Watch this video first, Then answer the question. Did Liz Smith admit in this Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i331rKrM8qM The Dems RIGGED the Trump Felonies to Stop 2024 Win

1. Who is “Smith” in the public record, and what did officials actually do?

News reporting and the Special Counsel’s own report refer to Jack Smith, the prosecutor appointed in November 2022, who compiled evidence and brought cases related to January 6 and classified documents; his offices closed or wound down those prosecutions after Trump’s November 2024 election in keeping with DOJ guidance about not prosecuting a sitting president ^{[2] [1] [3]}. Commentators and long-form pieces have examined Smith’s legal theories and decisions; The New Yorker described some of those theories as “creative” and noted judge rulings and appeal vulnerability in related cases ^[5].

2. Does any provided source show “Liz Smith” admitting a political rigging plot in the linked video?

The supplied search results do not include a transcript or reporting about the specific YouTube video you cited, nor do they identify a public admission by anyone named Liz Smith in connection with a confession that Democrats rigged felony charges to block Trump’s 2024 win. Available sources mention Jack Smith (special counsel) and political debate over prosecutions, but they do not mention Liz Smith making such an admission ^{[1] [2] [4]}. In short: available sources do not mention the claim you asked about.

3. What mainstream outlets say about politicization claims and competing narratives

Mainstream outlets and official documents show two competing framings. Critics—including some House Republicans—portray Smith’s work as politically motivated and have pressed oversight claims; Jack Smith himself rejected that charge as “ludicrous” while defending career prosecutors ^[4]. Independent reporting and legal analysis explore prosecutorial choices and novel legal theories—some describe the theories as creative and the cases as vulnerable on appeal ^[5]. The DOJ’s own publicly posted Report of the Special Counsel documents the investigative record and decisions ^[2].

4. How the timing of prosecutions and DOJ policy factor into the question of “rigging”

Multiple sources document a concrete policy reason why cases were paused or wound down after the 2024 election: longstanding DOJ guidance generally precludes prosecuting a sitting president, and Smith’s teams closed or paused matters after Trump’s reelection ^{[1] [3]}. That fact explains post-election procedural moves without proving malicious political engineering; critics read the earlier timing and prosecutorial choices as evidence of bias, while defenders cite legal norms and evidentiary bases ^{[4] [5]}.

5. Legal outcome context — convictions, appeals and case posture

Reporting notes many cases and legal twists: some charges and awards have been overturned or narrowed on appeal, judges made rulings that affected vulnerability of cases, and at least one line of special-counsel work was described as potentially sufficient for conviction though subject to appeal ^{[5] [1]}. Public sources also document that after Trump’s election, the Office of Special Counsel wound down some efforts; that procedural posture is documented in DOJ and academic summaries ^{[2] [3]}.

6. What to watch and the limits of current reporting

The search results do not corroborate the YouTube-video claim you summarized and do not provide a direct transcript of that video ^{[1] [2]}. If the question hinges on a single speaker’s on-camera statement, the relevant path is to obtain a media transcript or a reliable outlet’s coverage of that specific video; current reporting discusses “Smith” as the prosecutor and the larger political disputes around his prosecutions but does not record a Liz Smith admission that Democrats “rigged” felony charges to block the 2024 result ^{[4] [5] [3]}.

Limitations: this analysis strictly uses the supplied search results and cannot confirm or deny statements outside them; available sources do not mention the specific YouTube admission you asked about ^{[1] [2]}.