Civics: Notes on Government Spying on Journalists – Jack Smith Edition
As shocking as this news may be to some, I am not surprised to learn of this behavior by Jack Smith and the Biden administration. At the direction of the Biden administration, the federal government illegally censored The Federalist, tried to bankrupt us, and was eventually forced to admit it had zero legal authority to do any of it.
We took these thugs to court and won when we learned of their illegal censorship efforts, and we will explore all legal options going forward to deal with Jack Smith’s lawless and un-American attempts to silence us by spying on us.
Nobody in corporate media said a word in our defense when we were illegally censored. Outlets like CNN and the New York Times, which posture as First Amendment purists, had nothing to say about the Biden administration’s illegal attempts to punish us for our rigorous and accurate journalism.
I have zero doubt that they will be similarly silent today, because they are partisan hacks who supported Jack Smith’s egregious lawfare every step of the way.
Unlike corrupt corporate media, The Federalist will always fearlessly and accurately report the news, even in the face of never-ending Democrat assaults on the First Amendment, free speech, and freedom of the press.
We will never back down, and we will never stop reporting the facts and defending the greatest nation and greatest people on earth. Hillary Clinton couldn’t stop us, Joe Biden couldn’t stop us, and Jack Smith’s corrupt thuggery won’t stop us.
———
@ChuckGrassley told the hearing Smith obtained communications from at least 18 media outlets:
- 60 Minutes, Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS, CNBC, CNN, Fox News, LA Times, Mark Levin Show, Media Research Center, NBC, NPR, NY Magazine, Reuters, The Federalist, The Washington Post, Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal.
-Collection of media records is no small matter and may get not break through in the coverage
- Smith critics say it is more evidence of ‘government overreach’
——-
Never confirmed by the Senate.
——-
But that is NOT the context of the requirements under the Stored Communications Act. The requirements pertain to the subject of the subpoena, not anyone in that person’s universe.
———
“I request that you not disclose the existence of this request to the subscriber or any other person, other than as necessary to comply with this request.”
———
Jack Smith submitted “cloaked in secrecy” phone record subpoenas for the very people in Government who have lawful oversight over him. The only reason we know this is because one of the companies (AT&T) decided to inquire as to the reason for the subpoena and secrecy and they pushed back on Smith. Let that sink in.
