Former Special Counsel Jack Smith was eager to discuss the contents of his confidential report regarding the investigation into classified documents at Mar-a-Lago involving former presidential candidate Donald Trump. However, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon imposed restrictions that left Smith feeling that even reviewing his own report before providing closed-door testimony was too risky. This revelation comes from a newly released 250-page transcript by the House Judiciary Committee.

Unlike his predecessors Robert Mueller, John Durham, and Robert Hur, Smith has not had the opportunity to publicly testify about his final report, despite expressing a willingness to do so. Instead, Representative Jim Jordan, the Republican Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee from Ohio, organized a private session for Smith’s questioning regarding his investigations into Trump. This session took place on December 17, and the details were later made public through a transcript released on New Year’s Eve.

Smith defended the impartiality of his actions, asserting that both his team and the FBI conducted their investigations into Trump’s involvement in the January 6 events, the handling of classified documents, and alleged obstruction, without political bias. However, he refrained from delving into specifics about the Mar-a-Lago case due to ongoing frustrations with the Trump-appointed judge, who had dismissed the prosecution and deemed Smith’s appointment as special counsel invalid.

At the beginning of the deposition, House Judiciary Democrats pointed out that Cannon’s injunction, which has been in effect since January, prevents the release of Volume II of Smith’s report. This is the case even after the Department of Justice concluded cases against ex-Trump associates Waltine Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira. Democrats argued that this injunction effectively silences Smith, stopping him from discussing his investigation into Trump’s alleged crimes with the committee.

The transcript further highlighted allegations against Trump, including accusations of stealing and misrepresenting the classified documents stored at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The Democrats criticized the continued sealing of Volume II, suggesting it primarily serves to protect Trump from damaging revelations. The Department of Justice confirmed that Smith was prohibited from sharing any nonpublic details contained in that volume.

Democratic lawmakers on the committee repeatedly tried to ask questions in as roundabout a way as possible to get Smith to bite on the subject, but he refused, and the reason could be as simple as his “eyes wide open” understanding that “this president will seek retribution against me if he can.”

Not giving an inch, Smith emphasized he did not want to say anything that would violate Cannon’s order — something that could be used against him.

“Well, there is an order of Judge Cannon, an injunction regarding Volume Two. I want to make very clear that I do not want to do anything to violate that injunction or that order,” Smith said, revealing that the DOJ provided him a computer with files from his probe to review before his deposition and that he believed Volume II was among those materials.

But Smith said he didn’t access the Volume II file, believing that looking at his own report would be problematic.

“And so, given that I have not seen — looked at Volume Two since I submitted it to the Attorney General almost a year ago, I do not have an exact recollection of what is in there and not. And so, unless something is in a public filing or — and people can point me to a public filing — I think the category that was mentioned in the letter that we got this morning of publicly — I can’t remember the terminology, but properly publicly released information, I do not want to — I want to be clear I do not want to violate that order, and I don’t want to do anything that can even be remotely construed as violating that order,” Smith said.

A Democratic lawyer followed up with a question.

“Wait. So — I’m sorry. But DOJ did not let you review Volume Two of your report?” the person asked.

“It may well have been there, but I chose not to review it, because I didn’t want any implication whatsoever that I was somehow violating the order by looking at it, not being a member of the Department now,” Smith said, according to the transcript.

Later on in the deposition, Smith reiterated that Cannon’s order was the “reason” for his silence about the details of his report.

Asked if there was “any other reason right now,” given that Nauta and Oliveira’s cases have been dismissed, why Volume II should not go public, Smith answered, “Judge Cannon’s order is the reason.”

Ultimately, Smith noted, even if the injunction were to be lifted, whether or how much of the report goes public is U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s decision.

Since February, nonprofit groups the Knight First Amendment Institute and American Oversight tried to convince Cannon to lift the injunction in the public interest, filing motions to intervene in the shuttered criminal case against Trump. Cannon denied the motions more than half a year later — only after the groups appealed to the 11th Circuit. The appellate court agreed the judge had engaged in “undue delay” and put Cannon on a 60-day deadline to rule.

When Cannon did finally rule on Dec. 22, denying the proposed interventions to lift the injunction, Smith’s deposition had already taken place.

Unsurprisingly, both nonprofit groups responded to Cannon’s denial by filing notices of appeal at the 11th Circuit.