The Republicans’ Investigation Into Jack Smith, And The Other ‘Investigators'

The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America, and Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small. The U.S. Department of Transportation is empowering staff with Google AI tools to rapidly synthesize research and streamline contracting, directly strengthening the safety and reliability of our nation's transit systems. This is a new era of American Innovation. Learn more at g.co-slash American Innovation. The spirit of innovation is deeply ingrained in America, and Google is helping Americans innovate in ways both big and small. There are hundreds of thousands of skilled trade roles across the U.S. waiting to be filled. To help close this workforce gap, Google is expanding its skill trade support to help train more than 300,000 American workers across over 20 states. This is a new era of American innovation. Learn more at grow. Google slash skill trades. I'm Brett Baer. I'm Maria Bartramo. I'm Brian Kilmeade, and this is the Fox News Rundown. Monday, December 8th, 2025. I'm Mike Emanuel. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has subpoenaed former Special Counsel Jack Smith to appear for a deposition with his committee. Jim Jordan wants to know why the federal government accessed his phone records for more than two years. They know who I called, who called me, when I called them, how long the call lasted. If I initiated the call to do where I was at when that called to play, I mean, you can pattern someone's life. That is the creepiest, that's just ridiculous. Ohio Republican Congressman Jim Jordan is our guest. I'm Lisa Brady. While cigarette smoking has declined, nicotine is still big business, and so are illegal versions of e-cigarettes. Many of these devices are designed to appeal to children. That's counter to what we've tried to do in the last decade in the United States, which is to get a handle on reducing youth access of nicotine products. And I'm Guy Benson. I've got the final word on the Fox News Rundown.

Prominent Republicans want answers from former special counsel, Jack Smith. The House Judiciary Committee has subpoenaed him to appear for a deposition behind closed doors before Christmas. But President Trump would like to see it on camera for all to see. There's something really wrong with him. I'd rather see him testify publicly because there's no way he can answer the questions. Lawmakers are facing a year-end deadline to extend Obamacare subsidies. If a deal cannot be reached, millions of Americans will see their insurance premium spike. Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy is a medical doctor involved in negotiations on a solution capable of being passed in Congress. I think the White House and Republicans are very much in favor of Americans have an affordable health insurance. They want Americans to have access. And the president's given pretty clear guidelines. He wants money to go to patients and not to insurance companies. There are similar efforts in the House as well. House Speaker Mike Johnson would like to present a plan on addressing the potential insurance spike issue. Pennsylvania Republican Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick told me his vision on finding a deal soon. We have to make sure that we do not let prices go up at the end of the year. That's very, very important. There's not enough time to come up with a brand new construct. So I think we can get the best of both worlds here by having a short-term extension of the premium tax credits with guardrails. It won't be easy as Republicans have talked for years about repealing and replacing Obamacare. But finding a GOP alternative has been challenging. For now, they're wrestling with dealing with the reality. Premiums go up in the new year unless Congress acts. Well, subsidies increased price. Ohio Republican Congressman Jim Jordan is House Judiciary Chairman. I mean, so I don't think that the answer is, you know, continuing the expanded extension. of Obamacare subsidies to insurance companies. They're just going to drive a price for everybody in the long run. What we need is choice in competition, and that's what we need to focus on. That's what the speaker legislation, whether it's Rick Scott or someone else that we put together, Association Health Plans, the ability to purchase policies across state lines, health savings account. Those ideas work versus continuing the Obamacare. And I always remind people, remember the three big promises they gave this. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. And premiums will go down. They were 0 for three. And now we're just going to expand the subsidy, extend the expansion of the subsidy to insurance companies. Makes no sense. Let's focus on actually bringing down premiums and helping all Americans, helping all families with a better plan.

Okay, to your work as chairman of the House Judiciary Committee on Jack Smith, what do you personally hope to learn from Jack Smith when he sits down with the House Judiciary Committee later this month? Well, I mean, there's, I think there's lots of obvious questions. I typically don't broadcast what we're going to ask someone in a closed door deposition. But, I mean, the obvious questions is why was it so important that the carriers not tell members of Congress that the government was getting their phone laws? I mean, for goodness sake, they got mine for two and a half years. Did they know who I called, who called me, when I called them, how long the call lasted? If I initiated the call, they knew where I was at when that call took place. I mean, you can pattern someone's life. That is the creepiest, that is ridiculous. They did the speaker of the house. They go get his phone records after he becomes speaker. They go back and get his phone records for a two-month time period. I mean, that is that, so there's a, there's obviously. questions in that area. But there are lots of others I think we need to address as well. And never forget, we've already deposed three of his deputies, Mr. Windham, Mr. Bratt, Mr. Cooney. And we prefer Mr. Windham for obstructing our investigation. We actually did a criminal referral to the Justice Department. Something we don't do very often, frankly. We only do it if it is truly warranted. If we truly, we truly believe they were in violation of the law, and we did that for Mr. Windham. So we're going to bring Jack Smith in in a closed-door deposition, and then we'll see. down the road. Why do you believe members like you, Speaker Johnson, were targeted, and what do you think investigators were trying to find? I have no idea. But I think the whole, I mean, the whole plan was all President Trump was involved in some crazy conspiracy. I was like, what? What are you talking? When they did the subpoena for phone records for me, they said, well, AT&T and Verizon to the carrier. In our case, it was Verizon, you shouldn't tell your customer that we're handing over all his phone logs for a two and a half year time period because he might be a flight risk. He might go tamper with evidence. I'm like, are you kidding? I'm going to go back home to Ohio. It's like the dumbest things I've ever heard. But this is the mindset of Jack Smith. Never forget, Jack Smith was the guy who was also encouraging Lois Learner to do what she did 15 years ago. There's a reason Merrick Garland picked. this guy. Jack Smith is the guy who mishandled the documents. He accused President Trump of mishandling in the whole classified documents case. I mean, Jack Smith is the guy, one of his deputies, Jay Brad, tried to bribe one of the defense lawyers when he said, oh, we didn't realize you were a Trump guy. We thought you were interested in this federal judge position. Like, that's the kind of operation they were running. And so we're going to have some questions for him here in a week and a half.

Is an open hearing with Jack Smith still possible? And are there advantages to doing a private deposition over a public forum? Yeah, yeah. Great, great question. Yes. And so the first one is yes. We're definitely still open to that and everything's on the table. But you know the difference. And an open hearing, each member gets five minutes. But in a deposition, each side, Republicans get an hour, then Democrats get an hour, then Republicans get an hour, and Democrats get an hour. And you can go all. day long. So you can truly probe and ask the questions and get into various lines of questioning that you want to in a much longer format with one of our staff attorney, one of our good staff attorneys on our committee doing the bulk of the questioning. Now, members will jump in. I'll jump in at some point, I'm sure, but it's primarily done by our top general counsel and one of our other lawyers. On former FBI director James Comey, there's also new fallout tied to a case connected to him and a ruling that limits what evidence prosecutors can use. Are you concerned that this case or others like it could now be in jeopardy? Well, we'll see. I mean, you know, the only thing that you can do is let this play out. I mean, we've actually, we did one other referral, this Congress, a different case. But Mr. Brennan, and there has not been any charge brought yet, any indictment brought yet by the Justice Department. We'll see if that happens as well. But we do believe Mr. Brennan lied to us last Congress when we had him in for a deposition. We think it is clear. And we point that out. So we'll see what happens with Mr. Brennan. We'll see what happens with Mr. James Comey and frankly, Mr. Windham, who we've referred as well. But that is, that is, you know, the court process and the Justice Department will see how all those shake out. The Oversight Committee is now examining the massive COVID fraud scandal in Minnesota. There have been estimates of a billion dollars or more than a billion dollars in fraud and state. employees, whistleblowers coming forward, trying to flag for state leadership that something terrible was going on. What are you hoping to uncover through that investigation and the role of Governor Tim Walz? Yeah, I mean, I think you've hit on it in the question is like, what did they know? And did they look the other way? Did they look the other way for political reasons? That seemed to be the heart of it. And then just recovering taxpayer money. I mean, you look at that this is exactly the kind of situation that you have a House Oversight Committee, you have a Congressional Oversight Committee for is to look into things like this. Federal funds just being just being. you know, abused and taken advantage and all kinds of money going to these folks, fraudulent way. This is why you have an oversight committee. So Chairman Comer and our committee are digging into this. We'll see where it goes, but this is exactly the kind of investigation that is made for that particular committee.

This Minnesota case is obviously getting a great deal of attention now. Do you believe we're anywhere close to fully understanding how widespread COVID-era fraud really was and where all that federal money went? Yeah, another good question. And it was all that, all that spending and debt, I think, has led to the crazy inflation that now President Trump, of course, is bringing down. But my guess is it's going to be, you know, there's more. And when you throw trillions of dollars out there like we did. Now, again, some of it was certainly necessary. When you're telling companies, you can't operate, and it's essence of taking, you have to do something. But some of the secondary and other rounds that came from the Biden administration were just ridiculous. And I think that's where a bulk of this abuse happened. So, yeah, it could branch out into that as well. But right now, let's see what's happened in Minnesota, where this seems to be so obvious abuse. Turning overseas, there have been a lot of questions, a lot of scrutiny about the U.S. response to recent Venezuela-related boat strikes. Do you have concerns about the so-called double-tap reports? And are your colleagues raising alarms as well? Well, I don't have concerns. Some of my colleagues, primarily the Democrats, are raising concerns. But I don't have concerns. I mean, these are bad guys bringing in terrible things that do harm to Americans. American people, the legal analysis I've seen shows that what the president's actions and the actions of our military are entirely consistent with that legal analysis and appropriate. These are bad people who are, you know, narco-terrorist organizations bringing these terrible substances in it that caused death and all kinds of trouble and hardship for Americans and American family. So I support what the president is doing. But like I said, some of our... Some of our colleagues, primarily Democrats, have raised some concerns, but I don't think they're valid. There are some who bring up whether Congress should weigh in authorizing the use of military force. Do you think Congress should have a formal say before these kinds of strikes or operations move forward? I think what's happening here is fine under, you know, just this idea that these are narco-terrorist organizations doing this. I think the justification is there. That's the legal analysis that I've seen. And I think that makes sense. Certainly, if you're going to go to, you know, the Constitution is clear, if you're some other type of activity, some other war, somewhere, you know, that's going to require a vote of Congress. But this situation is not that.

Finally, looking ahead to 2026, you and everyone running for reelection in the House of Representatives is on the ballot in November. There's been a lot of talk about the affordability issue. We know President Trump is heading back out to sell his policies and what he's doing on that issue. Your thoughts on 2026 and the role the president could play in helping Republicans keep the majority. No, a huge role. You know, in the president's willing to work around the clock. It's what he does every day. And he'll be on the phone. He'll be doing events in the swing districts and helping our candidates. I always say I feel confident. You know, never forget that I always say not all Democrats are crazy, but the left that controls their party is. So we can point out that they have the crazy positions, you know, no border, defund the police, men and women's sports, all the crazy positions they take. We can point that out, and we're the party of common sense. And we're the party who's cut taxes, which I think is going to help with the affordability issue. Those are really going to start kicking in and have an impact on our economy. We're the party that's actually done what we said and secured the border with the leadership of President Trump. So we can talk about all those issues. And then again, President Trump will be as a leader of our party and a guy who can drive turnout. We'll be out there helping in all these key, just like he did last week in the Matt Van Epps at Tennessee Special Election, helping make sure Matt got over the top in one. The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Congressman Jim Jordan of the Great State, Ohio. Thank you so much for your time. Have a wonderful week, sir. All right, Mike. Thank you. Take care.

evaluate and approve the products. And if they are less harmful, there's a pathway for us to certify that they can go on the market. Right. And let me just interject, that would be part of the impetus there was to reduce smoking because of all the known harms of smoking cigarettes. Exactly. And over the decade, we've seen a massive reduction in the use of combustible tobacco products. And as people have switched to either vape or to other types of nicotine delivery, we've seen a massive reduction in combustible cigarettes, which is a cancer-causing, I think we all agree, is a cancer-causing event. But as Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said, nicotine patches and nicotine products do not cause cancer. There's been no scientific link to that. And our attempt in Congress at the time was to bring reduced harm products into the marketplace for adult consumers so that they would have choice. This fall, the FDA commissioner, did reach out to retailers nationwide, sent information aimed at boosting voluntary, you know, compliance with keeping the illegal stuff off the shelves, in part to make retailers better informed about what's illegal and what's not. Is that a strategy that can help? Well, it can help. And I think even the secretary recognizes the fact that we've got to have more product on the shelf than 13 products that have been approved. So there's just as much responsibility on the CTP to begin to approve some of the applications that have been in for as long as five years and understand that under the statute. FDA is required to address these applications within 180 days. So five years is way past the length of time that statutorily they were supposed to look at it. So there is a responsibility on the part of FDA to actually begin to do their job at CTP. and to provide the adult consumers more choices that are approved on the retail shelf. And that's hopefully an effort that FDA is working with the industry to try to accomplish. The Biden administration did announce a multi-agency task force. I think it was last June. And they talked about, you know, a plan to seek civil or criminal penalties against those selling or distributing illegal e-cigarettes and to crack down on the marketing of those products. This is something the FDA announced at the time last year. How hopeful are you that?

Those types of things can actually happen now under the new administration. Well, let me just say that in the Biden administration talk and action were two different things. There was a lot of talk, but there was no action. With the Trump administration and the current FDA, we've actually seen enforcement efforts to clean up the marketplace from smuggled and illegal products that were in the market. But here again, it takes an effort at review and approval to make sure that there's sufficient numbers of products and options on the shelves of retailers so that adult users can find what their preference is. Again, our attempt here is how do we get people off of cigarettes and onto a product that fills their need but doesn't have the health risks that combustible cigarettes does? Yeah, what would you say to people who think, you know, the jury is still out on that? Well, I would say that by every scientific account, products that don't combust tobacco are less harmful. And clearly, there may be different or varying degrees of assessment of bait product. One of the largest growing areas right now is pouches. pouches that one puts in their mouth. It delivers nicotine, much like a patch that you put on your arm. It's hard to understand why you couldn't quickly approve a pouch of nicotine when you've already got patches that go on one's arm to deliver nicotine to get over the addictive nature of switching. But this is a transition that the FDA has had to go through when you've got the culture for four years of proving nothing. It's not like you can just turn the switch on in tomorrow. All of a sudden, they accept the new options that are there. So hopefully, FDA will review quickly and match the scientific data. with the review processing come to a conclusion that they begin to approve more products for the retail shelf. I wanted to ask you if there's any concern, too, about the mechanism used in the illegal vapes. Because if the ingredients aren't regulated, one would assume the mechanism isn't either. And for instance, are there batteries more risky than an illegal product? Well, it's a great question, and I'm sure people don't think about this when they get on a plane and their device is in their bag and it's got a lithium battery in it that might cause a fire. Clearly, we've seen products that have come in the marketplace that don't meet the safety standards that are set. So it's as much about the device as it is about the ingredients, and many of these devices are designed to appeal to children. That's... counter to what we've tried to do in the last decade in the United States, which is to get a handle on reducing youth access of nicotine products. And the industry, the U.S. industry has been extremely conscious of this, but the illicit product that comes into the marketplace that's smuggled in in many cases doesn't have to live up to that effort that the industry has tried to make as the standard for the U.S. market.

So to get a better handle on youth vaping to help crack down on it more, is this where you think the focus should be? It's just cracking down on the illegal vapes the main thing that needs to happen in order to crack down on youth access to vaping. Well, clearly, youth access is impacted when the products that are on the shelf aren't appealing to them. And I think many of the illicit product today is built to appeal to the youth. But I remind your listeners, the legal age for accessing these products is 21. It's gone up from 18 over the years. And that's with the industry's agreement to do that. The industry is committed to make sure that there's an age restriction. The unfortunate thing is that many of the products that illicitly come in go to retail outlets that aren't necessarily concerned with age enforcement. And that makes any type of enforcement at the retail level much, much more difficult because of the number of eight shops that exist around the country. Is there something more that Congress should be doing at this point? What would your message be to Congress and the administration as a whole on this issue? Well, my message to the administration is continued to make the changes that are needed to bring additional products to the marketplace as quickly as possible. And to Congress, it's began to hold the FDA accountable for living up to the statute and the statutory timelines that are in place for review of these products. There's a tremendous amount of money that's been spent on the new technologies. to bring reduced harm product to the marketplace. And the companies and the consumers need to be the beneficiary of this. And that can only happen if, in fact, we go through a review process that lives up to the statutory timeline. Richard Burr, former North Carolina Senator, chair of the Coalition for Smarter Regulation of Nicotine. Thank you for spending some time with us. Great to be with you today.

Here's a look at the week ahead. Monday, the NFL goes animated. An alternate real-time Monday night football game will be played with the cast of Monsters Inc. suiting up as the Eagles and the Chargers airing on Disney Plus. Tuesday, President Trump heads to Pennsylvania to highlight how his administration is tackling inflation. He'll also tout his economic agenda. Wednesday, the Federal Reserve wraps up two days of meetings and will announce their final decision on interest rates for the year. Analyst say a rate cut is expected. Thursday, the final pennies have remitted will be up for auction. 232 sets will be sold off, including three pennies, one struck in Denver, two in Philadelphia, one of which is made of 24-carat gold. Friday, it's the day Swifties we're waiting for. Disney Plus drops the six-part docu-series, which follows the planning, execution, and behind the scenes of Taylor Swift's record-breaking heiress tour. The same day, the streamer releases the concert film for the same tour. And that's a look at your week ahead. I'm Tom Graham, Fox News.

I'm Benjamin Netanyahu Hall, Fox News Senior Correspondent and New York Times bestselling author. Join me every Monday on my podcast as I speak with silent but noteworthy heroes. Make sure you subscribe to my podcast searching for heroes with Benjamin Netanyahu Hall wherever you download podcasts and leave a rating and a review. Rate and review the Fox News rundown on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen. It's time for your Fox News commentary. Guy Benson. What's on your mind? There is a certain type of immigrant. who gets like this generational life lottery ticket to come to the united states and to build a life here and yet they seem to devote themselves to whining and griping about all the sins of this country and all of our flaws real and made up criticizing us talking about all the racism and systemic whatever it's like look at what you've been saved from i think gratitude as the overwhelming factor is in order. Not saying you can't have opinions, you can't be critical in any way, can't strive to improve our society or whatever, can't run for office. I'm not saying that. But I feel like just an overwhelming love of the country and gratitude to be here should be leading the way, and that is not the case. I'm Guy Benson.

You've been listening to the Fox News Rundown. And now, stay up to date by subscribing to this podcast at foxnewspodcasts.com. Listen ad-free on Fox News Podcasts plus on Apple Podcasts. And Prime members can listen to the show ad-free on Amazon music. And for up-to-the-minute news, go to foxnews.com.