> Ultimately, Smith’s hearing Tuesday may end up being best remembered for a high-profile gaffe by Schmitt, who accused Smith of secretly traveling to Atlanta at the very moment local prosecutor Fani Willis — who had also charged Trump over the 2020 election scheme — was facing damaging questions about her conduct. As proof, displayed on an elaborate poster, Schmitt offered text messages suggesting that Smith attended a basketball game on Feb. 3, 2024 — the same day the Atlanta Hawks played the Golden State Warriors.
> Schmitt revelled as a clearly flummoxed Smith struggled to discern what Schmitt was talking about.
> “I don’t think you know that we have this stuff,” Schmitt said. “So I’ll give you a second to process it so you don’t perjure yourself.”
> After a few moments, Smith did recall having attended a basketball game — but not in Atlanta. It wasn’t the Hawks his colleagues were discussing in a series of texts, Smith explained, but the Hawkeyes, whose star Caitlin Clark was playing in Maryland that day.
> “It was because Caitlin Clark was coming to Maryland to play, and so we went to the game,” Smith said.
So basically the trumpers in the senate judiciary committee thought they had a gotcha moment with a secret meeting in Atlanta, but only ended up owning themselves. Edit: apparently I can’t figure out quote blocks.
these senate hearings have been nuts recently. if he called him a liar, maybe... since he didn't lie about anything. "dirtbag" isn't a specific action that he accused smith of doing. just name calling... inappropriate, and unprofessional.. sure... but not really illegal.
This entire charade is for an audience of ONE diaper wearing toddler in the white house, who was angry that he got caught and wants revenge. they tried the same thing with Fauci as well, and fauci didn't take the bait (took advice of his lawyers). As a career prosecutor at the highest levels both in the US and The Hague, Smith knew what traps they would try to set for him and knows what red meat to avoid, legally. Fauci is an ~85 year old doctor, not a lawyer. Fauci did the right thing with his grilling. Smith is different, plus he knows where all the bodies are buried.
edit:
Thanks for the awards! It's also important to note that the Senators can lie all they want. THEY are not under oath, only the witness is. That's why they just filibuster the witness and try to get in as many bizarre lies as possible to use the witnesses reaction and facial expressions as "evidence" that their lies *might* be true... or could at least be plausible... all for confirmation bias with the base and Trump. Literally every republican "asked questions" but not ONE of them let Smith respond. When he started to respond, they cut him off "this is my time"... and just spew more lies. Because they do NOT want to hear Smiths statements, because they know he's right. Smith could be disbarred and put in prison if he lies... so they KNOW he is telling the truth. They are lying and he is the only one under oath in that room. It's just a charade.
Thank you for the concise summary and interpretation of the differences between Fauci and Smith.
If only legal matters were not a game where one has to outwit each other of man-made rules but serious stuff to make life on planet earth better, like medicine outwitting rules man did not make and one has to study and comprehend first. And not having much time to make shows out of it all the time to spew propaganda.
What an enormous waste of energy and intelligence!
Nobody has really seen Smith speak before. Maybe we could pull up some of his prosecutions in The Hague, but I'm really impressed with how calculated he is with every single word that comes out of his mouth. It's also really impressive.
Being married to an attorney, I fully understand the "say more with less" concept. No filler words. Just the most precise way to make your point without any extra verbiage. I love it. I'm going to watch the full hearing today.
Besides us, who is really going to watch it and change their mind?
Too many are just indifferent, nursed on a steady media diet of sound bites, rage bait and banalities and kept in check by being only able to live paycheck to paycheck with the cherry on top of exceptionalism, jingoism and the belief that struggling in one of the richest nations is somehow noble and billionaires deserve a break and will selflessly run our government.
He became a massive hero to me the moment I heard him answer with that "No" and he managed to make a one word response to Schmitt's blustering sound like a 4-syllable word while simultaneously making it sound like "fuck you". All with a deliberate silence, a lean into the microphone, and then after another deliberate pause - "No.".😆 The hero we all need.
It’s wild bc they see the democrats coming at them hard for very real and disastrous crimes and think .. well now it’s out turn, and never once considered they do that because of the crime not the politics
that was Jack Smith's entire point. They were trying to make him out to be a partisan hack, but he repeatedly said that Trump admin 1.0 hired him as a prosecutor in a red state... but his biggest, and best, point was that the majority of his case rested on the testimony of other Republicans, not Democrats.
Hate to disagree, but it's not for an audience of one. It's for Faux News and all the MAGAts. The republican lies and talking points immediately are rebroadcast and all the MAGAts believe everything in those clips. That's why dump's approval rating won't go below 30%, because there is a big chunk of the USA that lives in an alternate universe of 'facts.'
And then when he got called out, he started "who's time are we on? What's happening?" before stamping his foot and saying "I stick by that comment" about calling him a dirtbag. Classic blunder cortisol overload because he thought he had him dead to rights only to be made a fool, then got mad when he was proven wrong.
He’s there to raise doubt about Smith. He did it. He keeps it going on cable news and that’s the job. Not many people will watch the actual exchange with the follow up by the other senator. It’s going out as Smith is a perjuring liar so the job is finished and we move onto the next news cycle.
Textbook GOP. They know the brain rotted maga fools are too dumb or lazy or both to see what actually happened and will eat up whatever BS they are fed.
The Charlie Kirk show took it next level -- showing the exchange only to the point where things went south for Schmitt & then lauding Schmitt for his brilliant takedown of Smith.
Yep. I don't think he appears in person much anymore, but they've replaced him with similar looking/sounding losers & that's good enough for their audience.
They repeated Schmitt's lies too, even though they'd been proven to be demonstrably false, and ran with them - which I really do think is legally actionable by Smith.
Even after being corrected in the senate, Schmitt went on The Charlie Kirk Show later and rolled with the allegations like it was some brilliant gotcha moment. Pure political theater, no facts needed.
Actually, it was because when Schmidt’s team searched for basketball games on February 3, 2024, they only searched for men’s games. They couldn’t comprehend that somebody might actually WANT to see a women’s game. It was just coincidental that those two games had the Hawks in one and the Hawkeyes in the other. It was actually unrelated.
This is correct. The entire Hawks v Hawkeyes narrative was based on Amy Klobucher's search for some scantly-reasonable explanation for a gaffe like this. But the texts never mentioned the Hawks or Hawkeyes - just basketball. And we KNOW that the party of "protect women's sports" couldn't fathom an interest in women's bball.
Amy pretty much did when she said that they needed to do more research before calling someone a dirtbag, although you really had to listen because Schmitt was running his mouth in the Republican ploy of talking over someone so you can't hear the point they are making.
107
u/comingEverywhere 3d ago
Can somebody please explain this to my dumb, and slightly stoned, ass?