JONATHAN TURLEY: Even the Washington Post admits Jack Smith was wrong on free speech
Fox News correspondent David Spunt has the latest on the deposition of former special counsel Jack Smith regarding his decision to indict President Donald Trump on ‘Special Report.’
For years, some of us have argued that President Donald Trump's January 6th speech was protected under the First Amendment and that any prosecution would collapse under governing precedent, including Brandenburg v. Ohio. I was regularly attacked as an apologist for my criticism of Special Counsel Jack Smith's "war on free speech." I wrote about his history of ignoring such constitutional protections in his efforts to prosecute targets at any cost. I also wrote about how Smith's second indictment (which the Post supported) was a direct assault on the First Amendment. Now, years later, the Washington Post has acknowledged that Trump's speech was protected and that Smith "would have blown a hole in the First Amendment."
In this appearance before Congress, Smith's contempt for the First Amendment was on full display. During his testimony, he was asked by Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) whether Trump was entitled to First Amendment protections for his speech.
Former Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith enters a room in the Rayburn House Office Building to give his deposition before the House Judiciary Committee, part of its oversight into DOJ investigations into President Donald Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 17, 2025. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)
Smith replied: "Absolutely not. If they are made to target a lawful government function and they are made with........
