Jack Smith’s own team secretly read the private text messages of 44 members of Congress — then Smith told Congress under oath that he never collected any text messages from lawmakers.
Story Snapshot
- Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley revealed that Smith’s team obtained and read the actual content of texts from 44 members of Congress — not just call logs.
- Department of Justice records show investigators skipped a required Filter Team review and went straight to the message content.
- Smith told Congress under oath that he collected only phone records — no text messages — from members of Congress.
- Smith has already been referred for professional misconduct, and two state bar panels have recommended disbarment.
What Grassley’s Records Actually Show
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley dropped a bombshell on Tuesday. Department of Justice documents provided to his committee confirm that Smith’s investigative team obtained and read the actual text message content sent by 44 members of Congress to senior White House officials during the final weeks of President Trump’s first term. That’s not call logs or phone numbers. That’s the words inside the messages themselves.
The documents also show that investigators skipped a required internal step. Every investigation of this type is supposed to run sensitive materials through a “Filter Team” — a firewall designed to protect privileged communications, including those from elected officials. According to the Department of Justice’s own summary, Smith’s team “apparently bypassed the Filter Team and directly accessed these text messages.” Both Republican and Democrat lawmakers were among those whose messages were read.
Smith Said the Opposite Under Oath
Here is where the story gets serious. In December 2023, Smith sat for a private deposition with the House Judiciary Committee. The transcript, released on December 31, 2025, shows Smith told lawmakers his team obtained “just toll records” — meaning only phone numbers, call times, and call lengths. He said there was no eavesdropping and no text message content. He specifically denied collecting text messages from members of Congress.
Those two accounts cannot both be true. Either Smith’s team did not read the texts — and the Department of Justice documents are wrong — or Smith told Congress something that wasn’t accurate while under oath. Smith has not released a statement directly addressing the Department of Justice’s July 2026 letter, which names the Filter Team bypass and the content access specifically. That silence has only fueled the controversy.
What “Lying Under Oath” Actually Requires
Calling this perjury in a legal sense requires more than a contradiction. Prosecutors must prove the person knew their statement was false when they said it. The Department of Justice used the word “apparently” in its summary — leaving open the possibility that Smith’s deputies accessed the texts without telling him before his December 2023 testimony. No deputies have been deposed. No internal emails have been released. That gap matters legally, even if it doesn’t resolve the political firestorm.
🚨 BOMBSHELL: Jack Smith’s Team Spied on TEXT MESSAGES of 44 Members of Congress — Including Republicans AND Democrats
New records show Smith’s probe scooped up communications from over 40 lawmakers (mostly Republicans, but also Cory Booker and Karen Bass) during the Trump… pic.twitter.com/X604bs6B9d
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) July 15, 2026
Smith was already referred to the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility for misconduct before this latest revelation. Two state bar panels had also recommended disbarment. Now, ten Republican senators have demanded a formal referral over the text message access. Whether the Department of Justice acts is another question entirely. History shows that perjury cases against high-profile government officials rarely result in charges — and the political will to push this one forward remains unclear. What is clear is that a former special counsel told Congress one thing, and his own agency’s records now say something very different. Americans on both sides of the aisle deserve a straight answer.
Sources:
youtube.com, politico.com, nypost.com, judiciary.senate.gov, thegatewaypundit.com, robertgouveia.substack.com, transcripts.cnn.com, cnn.com, justice.gov, washingtonexaminer.com, brennancenter.org, npr.org, justsecurity.org, en.wikipedia.org, lawfaremedia.org, eenews.net, govinfo.gov