Jack Smith Seeks Cover With Latest Claims Related to Biden-Era Arctic Frost Spying Scandal – RedState
Every day, it seems like we’re learning more about the massive spying on Republican members of Congress carried out by then-special counsel Jack Smith under former President Joe Biden as part of his administration’s sweeping legal agenda.
According to details released Wednesday during the former special prosecutor’s recent deposition, Smith’s latest attempt to find cover for his actions is that it was not policy at the time to reveal the names of lawmakers in subpoenas filed with judges demanding phone records from carriers like AT&T and Verizon. The deposition was taken during a Dec. 17 meeting with the House Judiciary Committee.
Jack Smith hid GOP lawmakers’ names from judges who granted access to phone records https://t.co/Fe2np7wix2 pic.twitter.com/gHku0g6naG
– New York Post (@nypost) December 31, 2025
READ MORE: Arctic Frost Just Got Much Worse, Biden’s DOJ’s Most Extensive Hunt for GOP Phone Records Reveals
MORE: New: Smith examined McCarthy’s cellular data in the ‘Arctic Frost’ probe
Here’s how things went:
Asked by an unidentified Judiciary Committee questioner whether the judges who approved the subpoenas knew they were requiring phone carriers AT&T and Verizon to turn over the lawmakers’ call logs, Smith said, “I don’t think we identified that, because I don’t think that was department policy at the time.” »
Members of the judiciary countered that Smith’s team risked undermining “constitutional protections of speech or debate” for lawmakers, a dozen of whom — including former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and the panel’s chairman, Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) — had their cellphone metadata seized.
“When it comes to members of Congress, though, there are, you know, the speech or debate protections, which you have completely circumvented,” the unidentified questioner asked. “I mean, the toll records provide enormous [sic] valuable information because it shows who a member of Congress is, which senator is receiving calls, and who they are calling.
“And if you compare that to the Senate or the House schedule, you can see, you know, what are the contributions to their legislative decision-making, which is the heart of the speech or the debate. Do you agree with that?” » added the interrogator.
Smith responded that he and his office personally take the “speech or debate clause protections” seriously, noting that they are “an important part of the separation of powers.”
Smith claimed that when the subpoenas were requested, “we got approval from the [the Department of Justice’s] Public integrity [Section]who are the kind of gatekeepers of this issue, and they agreed to us getting these subpoenas. This was apparently an attempt to push the actions to the DOJ.
SEE: ‘Worse than Watergate’: Senators reveal extent of Biden’s spying efforts in Arctic freeze
ALSO: Jack Smith tracked private communications of Republican senators as part of election investigation
As RedState reported, Republican lawmakers have called for the impeachment of Judge James Boasberg, who granted these phone records requests, with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) calling it an “abuse of power.” Although Smith’s deposition now calls into question whether Boasberg actually knew the subpoenas related to Cruz and other Republican lawmakers.
Jan. 6 panel ‘star witness’ Cassidy Hutchinson provided ‘second-hand hearsay’ about Capitol riot: Jack Smith https://t.co/1YS4HQq1Ct pic.twitter.com/7eRknOYGsj
– New York Post (@nypost) December 31, 2025
Another shocking thing that was revealed in the deposition transcript was the fact that Smith admitted that the January 6 Committee’s star witness and former Trump White House aide, Cassidy Hutchinson, had no direct knowledge of some of the wild claims she made about that day and President Donald Trump, Fox News reported.
Smith said the specific claims were like those of a “second- or even third-hand witness.” Other witnesses shared “different perspectives” than Hutchinson, he said.
“If I were a defense attorney and Ms. Hutchinson was a witness, the first thing I would do is prevent some of her testimony because it was hearsay,” Smith said, “and I don’t have the entirety of her testimony in front of me right now, but I remember it being a decent portion of it.”
Smith went on to mention that “a number of the things she testified about were second-hand hearsay, things she had heard from other people, and therefore that testimony may or may not be admissible, and it certainly would not be as powerful as first-hand testimony.”
Oh my goodness, how very different things seem now that President Trump is back in office.
Editor’s note: Do you like RedState’s conservative reporting that attacks the radical left and the woke media? Support our work so we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join RedStateVIP and use promo code HAPPY74 to receive 74% off your membership.
