Does anyone know why the Jack Smith deposition was released?

[Tumbulu]

I am wondering, as it seems very damning, illustrating the obvious stupidity of the Republicans ( and why do none of them even introduce themselves? Who was that first idiotic inquisitor, for instance?).

It seems really strange to me and I am left wondering if it means that they ( the republicons) are not as unified around T anymore?

I’d love to hear your ideas.

Thanks in advance.

[Ms. Toad]

1. The introductions were not on tape -

The happened at the beginning - and the names were redacted in the transcript.

[Tumbulu]

4. Thanks for the explanation of the lack of introductions

Do you happen to know who the first one asking questions was?

[Ms. Toad]

7. Update: Name redacted.

Most of the questioners in the first part of the transcript, at least, were redacted.

You're talking about the questioner who started: You just made some pretty definitive statements about your belief that President Trump was guilty of these charges. Is that correct?", right? That was a name redacted question.

These names were all redacted, and show up only by title/role:

Appearances: For the COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY: , CHIEF CLERK , GENERAL COUNSEL , COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR AND COUNSEL , DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL , PROFESSIONAL STAFF MEMBER , CLERK , DIGITAL DIRECTOR CHIEF COUNSEL FOR OVERSIGHT , PROFESSIONAL STAFF MEMBER , CLERK , PROFESSIONAL STAFF MEMBER RESEARCH ASSISTANT , MINORITY OVERSIGHT COUNSEL , MINORITY SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR INVESTIGATIONS AND SENIOR ADVISOR , MINORITY GENERAL COUNSEL , MINORITY CHIEF COUNSEL AND SENIOR ADVISOR , MINORITY SENIOR COUNSEL , MINORITY FELLOW, MINORITY LEGAL INTERN , MINORITY COUNSEL , MINORITY INTERN MINORITY SENIOR COUNSEL MINORITY INTERN

[choie]

12. That is outrageous

We pay these fuckers salaries, healthcare, future pensions and other perks of their positions. How the hell do they have the right to redact their names when they were only questioning him?

[Ms. Toad]

13. I was quite surprised.

My guess is that they were trying to protect them from harassment. That might make a teensy-weensy bit of sense if the questioners were staffers (as opposed to elected officials) - but they appear to have redacted the names of virtually every one.

[SayItLoud]

2. Timing is everything and this is a disaster IMO

Released on New Years Eve. Bowl games, parties, celebrations, a holiday tomorrow in the US. Worst time to release this ever.

[Tumbulu]

6. But was it promised to be released?

Was anyone expecting them to be released at all?

[Tumbulu]

8. Well, everyone that I know is home reading it

So to me it seems like the kind of timing that illuminates how stupid the repubs are. Because most people are home resting. And now they have the time to watch the whole 8 hours.

Plus it is not going away, in time those few who go to parties will be back home and can watch it.

[Ms. Toad]

14. I'm at 6 hours and 6 minutes . . . n/t

[NJCher]

32. It was indeed stupid

I heard a figure of 68% of people stay home on New Years.

[CousinIT]

19. For the criminals involved, it was the BEST TIME to release it.

This was CALCULATED this way for precisely that reason. Some of the criminals involved were DOING the depositions,obviously, so they had complete control over the timing.

Releasing it late afternoon on 12/31 when virtually ALL news stations are airing bowl games, NYE parties and ball drops, and a holiday following was INTENTIONAL to protect the #1 PERP - Donald Trump.

[Dan]

3. Wasn't Aileen Canon instructed to release the documents?

[Volaris]

25. She gave the DOJ time to offer a counter-argument

Feb 2nd or 20th or some such, but I'm not sure even THATS legal, since the appellate court gave her a firm date to have EVERYTHING done and discharged, and this delays that order. Probably by valantines day, somebody will go back to the appellate court and ask that the Writ be enforced, and that SHOULD be the final word on releasing it.

And then this DOJ will take another month of dissembling to actually get anything out.

Oh well. Every day they delay just brings it all that much closer to the mid terms..

[bucolic_frolic]

5. Republicans couldn't hide from it any longer so they released it when no one was looking.

[SheltieLover]

9. Why was it nit open testimony?

Repukes were adamant to keep it secret, then they released it?

And wtf is with not introducing themselves? Were they born in barns? Nm.

[Raven123]

10. I have read almost all of the report. Not much new information there.

Release it while everyone is otherwise occupied on a holiday weekend. Won’t get as much attention. Smith couldn’t discuss what Cannon hasn’t released yet.

[choie]

15. Maybe not new information for you.

But I'm sure Jack Smith's responses to the questioning, which included substantiating that trump had everything to do with January 6th , might be new to many.

[Raven123]

22. Perhaps.

However, I think one reason they released the interview was because there wasn’t any significant new information. Whether or not people were paying attention on January 6, 2021, or followed the subsequent J6 Committee investigation and hearings is another question.

[rampartd]

30. everybody knows that jan 6 was by trump for trump and about trump

but 1/2 the country thinks trump was right to send paramilitary goons to kill godless pedophile commie democrats and the vp.

that is lust what we are up against.

[applegrove]

11. Maybe they hope it drowns out the Friday Epstein files dump?

Maybe it is because nobody will be watching on New Years' Eve, New Years' Day and the weekend? Could be anything with this lot.

[H2O Man]

16. Yes.

The House Democrats released it. The video of Mr. Smith's testimony is particularly impressive.

[mercuryblues]

17. This is the low-key warning to trump

To stop his crazy assed, shit or more will be released.

Now we all know Trump all he's going to do is double down. Republicans are now in CYA mode. They will impeach if it comes down to that.

[H2O Man]

18. Yes.

A message for republicans planning to run for re-election in 2026, as well. I think it's curious some here mistakenly seem to think the republicans released this. They didn't. Democrats did. And that's the same difference as between shit and sugar.

[Fiendish Thingy]

21. The news reports from several sources say it was released by the Republicans on the committee. Nt

[H2O Man]

26. You are right!

I was wrong.

Thanks!

[Ms. Toad]

23. Perhaps because Jim Jordan is a Republican?

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Wednesday released the transcript of the panel’s deposition with former special counsel Jack Smith concerning his team’s investigations and prosecutions of President Trump.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5668393-jack-smith-deposition-transcript-read-file/

[H2O Man]

27. You are right!

And I was wrong.

Thanks!

[H2O Man]

24. I'm wrong.

It is the republicans who released it!

[H2O Man]

28. Thank you to

those who corrected me here. It allowed me to also note that I was wrong on this while editing an OP I posted today.

[Fiendish Thingy]

20. The transcript will make a useful roadmap for the 2027 impeachment hearings.

With Smith making a return appearance as the star witness.

[RockRaven]

29. It is going to get out anyway, so dump it when attention is at a nadir. When people

try to address it later, insist that it is old news and they are stuck in the past.

[underpants]

31. Yep that's it.

[Jack Valentino]

33. RATS SCRAMBLING for the supposed 'exits'....

Yeah, I wondered myself why they would release that--- since GQP controlled the committee

but possibly the maggot delusional legislators supposed
that it would help them with their base base ???


Happy New Year!