic Frost investigation. This matters because Smith previously testified before the House Judiciary Committee that while investigators may have collected metadata (times, dates, recipients), they never reviewed the actual contents of those messages. According to Grassley, the records tell a different story and also suggest Justice Department protocols were violated in the process.
Now, Grassley has not publicly released all the underlying documents, so we are currently in the "trust me, bro" phase of this saga. But that has not stopped his Republican colleagues from treating this like a five alarm fire.
Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri, a former state attorney general, declared that "Jack Smith should be subject to prosecution for lying to Congress." His fellow Missourian, Senator Josh Hawley (also a former state AG, because apparently Missouri just churns them out), went even further. "Looks like perjury," Hawley wrote on social media, adding: "Joe Biden's DOJ not only tapped my phone; I just learned they ILLEGALLY obtained my texts with members of President Trump's administration. Everyone involved needs to be PROSECUTED."
Hawley then took his enthusiasm to a Senate hearing, where he asked Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche directly: "Have you thought about investigating this guy for perjury?" Blanche responded with the kind of careful non-answer that would make any lawyer proud: "We take testimony in front of this body very seriously, yes." He did not announce any investigation or indicate any conclusions had been reached.
Here is the important context that tends to get lost when senators start yelling about prosecution. To prove perjury under federal law, prosecutors must show beyond a reasonable doubt that someone knowingly made a materially false statement under oath. Being wrong or confused does not count. Whether the newly cited records actually contradict what Smith told Congress has not been independently established based on what has been made public so far.
Smith, who oversaw two federal criminal cases against Donald Trump during the Biden administration, has not publicly responded to Grassley's allegations. Both of those prosecutions ended after Trump won the 2024 election, consistent with longstanding DOJ policy against prosecuting a sitting president.
So where does this go? Nobody knows yet. No charges have been filed, no formal investigation has been announced, and Smith has not had a chance to respond. But if additional records come out that clearly show investigators were reading congressional text messages after Smith swore they were not, then the former special counsel might find himself on the wrong end of the kind of legal scrutiny he used to dish out. And that would be what the kids call irony.
Like what you see? Then sign up for our Free Newsletter
