Rep Brandon Gill (R-TX) destroyed former Special Counsel Jack Smith during a House Judiciary Committee Hearing on Thursday, catching him in multiple lies and exposing his knowledge that he was illegally spying on Congress members during the Arctic Frost investigation.
Joe Biden’s FBI – and later Jack Smith – spied on eight Republican Senators and four Republican House Members during the ‘Arctic Frost’ investigation into January 6.
Just days after then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy took over as Speaker, Jack Smith secretly subpoenaed McCarthy under a nondisclosure order, claiming the sitting Speaker of the House was a flight risk.
Gill brought the receipts, proving that, despite Smith’s testimony to the contrary, Jack Smith used “clearly false information to secure a non-disclosure order” and secretly spy on McCarthy. The judges’ order reads, “The Court finds reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result in flight from prosecution, destruction of or tampering with evidence, intimidation of potential witnesses, and serious jeopardy to the investigation,” seemingly in direct reference to the target of the subpoena, Kevin McCarthy.
Gill continued, exposing how Jack Smith knew his targeting of Congress members violated the congressional Speech or Debate Clause, which provides immunity for legislators during legislative activities. Smith attempted to claim there was no potential for a violation, but an email from the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section to Smith informed him that his secret collection of lawmakers’ phone information presented “litigation risk” due to a violation of the law.
Gill also revealed that the memo stated, “Given my understanding of the low likelihood that any of the Members listed below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here,” proving that, despite violating the law, they didn’t care because they didn’t plan on getting caught!
“In other words, you’re using a novel legal theory, which you knew is novel, has never been tested by any court, you’re not charging any of these members, nobody is going to know about it because you issued NDOs. Nobody is going to sue you about it, so who cares? We’re going to do it anyway,” Gill said in a scathing rebuke of Jack Smith’s weaponization. “You walked all over the Constitution throughout this entire process, spying on members of Congress, and you know it. It’s absolutely disgraceful.”
WATCH:
Transcript:
Gill: In January of 2023, did you subpoena then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy’s toll records?
Smith: We did.
Gill: The subpoena covered the time period between November of 2020 and January of 2021. How many days after Kevin McCarthy was sworn in as Speaker did you subpoena his records?
Smith: I don’t recall, but those two things had nothing to do with one another.
Gill: 16 days after becoming the highest-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives, you subpoenaed his toll records. Do you think it might reasonably be a violation of the Speech or Debate Clause?
Smith: I do not, and I want to be clear that the toll records–
Gill: You were collecting months’ worth of phone data on the Republican Speaker of the House, the leader of the opposition, right after he got sworn in as Speaker, all around the time of a major vote. That sounds like a flagrant violation of the Speech or Debate Clause to me, and I think most people agree with me. And Speaker McCarthy had no recourse, did he? Because you issued a nondisclosure order ensuring that neither he, nor any of the American people knew about these subpoenas. Is that right?
Smith: We did secure nondisclosure orders for those subpoenas.
Gill: You did, and Mr. Smith, at the time you secured those nondisclosure orders, was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?
Smith: The nondisclosure order was based on–
Gill: Was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?
Smith: He was not.
Gill: Then, why did your non-disclosure order refer to him as a flight risk? It says right here that the court finds reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result in flight from prosecution.
Smith: Sir, when securing a nondisclosure order, the risks don’t have to be associated–
Gill: You think the Speaker of the House is a flight risk? You think he’s going to hop on a plane and leave the country?
Smith: No, what I was trying to explain is, with respect to a nondisclosure order, the risks aren’t necessarily associated with the subscriber to the phone. The risk is to the investigation.
Gill: I think you are using clearly in reference to speaker McCarthy, and you were using clearly false information to secure a non-disclosure order to hide from speaker McCarthy and from the American people the fact that you were spying on his toll records. But I’ve got more, so let’s move on. In May of 2023, you also issued subpoenas for toll records of nine US Senators and an additional Representative. Is that right?
Smith: In May of 2023, we did issue–
Gill: You did. And there were nondisclosure orders in conjunction with those subpoenas as well, right?
Smith: That’s correct.
Gill: So, again, nobody would know what you were doing. The Senators wouldn’t, the Representatives wouldn’t, the American people wouldn’t know what you were doing, is that right?
Smith: The toll records that we secured and the nondisclosure orders were consistent with policy and consistent–
Gill: And you knew whenever you were were doing that that there was a risk you were violating the Speech or Debate Clause, is that right?
Smith: The toll record subpoenas that we secured were with the concurrence of the public integrity–
Gill: Your own analysis says that you knew there was a risk that you were violating the Speech and Debate Clause. I have it right here. This is an email from John Keller at Public Integrity Section to your team. “As you are aware, there is some litigation risk regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a Member’s legislative calls violates the Speech or Debate Clause in the D.C. Circuit. That’s from your own analysis right there. So, you did know, didn’t you?
Smith: With respect to the item you just put up on the screen, the last sentence states–
Gill: We’re going to get to the last sentence. And then, you cite case law in here: “The bar on compelled disclosure is absolute.” Is that right, or do you believe you didn’t have to abide by that precedent?
Smith: To be clear, this statement is not from my office. This is the statement of the Public–
Gill: This is your justification for those subpoenas and NDOs that you ordered. This was part of your analysis. It’s a cursory analysis, I think it’s worth noting. Now, let’s get to that last sentence then. “Given my understanding of the low likelihood that any of the Members listed below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here.” In other words, you’re using a novel legal theory, which you knew is novel, has never been tested by any court, you’re not charging any of these members, nobody is going to know about it because you issued NDOs. Nobody is going to sue you about it, so who cares? We’re going to do it anyway. You walked all over the Constitution throughout this entire process, spying on members of Congress, and you know it. It’s absolutely disgraceful.
The post Rep. Brandon Gill GRILLS Jack Smith Catching Him in Several Lies About Illegal Spying on Members of Congress – “You Walked All Over the Constitution Throughout this Entire Process!” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.