The NPR Politics Podcast - Jack Smith defends Trump investigations and Trump backs off Greenland threat

Episode Date: January 23, 2026

It was another busy week in politics. We discuss former special counsel Jack Smith’s appearance before the House Judiciary Committee — the first time he testified publicly about his investigations into President Trump — and Trump’s announcement of a new “framework” related to Greenland.This episode: political correspondent Ashley Lopez, justice correspondent Carrie Johnson, White House correspondent Franco Ordoñez, and senior political editor and correspondent Domenico Montanaro.This podcast was produced by Bria Suggs and edited by Rachel Baye.Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi.Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Hi, this is Tim in Rochester, Minnesota. I'm currently sitting inside with my one-day-old baby daughter looking outside at the negative 8-degree temperature, glad I'm warm and cozy inside. This podcast was recorded at 12.36 p.m. Eastern Time on January 23rd, 2026. Things may have changed by the time you hear it, but I will be soaking up all the cuddle time that I can get. That's so nice. Well, congratulations on a new baby. It sounds snugly warm. Oh, man, it's going to be a weekend. No. We're all getting prepared for similar weather over here. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Ashley Lopez. I cover politics. I'm Carrie Johnson. I cover the Justice Department. And I'm Domenico Montanaro, senior political editor and correspondent.

And today on the show, we're going to try to make sense of another busy week in the world of politics. This week marked a year since President Trump was sworn in for a second time. This month also marks five years after an angry mob attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. That attack led to a criminal investigation into Trump led by then special counsel Jack Smith. Smith was on Capitol Hill yesterday speaking publicly for the first time about those cases. Carrie, let's start with you. Before we get into what we heard from Smith, can you please remind us of the two indictments, right, that Smith secured against Trump? He did get two indictments against Trump.

Neither of these cases went to trial before Trump won the election in 2024 and returned to the White House. But the first of these cases relates to classified documents the FBI found at Trump's Florida Mar-Lago resort in a bathroom, a ballroom, in office, all kinds of other places that were pretty heavily trafficked. And Trump's alleged refusal to turn those materials back over to the government. And the second case revolved around the Capitol riot on January 6th. And Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the will of the voters in the 2020 election, which he lost to Joe Biden. And so those indictments were the first of their kind. But we never saw the bulk of Jack Smith's evidence and juries never heard testimony about those allegations. Yeah.

Well, how would you describe what you heard yesterday from Jack Smith? You know, Jack Smith has been portrayed by Republicans in Congress. and by the Trump White House is out of control. And yet he was very controlled in his testimony before Congress. He was almost even soft-spoken, didn't raise his voice at all, understated. But he didn't give any ground. He defended both of the cases that he brought against Trump and said if they had gone to trial, he's convinced the president would have been found guilty, even by that high standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Jack Smith also said he's not a partisan. He wasn't even sure how he was registered, either as an independent voter or no one at all. And he said if he had any regrets, it was not

appreciating his team of lawyers and federal agents more than he did at the time. Here's a little bit more about what Jack Smith had to say about why he did what he did. No one should be above the law in this country and the law required that he be held to account. So that is what I did. Jack Smith also talked a little bit more broadly than about his cases when he was asked about the president's mass pardons for people who rioted at the Capitol on January 6th. Smith said he couldn't understand pardoning people who had beat up police officers that day. And he also said that he's concerned that the rule of law has worked so well in the United States that maybe we've started to take it for granted and that we should not.

do that. Well, Domenica, what stood out to you about Smith's testimony yesterday? Well, I mean, I think the thing that stood out to me most is just how clear he was about and how calm he was about how he felt that his investigation went when we've been in a year of Donald Trump causing all of this kind of chaos around the world. He's largely immune from any kind of criminal prosecution for official acts that he takes as president because the Supreme Court allowed that for presidents going forward. And yet, Yet, here was Jack Smith, very calmly, very clearly saying he thinks they would have won a case because he committed criminal acts and that they had proof beyond a reasonable doubt as to that fact. And when you have leaders in the world, Republicans in particular in Congress, law firms, universities, trying to figure out how to deal with Trump, it was interesting to see somebody who was as clear as he was. No, one of the points that he made that was kind of interesting politically was this.

if that federal election interference case had ever gone to trial, the one here in Washington, D.C., Smith said that his main witnesses, his star witnesses, would have been Republicans who supported Donald Trump in that election. He was prepared to call people like Trump's Vice President Mike Pence, the Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger, members of Congress, people who had volunteered to serve as electors in swing states. And so the evidence that the jury would have heard would have been out of the state. the mouths of Republicans. Yeah. Carrie, have we heard from Trump? Has he had anything to say about Smith's testimony? Yeah, Trump was coming back from overseas from the World Economic Forum in Davos, but he posted on truth social twice on the way home about Jack Smith. The first post called Jack Smith deranged and said he was being decimated by Congress. And Trump said he was hoping the Attorney General was watching Jack Smith. And then secondly, Trump doubled down in another post and said, based on his testimony today, there's no question that deranged Jack Smith should be prosecuted for his actions. The president said at a minimum he committed large-scale perjury. And interestingly enough,

Smith was actually asked by Democrats about the issue of retribution or a vendetta. And the former special counsel said he fully expected to be the subject of Trump's vendetta and maybe even to be prosecuted himself. But Smith said, I will not be intimidated. And it. And it's worth noting that when he came back into office, the president actually yanked the security clearances of some of the lawyers representing Jack Smith. So there's already been a signal in that direction. Yeah. Well, stepping back to Menico, I mean, thinking about the time since Smith's investigation, obviously Trump is now president, what does this whole situation tell you about the state of our politics right now? Well, I mean, if you step back, you know, and you think about the fact that we all saw people climbing.

walls to break into the Capitol and do so to try to interrupt the certification of the electors who were inspired by Trump. We all saw boxes of classified documents piled up in Donald Trump's bathrooms in Mar-a-Lago. And what happened is that everything just sort of got absorbed into partisanship. You know, I mean, no matter where you look almost in the entire time that Donald Trump has been on public scene, you wind up with like a 50, 3% disapproval rating, a low 40s approval rating, and almost nothing changes that because of just how quickly the right has moved to say that they're just on Team Trump, regardless of what the evidence, facts, video, photos show. I should point out, there's one shoe left to drop here. At the end of the day, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee held out the prospect that Smith could be called back to testify again.

And that's because the second part of Jack Smith's report, the one that has to do with the documents found at Mar-a-Lago, still remains secret under orders from a Trump-appointed Judge Eileen Cannon in Florida. And there have been efforts by news media organizations and good government groups to try to make that report public so Smith can talk more about it and we can all see more of the evidence the DOJM-Massed. But for right now, he's been limited in what he's had to say. So it's possible he could be called back to the Hill to talk about that classified documents part of his investigation. But it's not at all clear to me at this stage that we're going to be able to read that report anytime soon. Yeah, something to look out for. Well, I am curious to hear from both of you, whether you think House Republicans achieve what they wanted here, which was to make Jack Smith look like a partisan at all. Did that come across at all in this?

I don't think so. I mean, he came across as somebody who believed in what he was doing, who seems to be somebody who. who is, you know, calm and able to prosecute based on the facts. And, you know, Trump has been out there, you know, putting on these truth social allegations and talking in public about how he's deranged. He's a lunatic and all of that. I think anybody who watched the hearing would probably come away with a very different view. The chairman of the committee, Jim Jordan of Ohio, started out by saying Jack Smith's investigation was always all about politics and an effort to get Donald Trump. And they were willing to do almost anything to make that happen, including, as Jordan and other Republicans pointed out, getting the metadata, getting phone call records of some of these lawmakers in conversations with either the president or some of Trump's allies like Rudy Giuliani. But misdemeanor was pretty understated throughout the whole hearing. And so the idea of treating him as some kind of rampaging partisan wasn't really borne out if you were watching some of this on TV. All right, Carrie, we're going to let you go. Thanks for being here.

Oh, my pleasure. We're going to take a quick break more in a moment. This message comes from Data Bricks, the data and AI company. AI agents work best when they have the right context. Your unique data, your rules, your workflows. Agent Bricks helps companies build agents that are accurate, continuously learning, and automate everyday tasks. It's AI built for how your business actually runs. Agent Bricks by Data Bricks.

AI agents grounded in your data and build for your goals. And we're back. And White House correspondent Franco Ordarniaz joins us now. Hi, Franco. Hi. It's great to be here. So let's turn now to the world stage where President Trump has focused most of his attention this week. Trump announced the framework of a deal related to Greenland.

Franco, what do we know about this framework as of now? I know that's been changing. Well, I mean, I think so much is unsublished. certain right now. It does change the situation a lot. I mean, I think the big thing that it really does is kind of takes the threat of the U.S. invading an ally, a NATO country off the table. Or, you know, we're talking about Trump here, maybe off the table for now. We are still waiting on specific details about what this framework is. A lot of questions about will this actually be different than the treaty that the U.S. signed with Denmark decades ago already. And, you know, Trump announced this framework after

meeting with the NATO Secretary General Mark Ruda. You know, there are real questions about what involvement Denmark had in these conversations. Now, Trump even himself mentioned that Ruda most likely talked with Denmark, but Trump was obviously not talking with Denmark. So with the lack of details apparent now about Denmark, I think there's still so much uncertain. about what this really means. But what has been averted is that rapidly, you know, steamrolling situation of this turning into an international crisis. I mean, it really was an international crisis with foreign leaders, you know, essentially describing the U.S. as imperialist and authoritarian, without naming Trump specifically, of course, you know, them sending military to the region for,

quote, unquote, exercises. And Trump hitting back with not so. veiled threats, slapping new tariffs or promises of new tariffs on European allies, trolling the leaders online. So this is potentially kind of an exit ramp. But I think the real question is, what is the damage that has been done and whether it can be repaired or what amount of it can be repaired? Now, I was going to say really is like kind of a Trump saving face off ramp, which is, you know, we've talked about in the podcast as a potential thing that it seem like that the direction things were heading. You could hear his sort of softer tone in Davos about this, you know, saying very clearly he was not going to use force to go into Greenland.

And what was happening domestically was the stock market was dropping on the news of the potential continued threats to invade or take action over Greenland. And you could hear Trump sort of bemoaning the fact that he thinks that there's all these great successes and the stock market goes down, it should be going up, he would continue to talk about them as America's earnings almost. But it was clear that the subtext of that was the stock market was going down. If there's one thing that moves him, it is whether or not the stock market's going up or down. So true. I mean, it was the same thing with him backing off of tariffs. It's the stock market. And the stock market often is one of the most powerful things that does move Trump.

Now, is it going to mean anything, you know, really concrete as? for the United States' control over Greenland. The United States had a lot of access to Greenland if it wanted it before this. Yeah. I mean, does the stock market fully explain the change, of course, here regarding use of force? I mean, or was Europe, as you mentioned, Franco, the trolling, was that also in the mix? Or like, how do you assess, like, why he eventually changed his mind? I mean, I've covered Trump for a while now since the beginning of the first administration. One lesson I learned is not to try to get too much into the president. brain. Sure. That said, this was a real international situation. I mean, you had U.S. allies sending military forces to the region.

The global leaders were freaking out. You had Denmark literally saying this is so emotional for us. All these leaders. Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada, is talking about a rupture of international order. They were saying the private stuff. that they've been talking about for a while out in public and very forcefully. And I do think that definitely played a role. Yeah.

Well, I mean, what do you think this says, though, about Trump's relationship overall with Europe now? I mean, do we talk about it differently now? I mean, I think the damage is very real. I mean, Trump took back his invitation to the Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, to join the Board of Peace in Gaza in Trump's speech. He said, this is a quote, Canada. lives because of the United States. Remember that mark the next time you make your statements. And those statements were, of course, talking about the rupture of the order and, you know, implying authoritarianism. It was really tough stuff. This could also have an impact on the

future of the trade deal between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. There are a lot of implications here that, you know, are going to continue to reverberate. And again, I think there are real questions about what parts of the relationship can be repaired and what can't be repaired. And saying that a sovereign nation lives inside the United States, if you're reading between the lines with what Trump is talking about there, he really believes that the Western Hemisphere is America's. It's the United States's, you know, region. He said it in his speech. This is our territory. Yeah. This is our territory. And if that's the case, then everyone in that territory is subject to the rules and guidance and the ways of doing things of the United States. And we've seen this now start to

build over the last several months of Trump trying to assert American dominance in the Western Hemisphere. Yeah. Well, I do want to talk about another major development this week concerning the Board of Peace, which is the body charge with overseeing the peace deal in Gaza. Franco, can you tell us what we learned so far about it? Yeah. President Trump was actually joined by a small number of leaders when he was in Davos, and he signed a charter of the Board of Peace. And, you know, you have a bunch of leaders who involved, including Bahrain, Argentina, Azerbaijan, UAE, Qatar. He also actually has invites out for Russia's Vladimir Putin as well as Hungary's Victor Orban, which is what in many ways makes it very, very controversial. Now, Trump's kind of billed it as, you know, this new body that's going to be part of a solution to global conflicts, kind of a perhaps a rival to the United Nations. Trump said it could even potentially replace the United Nations.

But I think what we saw with the Carney example and Trump revoking the invitation to Carney to serve on the Board of Peace, I mean, I think it just reflects the power that Trump plans to have over the Board of Peace. It really is his board. Even the charter gives him tremendous power to veto decisions, to remove members, to change agenda items. So it's really a new way of doing business in international order where dissent, especially dissent against Trump, there are real questions about whether that will be acceptable. And there's literally about doing business because the countries that want permanent status pay a billion dollars to be part of it. You know, and Trump is in charge. It's very much like a club. The club that he runs in Florida is Mara Lago where he lives. You have to pay a certain amount of money to be involved. And it's clearly Trump's, right?

That's what he wants. He doesn't like the United Nations because the United Nations is too collaborative and undercuts the United States' power, Trump's power in particular. And when you look at the countries that are involved here, Franco named some of them, but Argentina, Turkey, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Armenia, Afghanistan. I mean, these are not- Saudi Arabia. Yeah, right.

It's notable that the UK. Germany, France. They're all saying, no, we don't want any part of this. And that is a huge crack up in the world order. Yeah. Is that what we've been hearing largely from European leaders, a big no? I mean, they're definitely saying a big no for right now. Well, the UK, they raised concerns about Putin being involved and the potential of Putin being involved. The French president, Manuel Macron, at least his office, said that the board's charter goes beyond the, quote, sole framework of Gaza and raises serious questions with respect to principles and structures of the United Nations. Again, I think that, you know, speaks to what you're saying, Domenico. It's like a early aughts rom-com, you know, he's just not that into you.

Well, all of this, I mean, as you mentioned, happened during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where Trump did take some time to talk about the U.S. economy. What did you guys make of that part of the speech? I mean, I would say that was like descriptive part of this speech. I mean, so often with Trump, there's the scripted part and there's the unscripted part. And the talk about the economy and housing and domestic issues that Trump was getting out was part of the White House's plan and effort to get Trump to move back towards domestic policies because we have a huge, very important midterm elections coming up. And, you know, in the fall and the campaign. season is really, really going to be ramping up. And this administration, this White House, has been promising for a while that Trump is going to pivot to domestic issues. But Trump keeps going back to foreign issues, you know, invading Venezuela, capturing the Venezuelan leader, threatening Iran, now, you know, threatening and now backing off a bit on Greenland. So I think

that was a clear example of the White House trying to take some control and moving Trump. to an issue that is vitally important to the Republican Party because the Republican Party is focused on winning elections where Trump continues to seem to be more interested in history and his legacy. I think legacy is a big piece of this, right? I mean, he's almost 80 years old. You look back on your life. You look back on your presidency. You know, you start to think, what have I accomplished? What is my legacy going to be? And look, affordability, quote unquote, cost of living is not exactly something you can match. message your way out of as a difficulty. It happened to Joe Biden also, right? And it's very similar this approach that he's taking. He kind of went off script in Davos. He's supposed to be talking about feeling people's pain. And instead he starts talking about how he doesn't really want housing prices to come down because that could hurt people's wealth. So he's like, I could do it so quickly to bring housing prices down. But he doesn't want to do that. Well, I mean housing, medical care.

child care, tuition, prices of groceries. These are real things. People are struggling with how to buy. And he's most consumed with the stock market and wealth. Yeah. All right. Well, we're going to take a quick break. And when we get back, it's time for Can't Let It Go.

And we're back. And it's time to end the show like we do every week with Can't Let It Go. That's the part of the show where we talk about the things from the week that we just can't stop thinking about politics or otherwise. Franco, I want to start with you. What can't you let go of this? Yeah. I have the best. Can't let it go ever.

And I'm really excited, actually, to bring it up to Domenico because I love talking. Is this another soccer thing? So last time I brought up soccer to Domenico, we went at it. And it was men's soccer. So today, it is women's soccer. And it is the news that Trinity Rodman, the star forward of the Washington Spirit, our hometown team, has signed a new contract with the Washington Spirit. And it's a huge deal because there was all this, you know, drama and, you know, questions from soccer fans and really just any sports watchers about what was going to happen to her because the, you know, the women's soccer league couldn't figure out a way to get past their salary cap rules in order to keep her.

And she was talking to all these European teams. And there was a big expectation that she was going to leave the league. finally they changed one of the rules and kind of had this high impact player rule that's similar to what the MLS does in order to keep her. So it is a huge, massive deal. Trinity Rodman is just such an exciting player. She's this dynamic forward who can do everything, you know, score, clutch goals. And it's just really fun to watch. Yeah, Trini Robbins is a great player. And, you know, a big reason why the U.S. women's national team is as good as it is. compared to the men, which is impossible to watch. That was constant drama and chaos. Go ahead.

You know, and so I think it's a great thing that they were able to bring her back. Because look, the women's professional soccer league needs these kinds of, you know, tent pole players to be able to draw fans in. So I think it's a really good thing. And she's definitely going to be the face of the league of the NWSL. And I think it's really a great thing for the league. And, you know, they're going to now start calling, before it was called the Beckham Rule, which has got David Beckham to play at MLS, the Men's League. Now they're calling it the Rodham Rule. So I think it's pretty exciting.

Rodman Rules used to mean something different back in the 90s. Oh, yeah. Because her father is Dennis Rodman, as we know. So at least she's not playing in North Korea. Does she have cool hair as well? She does have cool hair. It's not quite her dad's flamboyance. But, yeah.

Yeah, yeah. She's got some energy. All right, Domenico, I'm assuming we're going to stick with sports because it's you. What can't you let go of this week? That is unappreciated. Violence. I have other hobbies like the Drake and Kendrick Lamar rap battle. Oh, yes.

If it sounds like, oh, God, why are we talking about that? It's two years old. I agree, Drake. Yeah. Why are you still talking about that, Drake? He can't let it go. He can't let it go. He is not like us lawsuit against UMG.

Like, what are you doing, bro? It's over. Stop, right? He's like, oh, it's bad precedent. First of all, that's why you lost a rap battle. You're using words like precedent. And Kendrick Lamar would be able to say it three different ways and better than you. Yeah.

You know, I mean, he warned him. You just, you know, look, I was saying this earlier to our producers. Like, if you are a pop star, you don't get into a rap battle with a rapper, right? If you're a catcher, I'm going back to sports, you don't play center field. It's not going to work, right? Your knees are bad. You're not going to catch the ball. Not going to happen, right?

Just stick to your thing. If Kendrick tried to make Taylor Swift songs, it wouldn't be good for Kendrick. So just stay in your lane. Let it be over. You know, chalk up your Spotify listens and just make your money. Go to Turks and tap out. Man, these are some life lessons that all of our young listeners should be paying attention to as well. I will say Kendrick of all rappers too.

Like, does he like being embarrassed? I don't understand him. Kendrick will not be embarrassed. No. He will take you to hell with him, as he said in his lyrics. I mean, I think like, I mean, I'm a millennial. So I think like the biggest rapper of my generation is definitely Kendrick Lamar. Like, I don't know why Drake would even. Also, continuing lawsuits.

I mean, you know, in one of Kendrick's comebacks, Kendrick Lamar's comebacks, he warned him. He said, cease and desist on the like that record, what you didn't like that record. He's like back to back. I like that record. We're going to get back to that for the record. He's just doing more favors. He got back to that for the record. Well, I want to stick with beefs, Canadians,

and talk about my can't let it go. What is it now? It's called Heeded Rivalry. Have you guys heard about this? Oh, yeah. Okay. That's big. I was very excited to talk about this.

We're sticking with sports. We are sticking with sports. Kind of. This is gay hockey romance. that is probably, I mean, we talked about Canadian exports. This is the biggest export out of Canada right now. It's this TV show from the streaming service crave. Anyways, the reason I bring this up, besides the fact that I have been part of the mass psychosis around this show, like, super obsessed with it first since it came out several weeks ago, is that the stars of the show, Connor Story and Hudson Williams have been selected as official torch bears for the Olympic torch rally in Milan.

So on February 6th, we will be seeing them carry a torch, which I think is kind of in the same. insane because these two actors, for people who don't know what heated rivalry is, welcome from under the rock you're under. Welcome to the light. It is a gay hockey romance that was released on HBO, I think just before the holidays. It has been on that platform like the biggest show for weeks now. The stars were of that show were waiting tables right before this came out. So they came out of nowhere and now are like the biggest stars in the industry. They were in the Golden Globes and stuff like that. But because the show is about hockey, I think now they're part of the ceremonies as well, which is, I don't know, I think it's kind of crazy for two months ago

for you to be someone that no one knows who you are and now you're carrying a torch. What I'm curious about is before all of this, Ashley came in with some violence in saying that she's interested in talking about her can't let it go because Franco and Domenico will introduce them to a part of the world they don't understand. And I was like, I don't know what you're talking about we're pretty well traveled and globally minded. Thank you. What are you talking about, Asher? I mean, I was assuming you guys haven't watched heated rivalry.

Do not seem like the audience for this show. Am I wrong? I have not watched it, but I am aware of it. You're aware of it? I have not watched it either. Okay. But I am familiar with the excitement. The context.

I take it back. Anyway, Franco and I are going to crawl back into our basic lives. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for joining me here on the cool side for a little bit. I appreciate it. All right. That's a wrap for today.

And to make sure you don't miss an episode, please hit the follow button on your favorite podcast app. Our executive producers, Mathonia Maturi. Our editor is Rachel Bay. Our producers are Casey Morel and Brea Suggs. Special thanks to Dana Farrington and Christianiative Calammer. I'm Ashley Lopez. I cover politics.

I'm Franco Ordonez. I cover the White House. And I'm Domenico Montanaro, senior political editor and correspondent. And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.