Jack Smith's witch hunt against Trump failed miserably.
But he's not going down without a fight.
And Jack Smith made one threat that he's going to live to regret.
Jack Smith House testimony opens door to Trump prosecution in 2029
Former Special Counsel Jack Smith testified before the House Judiciary Committee.
Republicans wanted answers about his failed prosecutions of President Trump.
Democrat Representative Hank Johnson from Georgia asked the question that exposed Smith's real agenda.
"Can they be rebrought or resurrected after Trump leaves office?" Johnson asked about the dismissed charges.
"They were dismissed without prejudice," Smith stated.
Johnson pressed whether prosecution remained possible after 2029.
Smith refused to rule it out.
"I'm not going to speak to that," he said.
What "dismissed without prejudice" means for Trump charges
Smith dismissed both cases against Trump last November after Trump won the election.
Justice Department policy bars prosecuting sitting Presidents.
But Smith made a calculated choice about how to dismiss them.
He chose "without prejudice" instead of "with prejudice."
"With prejudice" means it's over forever.
"Without prejudice" means prosecutors can refile later.
Smith picked the option that keeps Trump under threat for four years.
Former prosecutor Barbara McQuade spelled it out.
Smith structured the dismissals "to keep the cases alive in the long term" for another prosecutor to pick up in 2029.
He even filed detailed reports laying out his evidence before Trump took office.
During testimony he doubled down.
He would prosecute Trump again "regardless of whether that president was a Democrat or Republican."
"No one should be above the law," Smith declared.
Statute of limitations will kill Jack Smith's Trump prosecution threat
Smith's plan has one fatal flaw.
The statute of limitations.
Federal law gives prosecutors five years to bring charges.
Trump's alleged conduct happened in late 2020 and early 2021.
By January 2029, more than eight years will have passed.
The five-year deadline will have expired.
And dismissing "without prejudice" doesn't stop the clock.
It keeps running like the charges were never filed.
Any refiling in 2029 gets immediately dismissed as time-barred.
Even Smith's defenders call refiling "extremely unlikely" and "not realistic."
But he refused to rule it out.
Democrats want this fake threat hanging over Trump even though it's legally impossible.
House Republicans expose Smith's January 6 investigation tactics
Republicans hammered Smith for secretly grabbing phone records of Members of Congress.
Senator Chuck Grassley revealed Smith spied on eight Republican Senators without telling them.
Their crime?
Supporting Trump's election challenges.
Democrats questioned the results in 2000, 2004, and 2016 elections.
The media called it patriotic.
Trump did it and Smith spent $50 million calling it a federal crime.
Voters disagreed.
They gave Trump a landslide victory and a mandate to clean house.
While Smith testified, Trump fired back on Truth Social.
He called Smith a "deranged animal" who "destroyed many lives under the guise of legitimacy."
Trump urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate Smith's conduct.
Smith spent $50 million with two federal indictments and dozens of felony charges.
He hired twenty prosecutors and forced witnesses before grand juries across multiple states.
Voters chose Trump anyway.
Even in defeat Smith couldn't resist taking one last shot by refusing to rule out future prosecution.
That threat is legally meaningless because the statute expired.
But Smith wanted Trump under a cloud for four more years.
Bad move.
Attorney General Bondi can investigate whether Smith abused his authority, examine how Smith spied on Members of Congress, and review whether he violated Trump's constitutional rights.
Jack Smith thought he could threaten Trump on his way out the door.
Instead he just put Attorney General Bondi's crosshairs.
Sources:
- Stephen Dinan, "Jack Smith suggests Trump charges could be brought again," The Washington Times, January 22, 2026.
- "Special Counsel Jack Smith Faces Tough Questions In Fiery Congressional Hearing," The Daily Wire, January 22, 2026.
- "Why is US prosecutor Jack Smith dropping charges against Trump?" Al Jazeera, November 27, 2024.
- "Judge dismisses charges against Trump in D.C. election case after Jack Smith request," CBS News, November 26, 2024.
- "Don't confuse Jack Smith's motion to dismiss Trump's charges for capitulation," MSNBC, November 26, 2024.
- "'Dismissed Without Prejudice' – What does it mean?" Shouse Law, May 6, 2025.
- "My case was dismissed without prejudice? Can it be refiled?" Shouse Law, January 23, 2025.
- "Trump was 'looking for ways to stay in power,' Jack Smith tells House committee," Yahoo News, January 22, 2026.
