The New Year’s Eve release by the House Judiciary Committee of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s closed door testimony grants the prosecutor his wish — and could set the stage for clashes to come.

Mr. Smith ventured that President Trump “wants to seek retribution against” him and answered “no” when he was asked if he would be surprised if he were indicted by Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Department of Justice. Mr. Smith also testified that Mr. Trump “caused” the violence at the Capitol and “exploited it.”

The records released include some 255 pages of transcripts and eight hours of video. Mr. Smith, who led two failed federal prosecutions of President Trump, testified under oath following a subpoena issued by the Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Congressman Jim Jordan. Mr. Smith’s preference for a public hearing was denied by lawmakers, as was his request to be immunized for his testimony.

Mr. Smith’s opening statement declared that he developed “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” that Trump engaged in a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election. He also insisted that Mr. Trump “repeatedly tried to obstruct justice” in the prosecution that centered on the storage of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. In the video Mr. Smith appears confident and does not invoke the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. 

Mr. Smith said with respect to the January 6 case that Mr. Trump “by a large measure the most culpable and most responsible person in this conspiracy” and that the once and future president propagated  “claims that were so outlandish and so just fantastical” and that he continued “to push those sorts of claims after they’d been disabused.” Mr. Trump pleaded “not guilty” in both criminal cases levied against him. The cases were dismissed after Mr. Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election.

Mr. Smith’s final report on the January 6 case, released in the days before Mr. Trump swore the oath of office for a second time, struck the same defiant note as his testimony earlier this month. The special counsel insisted that he would have convicted Mr. Trump “but for” the results of the election. Mr. Smith avers that he was thwarted not on the merits but because the Department of Justice maintains a “categorical” ban on prosecuting a sitting president. 

Mr. Smith, though, did cast doubt on some of the most explosive public testimony against Mr. Trump — that offered by the former aide Cassidy Hutchinson to the House January 6 Committee, which was dominated by Democrats. Mr. Smith told lawmakers that ” If I were a defense attorney and Ms. Hutchinson were a witness, the first thing I would do was seek to preclude some of her testimony because it was hearsay,” and therefore inadmissible.

The special counsel was asked about Ms. Hutchinson’s claims that Mr. Trump knew that some of his supporters were armed at the January 6 rally that turned violent and that the president tried to forcibly grab the steering wheel of the Beast away from a Secret Service agent and return to the mayhem at the Capitol. Mr. Smith reckoned that Ms. Hutchinson was “a second or even thirdhand witness” and that other witnesses gave “different perspectives.”

Mr. Smith reflected that the “evidence that I felt was most powerful was the evidence that came from people in” Mr. Trump’s “own party who … put country before party and were willing to tell the truth to him, even though it could mean trouble for them.” These included Vice President Mike Pence, who Mr. Smith determined would make a strong witness if called to the stand at trial.

One of Mr. Smith’s more startling admission under oath was that he had not made final charging decisions on the unindicted co-conspirators in the January 6 case when Mr. Trump reclaimed the White House. That means that  Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Kenneth Chesebro, John Eastman and Boris Epshteyn could all have eventually faced their own criminal charges.

The prosecutor refused to divulge details from his final report in the Mar-a-Lago case, which is currently tied up in litigation. Judge Aileen Cannon has blocked its release for now, a status under seal that Mr. Trump wishes to make permanent. The judge has imposed a deadline next month to determine the dossier’s fate. When asked about it Mr. Smith would say only “I don’t think I should even talk about that. I don’t want to have any — any implication that I gave some sort of insight about how that report is constructed.”