Things got testy between Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and former Special Counsel Jack Smith when the California Republican brought up the alleged spying by the Biden Justice Department targeting communications records from then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy. McCarthy wasn’t the only member of Congress for whom Smith and his team sought toll records.
Smith said he didn’t spy on anyone, which made Issa angry. Later, when things got too close to home, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) ran interference, interrupting Issa pervasively:
.@repdarrellissa: Did you mention that you were spying on seeking records so you could find out about when conversations occurred between the...Speaker of the House and the president? Did you inform the judge or did you hold that back?
— CSPAN (@cspan) January 22, 2026
Jack Smith: My office didn't spy on anyone. pic.twitter.com/41exgEKzRR
HOLY CRAP! It's getting HOT in Congress with Jack Smith! Rep. Darrell Issa just PINNED him against the wall over him SPYING on members of Congress.
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) January 22, 2026
Jamie Ratskin tried to SHOUT DOWN Rep. Issa EVERY TIME he pressed Smith for a straight answer.
Why are Democrats AIDING AND… pic.twitter.com/ckp8H6m9OL
House Republicans post this about Smith before today’s hearing:
- Smith continued—and continues—to depart from precedent set by other special counsels by asserting a person's guilt without a jury verdict. Smith violates the fundamental tenet of the American legal system of innocent until proven guilty.
- Smith imputed guilt to President Trump partially because of who advised the President at the relevant times —implying that only "experts," in Smith's view, should be briefing the President. Smith seems to believe that he is an arbiter of who may counsel a president.
- Smith stated that he was deeply involved in the details of his office's investigations. But, when probed, Smith said he could not recall basic investigative steps that his team took.
- Smith conceded that he approved of several actions and procedural moves that were highly irregular.
- Smith approved toll record subpoenas for Members of Congress without regard for whether the private communications were constitutionally protected. When asked who bears the burden of this abuse, Smith blamed President Trump for the prosecution's unconstitutional conduct.
- Smith sought Speaker McCarthy's private toll records to corroborate evidence his office already possessed. In other words, he had no need for the records, but sought them because he could—a flagrant abuse of the prosecutor’s duty to do justice.
- Smith confirmed that his prosecutors did not tell judges signing gag orders for the subpoenas that the Special Counsel's Office was seeking records from Members of Congress.
- 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.
- Although Smith wanted to prevent President Trump from commenting on the case, Smith could not articulate a specific harm concretely traceable to anything President Trump said about the case.
- Smith testified that partisan January 6th Select Committee star witness Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony was unreliable and contradicted by other witnesses with better knowledge.
- Smith declined to initiate an independent investigation into serious allegations that his top aide Jay Bratt threatened a defense counsel to entice his cooperation with the prosecution—instead asking two other deputies to do an internal review of their peer.
- Smith testified that, at his direction, his team asked for and received the partisan January 6th Select Committee's evidence gathered during its politically motivated inquiry.
What a circus.
🚨"And with that I yield back in DISGUST of this witness!"
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) January 22, 2026
Things got HEATED between Darrell Issa and Jamie Raskin during the California representative's questioning of Jack Smith. pic.twitter.com/yPk59RC8wN
🚨BREAKING NEWS: Rep. @chiproytx just revealed that HIS PHONE RECORDS were also subpoena'd by the Biden DOJ!
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) January 22, 2026
"I didn't know! I didn't know until about three weeks ago!" pic.twitter.com/cah0CtIJ2W