美前特别检察官史密斯出席参议院听证会 为起诉特朗普辩护Former Special Counsel Jack Smith Testifies Before Senate, Defending Trump Charges

史密斯9月29日出席参议院司法委员会听证会，是他过去两年内第三次前往国会山作证。此前，他曾先后在闭门会议和公开听证会中向众议院司法委员会提供证词。参议院司法委员会主席格拉斯利在听证会前发表声明指出，史密斯必须为其所称的由纳税人资助的滥用职权行为负责，并主张此举意在追究司法部在拜登政府时期的相关作为。

Smith's appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 29 marks the third time he has testified on Capitol Hill over the past two years, following earlier closed-door and public appearances before the House Judiciary Committee. Committee Chairman Grassley issued a pre-hearing statement asserting that Smith must answer for what he characterized as rampant abuse of authority and political targeting funded by taxpayers, framing the hearing as an effort to hold the Justice Department accountable for actions taken under the Biden administration.

针对共和党阵营的指控，史密斯坚称自身作为职业检察官在职业生涯中同时起诉过共和党人和民主党人，否认存在党派动机。他在先前的结论报告中记录特朗普煽动支持者在国会大厦实施暴力，而特朗普否认煽动指控并曾对涉案人员予以特赦。史密斯反驳称，认为其决策受到拜登政府或政治势力指使的说法毫无根据，若案件进入审判阶段陪审团理应认定特朗普有罪。

Rejecting accusations of partisan bias, Smith noted his career record of prosecuting both Republicans and Democrats while denying political motivations. While Smith's final investigative report concluded that Trump inspired supporters to commit violent acts at the Capitol, Trump denied inciting crowds, maintained his rally remarks were appropriate, and granted clemency to defendants after returning to office. Smith previously maintained that claims of interference from the Biden administration were groundless, asserting that a trial jury would have convicted Trump based on the evidence.

史密斯在准备提交给参议院司法委员会的书面开场陈述中指出，其主导的调查获得了证明特朗普从事犯罪活动的排除合理怀疑的证据。他计划向议员强调，两个不同司法管辖区的大陪审团在审查相关证据后得出了与调查团队一致的起诉结论，这涵盖了针对2020年大选结果处置以及海湖庄园机密文件保管的两起刑事指控。

In prepared opening remarks obtained prior to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, former special counsel Jack Smith maintained that his investigations developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal activity by Donald Trump. Smith planned to tell lawmakers that grand juries sitting in two separate federal districts reviewed the evidence and reached the exact same conclusion as his investigative team regarding both the efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the retention of classified materials at Mar-a-Lago.

在证词中，史密斯还就美国当前的司法环境与法治原则提出警示，指出由于反对特朗普而使美国公民日常面临起诉威胁，国家正在经历不同寻常的挑战。他认为预定结果日益凌驾于司法部长期秉持的核心价值观、传统和准则之上，并强调历史表明法治很少瞬间被摧毁，往往是由于针对宣誓维护法治的公共机构和公职人员的攻击而逐渐被削弱。

Smith's written testimony also voiced concerns about the contemporary legal landscape and the durability of foundational legal norms, asserting that the country faces unprecedented challenges as citizens are routinely threatened with indictments for opposing Trump. He planned to warn the committee that predetermined outcomes increasingly appear to supersede the Justice Department's traditional values and standards, stating that history demonstrates the rule of law is rarely dismantled overnight but is progressively weakened by attacks directed at institutions and public servants sworn to uphold it.

国会共和党人对史密斯调查手法的审查焦点之一，集中于其团队此前获取了国会议员电子通信记录的举动。参议院司法委员会主席格拉斯利在7月披露，史密斯在调查期间获取了44名国会议员与白宫官员之间的往来短信记录，共和党议员对此表示强烈不满。此外，众议院司法委员会主席吉姆·乔丹曾要求特朗普政府对史密斯在国会作证时“看似”提供虚假陈述展开调查；史密斯的律师团队对此回应称其提供了真实完整的回答，并指责乔丹的指控意在将司法体系武器化以攻击无党派公职人员。

A primary focal point of Republican scrutiny regarding Jack Smith's investigative methods involves the special counsel's acquisition of electronic records belonging to federal lawmakers. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley revealed in July that Smith obtained text messages exchanged between 44 members of Congress and White House officials during the period surrounding the January 6 Capitol attack. In addition, Representative Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, asked the Trump administration to investigate his claim that Smith seemingly made false statements during earlier congressional testimony. Smith's legal counsel defended the testimony as truthful and responsive, asserting that Jordan's referral demonstrated an effort to weaponize the justice system against a nonpartisan career civil servant.

针对共和党阵营的集中质询，参议院司法委员会高级成员、民主党参议员迪克·杜宾在参议院发言中为史密斯进行了辩护。杜宾称史密斯为无党派的职业检察官，并批评共和党议员从未努力获取史密斯特别检察官调查报告的第二卷内容，该部分涉及特朗普在海湖庄园处理机密文件的调查事实。

In response to the Republican criticism, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, the Judiciary Committee's ranking Democrat, defended the former special counsel during a Senate floor speech on Monday. Durbin described Smith as a dedicated nonpartisan career prosecutor and criticized his Republican colleagues on the committee for making no effort to obtain Volume 2 of Smith's investigative report, which details the findings regarding Donald Trump's retention of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

在参议院举行听证会的同时，特朗普政府自去年起启动了针对联邦执法人员自2016年以来相关行为的广泛调查，这一调查时间跨度超出了大多数联邦罪行通常适用的五年诉讼时效。此外，特朗普政府撤换了参与既往涉特朗普调查的联邦调查局及司法部官员。曾负责主导该项调查的前联邦检察官乔·迪吉诺瓦已于本月离任司法部，他在离职后向媒体表示工作后期出现了职责交叉。当事官员的辩护律师近期向法庭指出，司法部官员目前正计划调查2022年8月联邦调查局搜查海湖庄园的相关细节。

Concurrent with the Senate proceedings, the Trump administration launched an inquiry last year into actions taken by federal law enforcement personnel dating back to 2016, reaching beyond the standard five-year statute of limitations for most federal offenses. The administration also removed FBI and Justice Department officials connected to past inquiries involving Trump. Joe diGenova, a former federal prosecutor who led the inquiry until departing the Justice Department this month, told reporters that responsibilities crossed paths during his final days. Defense attorneys for current and former officials informed a court that Justice Department officials appear focused on investigating the circumstances surrounding the FBI's August 2022 search of Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate.

针对本次参议院听证会的质询范围，史密斯预计不会就机密文件调查的具体内容回答提问。由特朗普任命的联邦地区法官艾琳·坎农此前签发裁定，禁止公开史密斯作为特别检察官报告中涉及机密文件的部分内容。基于该项司法禁令，司法部已明确认定在听证会上回答与机密文件调查相关的问题将构成对坎农法官命令的违反。

During the Senate hearing, Smith is not expected to discuss details of the classified documents investigation due to court-ordered constraints. U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon issued an order prohibiting the release of that portion of Smith's special counsel report. The Justice Department maintained that answering lawmakers' questions regarding that specific investigation would violate Judge Cannon's directive, restricting the scope of his testimony.