House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan says the probe into Jack Smith’s January 6 work keeps exposing deeper overreach against Trump, including a referral for alleged lying under oath and real-time monitoring of Trump’s inner circle.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) went on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity” this week and did not soften the picture. The House Judiciary Committee chairman said the panel’s ongoing look at former special counsel Jack Smith’s investigations tied to the January 6, 2021 protests and riots is following a familiar track.
Jordan’s line was blunt. Investigators keep finding more than they first expected. He tied the latest findings to what he called a years-long effort by Democrats to stop Donald Trump from holding office.
Breitbart reported Jordan’s exchange with host Sean Hannity, including the referral of Smith and the claims about real-time communications monitoring.
Hannity pressed him on whether the committee is now looking at other crimes connected to the case, and noted FBI officials in Washington had pushed back against the actions under discussion.
"Yeah. Well, well, first of all, Sean, once again, we’re, our, the line we always use is the only thing we get wrong in these investigations is it’s always worse than we thought. And we once again were proven right in that. I mean, the length he was willing to go to stop President Trump or try to stop President Trump from being president is just unbelievable."
That is the frame Jordan put on the entire probe. Not a one-off dispute over process. A sustained campaign, in his telling, to keep Trump out of power.
Jordan told Hannity the committee has already taken a formal step. He said lawmakers referred Smith for lying to them under oath about access to communications involving members of Congress.
According to Jordan, Smith told the panel he did not have access to the communications themselves, only the records. Jordan said the facts showed otherwise.
"So, yeah, we’ve referred him for lying to us. He did that under oath about communications that he got access to of members of Congress that he told us he didn’t have access to communications, just the records. So we referred him for that. There are other issues we’re looking at as well. So, and then, of course, you have this idea that First Amendment, he tried to keep President Trump from even talking during all of this. So all of those issues, I think, are there but now we’re going to look at this a little closer."
The referral is one concrete action Jordan put on the record. He also flagged a separate First Amendment concern: that Smith tried to keep Trump from speaking during the period under review.
He did not treat that as a closed file. He said the committee is still examining other issues and intends to look closer.
Readers following related oversight already know how wide the communications fights have run, including a Senate probe into Jack Smith’s team and lawmaker messages swept up in Trump-related work.
Hannity then turned to what he described as real-time monitoring tools. He focused on Susie Wiles, who he said was often talking to Trump’s friends, supporters, donors, political allies, and attorneys.
"All right. Let’s talk about the real-time monitoring tools that were being used here especially as it relates to Susie Wiles, who was talking to, often, not only the president’s friends and supporters and donors, and political allies, but also his attorneys."
Jordan did not walk the claim back. He called the scope extreme.
"Yeah. I mean, look, the idea that they went and got real time communications, knowing who Susie Wiles is talking to, when that call happens, how long that call lasts, who’s calling her, who she may be contacting, that is crazy. They did that to both the first lady, to the first family, and of course, to the White House, later the White House chief of staff. This is how ridiculous it all got, the lengths again he was willing to go to try to stop President Trump."
In Jordan’s account, the monitoring was not limited to a campaign aide’s call log in the abstract. It included who called, when the call happened, how long it lasted, and who she might contact next.
He said the same approach reached the first lady, the first family, and the person who later became White House chief of staff.
That family-and-staff surveillance theme matches earlier reporting on White House records on Biden-era FBI monitoring of Melania and Barron Trump travel and related attention on Wiles.
Jordan’s point was simple. If prosecutors can map the first family’s contacts in real time while chasing a political target, the “process” has left ordinary limits behind.
Jordan refused to treat Smith’s work as an isolated chapter. He cast it as the latest entry in what he called a long pattern by Democrats.
"And understand, Sean, this was all part of this long pattern of the Democrats,"
He then walked through three election cycles in plain terms.
"In 2016, it was, ‘Oh, we’re going to spy on the other campaign, use the dossier, the whole Russia collusion hoax.’ Then in 2020, it was the 51 former intel officials writing the letter saying the Hunter Biden laptop was a Russian information operation. And then in 2024, it was Jack Smith who was looking to indict the president and keep him from taking office, so much so that he’s willing to go get the communications of his chief of staff and his first family."
That is Jordan’s timeline, stated on air without apology. 2016: the dossier and Russia collusion narrative. 2020: the letter from 51 former intelligence officials about the Hunter Biden laptop. 2024: Smith’s indictment push and the grab for communications from Trump’s chief of staff and first family.
He is arguing motive and method at once. Use the tools of government and prestige institutions to hobble one candidate, then deny the pattern when voters notice.
Declassified material in related coverage has also detailed FBI tracking of Melania and Barron Trump travel and monitoring tied to Wiles’ lawyer calls, the same circle Jordan put at the center of the Hannity segment.
Jordan’s appearance was not a victory lap. It was a status report with an edge.
The committee has an open probe into Smith’s January 6-related investigations. It has, in Jordan’s words, referred Smith for lying under oath about congressional communications. It is still reviewing other issues, including the claim that Smith tried to keep Trump from speaking.
And it is now, Jordan said, looking more closely at the real-time communications practices he described around Wiles, the first family, and senior staff.
Hannity’s questions framed the stakes as criminal exposure and internal FBI resistance in Washington. Jordan answered by widening the lens to 2016, 2020, and 2024.
No on-air response from Smith or the Justice Department appeared in the account of the broadcast. The public record Jordan offered was the committee’s referral, the monitoring claims, and the pattern he says Democrats have repeated across three cycles.
Trump remains the through-line in these fights, whether the subject is old investigations or newer political flashpoints such as when Trump blamed Minnesota leaders in a major infrastructure dispute, or court battles that have reached even White House projects.
Jordan’s message to viewers was that the Judiciary Committee is not done. The more the panel digs, he said, the worse the conduct looks.
When power is used to map a first family’s calls and sideline a rival before voters finish the job, accountability is not optional, it is the whole point of congressional oversight.