Friday, November 28, 2025

Arctic Frost’s Spying on Members of Congress is a Constitutional Crisis: What I Learned About FBI Spying In and Out of Congress

Arctic Frost’s Spying on Members of Congress is a Constitutional Crisis:
What I learned about FBI spying in and out of Congress.
Many were shocked to find out that Jack Smith (or Jack ‘Frost’ Smith for short, as I prefer) had subpoenaed the cell phone records of many Republicans, including Senators, during the ‘Arctic Frost’ investigation into President Trump for a matter of days. Now we have learned that the Biden administration appointed ‘Special Counsel’ also requested some cell phone records, including mine, for nearly THREE MONTHS from November 3, 2020 to January 8, 2021.
To understand the Constitutional crisis that this has created, one must first understand that the subpoena was issued as a “Grand Jury Subpoena.” Although we were not in the room when the pitch was made to the grand jury, here is what is fairly obvious. Jack Smith and his cronies, provided information to a group of Washington, DC citizens, 95% of whom (or maybe all of whom) voted for someone other than President Trump, indicating that they believed there was a grand conspiracy for an insurrection to destroy the proper election of the ‘electorally pure’ Joe Biden. To the minds of these jurors, Trump and all of his henchmen must be stopped.
Jack Smith or someone on his behalf must have assured these fine people of the grand jury that this insurrection occurred on such a broad scale, that it included hundreds of members of Congress and other groups, and that they just had to agree to let them get subpoenas of very personal material from those people in order to stop the insurrection and prosecute the insurrectionists. Further, it was critical that those people must not know that the information was being sought or these people were so devious that they would likely destroy all of the evidence.
That last part we know because that was part of the order issued to the recipient of the subpoena that they could not disclose this to the individuals whose information was being sought or they might try to destroy it or get rid of it: sort of like Hillary Clinton did with her phone and emails.
Keep in mind, these subpoenas do not rise to the level of requiring probable cause as do all warrants under the 4th Amendment. That is normally not an issue when the subpoena is issued to the party whose records are being sought because that party can immediately go to court and challenge the legitimacy of a lack of probable cause.
Senator Grassley’s investigators revealed to me that, as far as they could tell, Verizon received the subpoena and simply turned over everything that was sought. However, AT&T and others balked at the legality after apparently seeing that the records of elected officials were involved. As far as they could tell, Jack Smith pushed no further with those companies that refused to produce the records and did not take further legal proceedings to justify his actions. Good for AT&T.
There have been cases through the years that indicate that getting the ‘metadata’ (the massive record of phone numbers calling other numbers) from cellular providers did not violate Constitutional norms since it did not reveal their names. However, when the Department of Justice (DOJ) grabs months of cellphone records from an American citizen without proof of any probable cause of a crime being committed by that individual, it is time for the courts to proclaim clearly that this is a fishing expedition and requires a major hand slap to this Orwellian prosecutor.
The importance of the “Congressional privilege” that extends to material that is produced in a Congressional office, and why it’s more important than the attorney-client privilege (which the Obama and Biden DOJ had no problems violating as well), is because people come to Congress members and Senators with concerns about their government. That includes whistleblowers reporting problems within the FBI and DOJ or within the Executive Branch.
The only way a republic is perpetuated is when there are plenty of checks and balances on governmental power. If one branch, especially the one that can put people in prison, is able to stifle checks against its enormous power, the checks and balances fail, as does the democratically elected republican form of government. The executive branch can then control who has power and who goes to jail without ever needing to obtain executive branch power again.
In the past when I revealed the many times that FBI agents and others had privately reported Constitutional abuses within the DOJ and FBI to me, I was careful not to say how they got in touch with me. If whistleblowers knew that the DOJ could simply grab information from Congress members or their offices and phones, the checks and balances on the department that is capable of the most heinous abuses would be gone. --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.


No comments: