Julie Kelly Exposes False Claims by Former Special Counsel Jack Smith in Trump Prosecution

Investigative journalist Julie Kelly has accused former special counsel Jack Smith of making multiple false and misleading claims regarding his prosecutions of President Donald Trump. In a detailed thread on X, she outlined what she described as a series of “lies” related to the 2020 election interference case, the classified documents investigation, and Smith’s handling of court proceedings.

Kelly disputed Smith’s recent public comments defending his work as special counsel, arguing that court records and subsequent judicial rulings undermine his narrative. Her post followed hours after the House Judiciary Committee released a transcript and video of Smith’s closed-door testimony on December 17.

Highlighting specific discrepancies, Kelly noted that Smith falsely claimed he was not driven by the 2024 election calendar. Instead, she pointed to what she called Smith’s “extraordinary” request for the Supreme Court to immediately address presidential immunity questions in late 2023. According to her account, Smith sought the high court to bypass the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit after U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan—a Barack Obama appointee—denied Trump all claims of presidential immunity.

The Supreme Court ultimately rejected Smith’s request, the appeals court upheld Chutkan’s ruling in February 2024, and the justices themselves took up the issue. In July 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that presidents enjoy broad immunity for official acts—a decision that significantly narrowed Smith’s indictment in the election interference case.

Kelly also challenged Smith’s characterization of January 6, 2021, Capitol events as an “attack,” describing the protest as “unarmed” and disputing claims that 140 police officers were injured. She further contested Smith’s assertion that a Jan. 6 tweet from Trump criticizing former Vice President Mike Pence endangered Pence’s life.

Additionally, Kelly rejected Smith’s claim that Trump delayed responding to Capitol unrest, noting that the first breach occurred at approximately 2:12 p.m. local time and Trump issued messages about 25 minutes later urging people to “stay peaceful” and respect law enforcement.

Kelly also disputed Smith’s misrepresentation of Twitter’s dispute over a nondisclosure order seeking Trump’s account data. She stated that Twitter did not refuse compliance but sought appellate relief after U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell—an Obama appointee—imposed what Kelly called an unreasonable deadline, later fining the company $350,000 for a brief delay.

According to Kelly, Smith initially argued Trump was a flight risk to justify the nondisclosure order—a claim later acknowledged as erroneous. She further challenged Smith’s assertion that Trump should be treated like any “normal person” regarding records, citing testimony from a National Archives official that every president retains classified materials. Prosecutors also conceded that the Trump case was the first espionage-related charge brought against a high-ranking elected official for document retention.

Smith has not publicly responded to Kelly’s specific claims.