![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/garland-evidence.jpg?ssl=1\")
<\/a>\n<\/p>\n
The action in question were a series of subpoenas for the phone records of a number of Republican senators and a couple of representatives. The subpoenas also ordered the phone companies to not inform Congress that the DoJ was asking for them. The judge who signed the order was Judge James Boasberg, arguably one of the most corrupt, in the sense of taking power and authority he doesn\u2019t have, in the United States.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
He should have known that the request from the DoJ was questionable on it\u2019s face and that the Non-Disclosure Order to the phone companies was a blatant violation of the law. Now it\u2019s being claimed that he wasn\u2019t aware that the subpoenas were for members of Congress. Here are the details from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n A top federal court official defended Judge James Boasberg\u2019s gag orders that hid subpoenas related to the FBI’s Arctic Frost investigation, saying this week that the chief judge in Washington would likely have been unaware that the subpoenas’ intended targets were members of Congress. <\/b><\/p>\n I\u2019m not even going to bother posting a meme here, that is absolute and utter horseshit. There is no way Boasberg, or any judge for that matter, is going to sign off on a subpoena or warrant without knowing who the target or targets are. I\u2019m no legal scholar but that screams of a 4th<\/sup> Amendment violation to me.<\/p>\n The administrative office for the federal courts indicated that the chief judge in D.C. routinely blindly signed gag orders when the Department of Justice<\/a> requested them, including during Arctic Frost, the investigation that led to former special counsel Jack Smith bringing election charges against President Donald Trump. <\/b><\/p>\n Currently, there is a bill of impeachment in the House against Boasberg. If he was signing these without review, then this needs to be added to the reasons to remove this judicial tyrant from the bench. There is a term for what he did. It\u2019s called \u201cRubber Stamping\u201d the requests.<\/p>\n The letter came in response to Grassley, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, demanding an explanation from Boasberg about why he authorized the one-year gag orders, which barred phone companies from telling Republican Congress members that their records were subpoenaed by Smith in 2023. <\/b><\/p>\n For a little background, Verizon handed over the records and AT&T told Smith and the DoJ to go pound sand. I believe they also contacted the Congressional Sargent at Arms and let him know what was going on. (I\u2019m not sure on this part)<\/p>\n Conrad said he could not address those specific subpoenas and gag orders, in part because some of the material was sealed, but that he could help the lawmakers “understand relevant practices” in place during Arctic Frost. <\/b><\/p>\n Oh this should be interesting, much in the same way watching a train wreck is interesting.<\/p>\n The DOJ\u2019s requests for gag orders, also known as non-disclosure orders, “typically do not attach the related subpoena; rather they identify the subject accounts only by a signifier \u2014 e.g., a phone number,” Conrad wrote. “As a result, [non-disclosure order] applications would not reveal whether a particular phone number belonged to a member of Congress.” <\/b><\/p>\n I do not believe that for a second. However, if this is true, then we have a much bigger problem.<\/p>\n Grassley reacted to the latest correspondence from the court by faulting the Biden DOJ for seeking the gag orders from Boasberg without notifying the judge that they pertained to Congress members.<\/strong><\/p>\n If the DoJ did hide this fact from Boasberg, they did so for a reason. They knew it was illegal and that Boasberg would be compelled to deny it. Now whether or not Boasbarg would have denied the requests is another matter. (I don\u2019t think he would have)<\/p>\n Grassley noted that the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section gave Smith’s team the green light to subpoena lawmakers’ phone records but had also told the prosecutors to be wary of concerns lawmakers could raise about the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which gives Congress members added protections in prosecutorial matters. <\/b><\/p>\n The more I hear about the Public Integrity Section, the more I think it needs to be shut down and everyone associated with it fired and investigated for potential constitutional rights violations.<\/p>\n “Smith went ahead with the congressional subpoenas anyway, and it appears he and his team didn\u2019t apprise the court of member involvement,” Grassley told Fox News Digital. “Smith\u2019s apparent lack of candor is deeply troubling, and he needs to answer for his conduct.” <\/b><\/p>\n Johnson said he remained unsatisfied with Boasberg after the letter from the administrative office. <\/b><\/p>\n “Judge Boasberg\u2019s refusal to answer questions from Congress about his approval of unlawful gag orders is an affront to transparency and an obvious attempt to deflect any responsibility for his awareness of or involvement in Jack Smith\u2019s partisan dragnet,” Johnson told Fox News Digital. “Judge Boasberg must immediately lift the seal that is apparently preventing him from addressing Congress\u2019 questions and provide the public a full explanation for his actions.” <\/b><\/p>\n I suspect that Boasberg knows how bad it would look if he refused to answer questions citing his 5th<\/sup> amendment rights against self incrimination. I suspect he knows he\u2019s in trouble, which would explain some of his other recent actions against the administration.<\/p>\n Public documents reveal that as chief judge of the D.C. federal court, Boasberg authorized numerous gag orders that blocked phone companies from telling about a dozen House and Senate lawmakers that Smith had subpoenaed their phone data. <\/b><\/p>\n Smith had sought a narrow set of their records, which included details about when calls and messages were placed and with whom the Congress<\/a> members were communicating. The records did not include the contents of calls and messages. Smith has defended the subpoenas, saying they were in line with department policy and “entirely proper.” <\/b><\/p>\n Smith is another one that is looking through his curtains for an FBI raid team. I\u2019ve gone over is actions for years, as have other far better qualified then I am. This business with getting the phone records of Republican members of Congress was a literal fishing expedition and part of the Biden maladministration\u2019s plan to go after their perceived enemies.<\/p>\n It\u2019s only been a few months since this started blowing up, and I don\u2019t expect anything really serious to happen until next spring at the earliest. I believe that Kash Patel has opened an investigation into the whole Arctic Frost conspiracy. Stay tuned! I have no doubt even more shoes are dropping.<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Good day all. Arguably one of the biggest scandals since Watergate has been the fishing expedition against Republicans by the Biden Maladministration. This was conducted under an investigation called Arctic Frost and, among other things, broke a law regarding notifying … Continue reading <\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n (2<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n