Today on Sekulow, we have breaking news. Jack Smith's investigators secretly obtain text messages from members of Congress. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow. We want to hear from you.
Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host. Welcome to Sekulow Will Haynes in studio today. We are talking about this breaking news item. This is a release that comes from Senator Grassley and Senator Johnson as they are conducting oversight into Jack Smith's Arctic Frost investigation.
That was the entire special counsel investigation into President Trump. And now, as we've found out details along the way that were shocking, we first learned that they were getting subpoenas and warrants for the toll records, the phone records of U.S. senators. They went to their phone companies and they issued warrants. We also know that then they were trying to seek the records of more than 400 conservatives and conservative-related organizations.
And if that wasn't enough, This new release is that they secretly obtained The text messages, not just the if they sent and received like the toll records, but the actual content of text messages from forty four members of Congress. Amid this entire probe. And this is a letter that was sent from the office of the Assistant Attorney General Patrick Davis to Chairman Grassley. That talks about this, and it says that, and this is the bottom line, folks. Although a filter team, I'm sorry, I'm gonna go right back to this page because it says subsequent email documents.
The files that are saved directly to the special counsel's team shared drive. Thus, the special counsel's investigative team apparently bypassed the filter team and directly accessed these text messages. The FBI then identified the people whose phone numbers sent or received the text messages, and it is 44 members of Congress. Including 20 U.S. Senators.
and then 24 members of the House of Representatives, including some Democrats like Corey Booker, Congressman Adam Smith from Washington, and the now current mayor of Los Angeles, then Congresswoman Karen Vass. Where's the outrage from them? We're going to break it all down for you, what this means, the shocking kind of details that go along with this. And I'll be joined by Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, Jay Sekulow, in the next segment, as he will break this down for you as well. It's shocking because they went around.
Their entire process. The filter team was in place from the Department of Justice to try and mitigate these issues. To try and make sure they weren't accessing text messages from sitting members of Congress that they weren't supposed to. And this is where it's the craziest part of it all to me. On June 2nd of 2023, Senior Assistant Special Counsel Thomas Wyndham.
He asked the National Archives and Records Administration, general counsel, all text messages from October 2020. Through January 20th, 2021, for phones associated with the long list of White House individuals. I mean, that includes people like the current CIA director, by the way, and we'll talk about that as well. But these individuals, any of their records. and the National Archives turned them over august twenty first, twenty twenty three.
And within 26 minutes from that email coming from National Archives to the Special Counsel's team. The senior assistant special counsel had downloaded all the files and disseminated them and started getting people to review them before this filter team even had a chance to open the email. Folks, we're going to talk about this, the seriousness of this, and some of the work of the ACLJ that is ongoing on this very issue when we come back. Call me if you want to talk about Jack Smith. in the egregious abuse of power that we are seeing.
from this former special counsel. 1-800-684-3110 to talk to me on air. As well, you can support the work of the ACLJ. And I'm going to tell you specific things our attorneys are doing right now about this. When we come back and later on in the broadcast.
But support us. Your donations are doubled at aclj.org slash liberty. That's right, aclj.org slash liberty. Donate today and have your gift doubled. Welcome back to Sekulow.
I'm joined on the phone right now by Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, Jay Sekulow. And this came out yesterday evening as Senator Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, as well as Chairman Ron Johnson of the Senate Investigations Committee, released this information. And I think it was Senator Johnson that said it shouldn't be shocking at this point, but it should be outraging to those that see this news because it appears that there are no depths to the constitutional violations and the ways that this special counsel decided to run roughshod over the constitution. And I wanted to get your take when you saw this, Jay, about what the special counsel was doing, obtaining the text messages from sitting members of Congress.
Well, I think what Senator Johnson said is exactly correct. No no one's shocked. Although it is shocking. that he did this, but it's not shocking because we saw the abuses taking place By the Department of Justice, with Jack Smith in particular. The outrage is.
Palpable, and that is. When you sit back and see a list of thirty-something U. S. Senators and House of Representative members, That have now had their text messages reviewed by a special counsel From the Department of Justice.
So you have the executive branch spying basically on the Uh Legislative branch. You're talking about constitutional violations of which we have not seen in our lifetime. This is The Quintessential example. of not just government overreach. but government run amok with no moorings With no guideposts.
And with No. Any kind of influence that would stop it. They were on a runway. that was never ending. To violate the constitution here, and they did.
Now, the question is going to be: how do you hold them accountable? And we're looking at that as well. But this is. Beyond The pale. It is beyond the scope Of legitimate Prosecutorial inquiry.
This was the executive branch, as I said. Spying On members of the United States House and Senate and people that they were talking to.
So you may have had news media people. I mean, you're talking I could think of First Amendment violations, Fourteenth Amendment violations. I mean, you could write a when we used to have phone books, this could be a phone book full of violations. We'll see what the Department of Justice does, but I will tell you this: the ACLJ, we're looking at it and we will take action.
Well, and I think what is one of the more shocking parts of this, and we knew how aggressively he was operating as a special counsel and was kind of ignoring the rules of the game as he went along. But when you read this, that the Department of Justice had a filter team in place to try and filter out, that's exactly what they do, when they receive records that the special counsel can legitimately ask for. Supposed to filter out things that may be attorney-client privilege, that may be speech and debate clause violations if he were to get his hands on for members of Congress, anything that could have raised even a hint of a constitutional violation. But it appears they, when you read the timeline, it was within 30 minutes that they were aggressively trying to go around that process. And I think that's what's the biggest thing for me.
Yeah, the taint team, by the way, because I dealt with that in representing President Trump. I mean, I dealt with these taint teams. It's kind of ridiculous anyways, but your point is well taken, and that is They distribute this material in a nanosecond, and they did that. Because I'm assuming we don't have I don't have evidence of this, but the timeline certainly indicates that they did this.
So they didn't have to go to the tank team.
Now, what the Taint team would or would not have done with this, I don't know, but the idea that the executive branch of government, the Department of Justice, was looking at the access records. of and text messages of sitting members of Congress. is unbelievable. Cruel team or not.
So I mean, in one cent, the least of their problem is they didn't go through a tank team. That's an internal violation of their own policies, not shocking there either. But if you know, I'd like to know who knew this too, by the way. But did Merrick Garland know this? They President Biden know this.
Yeah. Others within the Department of Justice know this. I'd like to know those answers.
So I'd like to send out a Freedom of Information demand. That says who received this? Who got it? Who distributed? Who was on that list?
Was there information going from the Department of Justice to the White House about these very messages? And then, of course, you have the fact that. KG Jack Smith went up before Congress and The minimum Fiscated. He basically. Either dodge the question What's left the clear impression that he did not see these documents?
I mean, we could play that, Will. I think that's not a bad idea. Yeah, I think this is the perfect time to play this because this is from just December of 2025. This isn't, you know, with some of those depositions that we talked about with James Comey, that where he was either dodgy or it appeared he lied to Congress were from years back. This is months old at this point.
And when you hear this is bite one, it's a congressional attorney doing a deposition of Jack Smith. And this goes to that question of toll records and text messages. Let's go ahead and play bite one. Did the toll records that you requested from the senators, did they include the content of the phone calls? No.
Did the records that you requested, the toll records from the members of Congress, include the content of text messages? No. So, right there, did the toll records from the members of Congress include the content of text messages? What he's going to say is his technicality is: you know, these weren't toll messages. I mean, they're going to go to technicality, but let me say what he did.
He let the clear impression. to the American people and to members of Congress that it was just what we used to call these pings. I knew that I texted you, you texted me, I don't know what was said. That is not the case. They had the substantive text messages of these members of Congress and the people that they were texting.
So Jack Smith, at a minimum, evaded the question and I think really committed a form of perjury. Because he now he may have a technical defense because the way he said sold records versus text messages and how he got the text messages through the process. But the fact is, What we cannot lose sight of is A member of Congress had his text messages reviewed by the Department of Justice. The executive branch again. Overseeing quote unquote.
invading the confines of the legislative franchise. In the United States, you know what we call that unconstitutional and unacceptable. One question that this leads to for me, and this is something you've been critical of the special counsel process for years. If people have been following this broadcast or the ACLJ, they know your thoughts on the special counsel process. You've had to deal with special counsels maybe more than anyone in the United States today when it comes to the Mueller probe and all of those issues.
There were a lot of questions about even the way that Jack Smith was appointed, if that was even constitutional. I know that it was raised by Justice Thomas in a dissent about, or a concurrence rather, whether this was even a process that follows the Constitution. Do you think that this could be, especially now that we see Corey Booker, Karen Bass, Adam Smith, Democrats having their rights violated by this special counsel, could there be a push within Congress to maybe change some of this? There should be. Listen, I have been Will, as you said, I have been critical of special counsels going back to the Bill Clinton era.
I didn't like independent councils. before, at least they were accountable to the to the executive branch, to the way the Constitution is set up. These special counsels are accountable to nobody. They're not really technically accountable I mean, in a technical sense, they're accountable to the Department of Justice, but they operate totally independently. That process is ridiculous.
It violates the Constitution. It creates a star chamber, and we shouldn't have that in the United States of America. It's not worth the risk to our Constitutional Republic. Thank you so much for joining me on this important topic. And, folks, we're going to be talking more about this in the next segment.
If you want to call in 1-800-684-3110, but I'm also going to talk about what our attorneys are doing right now. You heard our chief counsel, Jay Sekulow, allude to that earlier in this segment. We've already been investigating this through FOIA requests, through lawsuits. That we have filed, including a lawsuit this week that was filed. I'll tell you about in the next segment.
Our attorneys right now, because this is new information, are going over what we already have. To see which parts of it there may be overlap, so that we know the best way forward to figure out who received these informations, who was privy to this information. Was it the Attorney General? Was it the President of the United States? We are looking at what we've already got in place and to see where we need to go next.
We are that nimble here. We are able to turn on a dime when we have news like this come out that was gotten from the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. This is a big deal, folks. And as we heard, this could be the impetus for change when you start to see even members of Congress that are Democrats, that are in the opposing party here, so to speak, it shouldn't be partisan. What's happening here is an attack on our constitutional framework.
on our Congress, on coequal branches of government, And if you think that A special counsel, oh, it would never happen to an ordinary American. They're doing it to sitting U.S. senators and congressmen. We'll be right back with more on Sekulow, but you can support our work by going to aclj.org/slash liberty and donating today. Welcome back to Sekulow.
Will Haynes here, and I want to hear from you as you're hearing this news. Does it surprise you? Does it outrage you? Call me at 1-800-684-3110. And I think.
When even if you heard me and Logan talking yesterday, and we were talking about the way that these ad hominem attacks go forward, we had this issue with the Supreme Court, and we kind of derailed our conversation because people going after sitting members of the court and saying the, you know, people clearly have other things in mind rather than their duty to the court. And we went after this, this ad hominem attack situation that we see so frequently. And I think also you can be cautioned that if everything is an ad hominem attack and everything is outrageous, then. Can you truly be outraged by something? I think this is something you should be outraged by.
This is where a special counsel that was outside of the traditional framework of the Department of Justice because of how this is set up, that is very light accountability to the Department of Justice, was able to go and dig deep and do whatever he wanted. And his team could do whatever they wanted. And didn't really even pay attention to the rules and the guidelines that are there. And tried to find clever ways around them. And I'm going to play this bite.
This is from the special counsel, Jack Smith, in a deposition before Congress in December. And what is the context of this deposition? They were deposing him because they were finding out all these things that happened regarding this operation, the special counsel's investigation. Things like Getting the phone records of sitting. U.S.
Senators. They were outraged. But they tried to play it down. They said, no, it's not that big of a deal. We were just getting the toll data.
If a congressman called or a senator called someone at the White House, that's all we could see. We weren't spying on them. We were just getting information, right? That's what we were told. He had the opportunity also to come clean then and say, hey, by the way.
We also scooped up all these text messages. They didn't. Then down the line, more reporting. That they not only went after members of Congress, but everyday Americans and people that were in conservative organizations. Turning Point USA was a part of that.
This special counsel was targeting conservative organizations. Trying to get their records. Oh, but don't be outraged. It was legitimate. It's fine.
It was nothing, no invasion of privacy, whatever. Then we get to The Revelation Today. That Not only did they Seek the toll records, but they scooped up. 44 members of Congress, their content. of their text messages.
So We find this out today, but back in December, based off the toll records investigation, he was deposed. by Senate investigators. And it's an eight and a half hour deposition. It wasn't a 30-minute interview, eight and a half hours. And multiple times, the content of text messages is brought up.
We played a bite for you in the previous segment. I want to get bite 10 queued up for everyone. This is more from the investigative team asking Jack Smith, the former special counsel, about contents of text messages. And I want you to listen very carefully. What question is asked and how he answers it.
Let's go ahead and roll this from the deposition in December. The telephone calls or for the content relies mostly to text messages. Did you seek a search warrant for the content of any text messages from members? From members? It was just all records.
Correct.
Okay. But by not telling the members, by going through this NDO process, I mean, they didn't have an opportunity to litigate the speech or debate concerns. That's correct. That's unfair in our view. I understand your position, and as I said before, we respect the speech or debate clause.
I'm aware of no case in the Supreme Court or the D.C. Circuit that says that getting non-content full records from a third party violates the speech or debate clause, particularly where, and I think an important point here is these records were not on senior. Even s um in sight um to use against members of Congress who are targets.
Okay. So there's a lot to break down there, and I wanted to play this longer bite. Because the first part is about content, right? And he says. The attorney who's asking the questions, the investigator, says, Did you seek a search warrant?
for the content of any text messages from members. And Jack Smith goes from members. He's clarifying. Did I seek a search warrant? from members for content from members.
And the attorney affirms that, says, yes, that's what I'm asking. He goes, no, I don't recall. Getting A search warrant for the content of their text messages. And so the attorney then once again clarifies it was just toll records, to which Jack Smith replies, correct. That first part, let's break it down.
Because, on the face of it, we know that they reviewed the content of text messages. Here's where he's being tricky. Wow. How he got this was by going to the National Archives and asking for the content of text messages not from members of Congress. But from President Trump?
Mark Meadows, Dan Scavino, Ivanka Trump, Stephen Miller, Peter Navarro, John Ratcliffe, Cash Patel, Rudy Giuliani, Kellyanne Conway, and Mike Pence. And then they didn't go to the filter team.
So any person. That list of White House officials, including the President and vice President, any person they were texting with. They got all that information from October to January 20th of 2021.
So he's Relying on the technicality, it's the lie of omission. Where he says, No, I didn't seek a search warrant for the content of members' text messages. But I definitely got it. He doesn't say that part. And then, where it even goes on to show, because this was eight and a half hours, and he had multiple opportunities to talk about what he did get.
Where he's still hiding it from the investigators is when you hear that later part. Where they're saying, hey, it gets into this nondisclosure order that they sought so members of Congress didn't know their toll records. were being sought. And the judge, we have talked about that, didn't know it was members of Congress when they were requesting this. They were hiding the ball again from the judge.
That signed off on non-disclosure orders so the targets of the investigation didn't get. uh notified that they were having their information sought. And he says. Because the attorney is saying that we think this is unfair. You didn't let members of Congress know that you were seeking their toll records.
And he says, I understand your position. As I said before, we respect the speech and debate clause. It doesn't appear that way. He says, I'm aware of no case in the Supreme Court or D.C. Circuit that says getting non-content full records from a third party violates the speech and debate clause.
Because the other is not revealed, there is no direct questions. asked of the special counsel about, hey, But what about you reviewing all this content and the way you did it without a filter team?
So, his defense, if they try to say, you perjured yourself, you lied before Congress, he's going to be like, They didn't ask me about this. They were asking about this. They were asking about me getting a warrant for their records. He's very crafty and very tricky, but you know what's about to happen? Senator Grassley, chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the Senate, said he's coming back.
We're having more hearings on this. But right there, you can see how tricky he's being with the investigators. Not forthcoming. And he's trying to make it seem like they never saw the content. But they did.
We're going to talk about more of this when we get back on Sekulow. Support the work of the ACLJ at aclj.org. Your donations are doubled. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Sekulow.
Welcome to Sekulow second half hour of the broadcast. And we're talking about this revelation that came out from Senators Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Charles Grassley, Chuck Grassley from Iowa. And that the special counsel, Jack Smith, Not only sought the phone records, the toll records of senators, not only did he go after over 400 conservative targets. He also he and his team Members of his team. Reviewed the contents of text messages from 44 members of Congress.
Senator Grassley said, Chairman Grassley, he said, it shouldn't be shocking. It's not shocking at this point, but it should be an outrage. And this is where we look at, and he also says this: I hope my Democrat colleagues, several of whom had their own text swept up. Finally, put partisanship aside and recognize the severity of these actions. Smith's team ran roughshod over the Constitution even after repeated warnings.
Jack Smith has answering to do, and I intend to have him before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the coming months to hold him accountable.
Now, this is related to that Arctic frost. Investigation. That was the name of it. They had so many names. Even with this one, Operation or sorry, Project Coconut.
was uh the investigation relating to January 6th. Mar-a-Lago Documents Investigation they refer to as Project Cranberry. They seem so innocent and harmless, right? Project Coconut.
Sounds fun.
Sounds like a beach vacation. No, it was a violation of constitutional rights, is what we see here, and going after a co-equal branch of government by sweeping up their text messages and their communications with officials at the White House. We currently, just days ago, I believe it was on either Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning, filed a lawsuit related to a FOIA we have. It was a Freedom Information Act request against the FBI. Where we were seeking records about Jack Smith's efforts to swoop on the now FBI director Cash Patel.
And Susie Wiles, President Trump's chief of staff. We learned that the Jack Smith team issued subpoenas to Cash Patel and Susie Wiles wireless services service providers, and they were uh much broader. Than even the original toll records request for those sitting members of Congress.
So, the FBI had not gotten back in time, and so what do we have to do? We have to take them to court. And so we are now going to be fighting this, but our attorneys now are looking at where there's overlap with this. Because of, once again, The members that they were requesting the records for to get the members of Congress's records. were and here's the list here.
It was the President. It was Mike Pence. It was Mark Meadows, Dan Scavino, Ivanka Trump, Stephen Miller, Peter Navarro, John Ratcliffe, who's the current CIA director. You think he may be concerned about what the Justice Department under Joe Biden was doing. Cash Patel, current FBI director.
and a few others.
So there's already overlap. The fact that they were able to get these communications because they had that, they were requesting the records of Cache Patel. And that's what our FOIA is about. We also are in the middle of, we've started receiving production on our FOIA related to Arctic Frost. That helps us maybe key in on some more angles.
So, what's our attorneys at the ACLJ? What are they doing right now? They're looking at what productions are starting to come in. From the Department of Justice related to Arctic Frost. They're looking about what we just had to file a lawsuit about.
With the Subpoenaing of records of Susie Wiles and Cash Patel. And then they're looking at what we need to ask for next. We're going to get to the bottom of this because it's not just about these individuals. It's not just about the violation of going after members of Congress. It's about every one of us and making sure this doesn't happen again, making sure there's changes when it comes to.
the special counsels and the way those operate. And you can join us today at aclj.org, where your donations are doubled during our Liberty Drive. Go to aclj.org today. Welcome back to Sekulow. Will Haynes here, and we're talking about this revelation that Jack Smith was able to and his team looked at the contents of text messages.
From October 2020 through January 20th, 2021. from phones associated with a long list of White House personnel. Yeah. And included in those messages were communications with... Sitting members of Congress, and at this point, some of them are former members of Congress.
Now, Jack Smith is kind of under fire here, but even. As recent as a hearing before the House of Representatives in January of this year. This isn't just The The deposition that we've been playing. This is where Congressman Cohen of Tennessee. was asking Jack Smith in January of this year.
About If they were able to see any content. Of text messages. Let's go ahead and play byte 11 for everyone so they hear that this line that he's been using over and over again, and we'll break it down: byte 11. And just make clear, you did not see any of the discussion. There was not any, it was just the content that they made a call to the President and vice versa, but nothing about any content whatsoever.
That's correct. A toll record subpoena gives you Who a call is from, who it is to, and the length of that call. It does not tell you the content of what people are speaking about. Once again. Repeatedly.
The lie of omission. on full display. Jack Smith is smart. He is being very precise. about what he is answering.
In both the depositions and in that open hearing with the congressman from Tennessee, Democrat from Memphis. He is saying. A toll record subpoena. only gives you the call from who makes it Who it is too? And the length of the call.
All of those questions that he was able to answer precisely.
Now have the The entire uh different context Because Those questions should be more open-ended. Not just In the warrants you sought against members of Congress, but in the records you sought and obtained. Did you ever C communications that may or may not have been privileged or fall under speech and debate clause, Did you ever or any member of your team ever. view records like that. And I think even today, it's an important day because the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, is sitting in his confirmation hearing before the Senate.
To become the next Attorney General, confirmed Attorney General of the United States. And he was asked by Senator Kennedy.
Now, this is bite seven. We're going to play this. Senator Kennedy is calling them emails. The precise term here is that these were text messages that were sought.
So, I'm going to go ahead and play byte 7 for you, and then we'll talk a little bit about how this could go forward. Let's play it. Did Jack Smith read my emails? Yeah. I'm not sure, Senator.
I don't know. Would you check for me? We will check, Senator, yes. I think he read Senator Grassley's emails. How how did he How can someone at the Department of Justice get Senator Grassley's emails without Probable cause.
There are checks in place that should make it extraordinarily difficult for a prosecutor to collect and review a senator's emails or a congressman's emails or a lawyer's emails or other folks that have privilege protections associated with their communications. And those checks and balances should always be used. But Mr. Smith just ignored them? I cannot speak for Mr.
Smith, Senator.
Now We are at not even 24 hours since this revelation. The acting attorney general may not be up to speed on this, or he may not want to speak for the special counsel by saying, I cannot speak for Mr. Smith Senator. Here's what we know. The acting attorney general, who is sitting before Congress right now, is saying there are checks in place that should make it extraordinarily difficult for a prosecutor to collect and review a senator's emails.
In reality, the question here is text messages, or a congressman's emails, or a lawyer's emails, or other folks that have privilege protections associated with their communications. And those checks and balances should always be used. Here is the timeline from the Department of Justice of how this played out. There was a filter team in place, and the filter team, and this is their goal. Our goal is to provide as much responsive, non-privileged information to the investigative team as possible so the special counsel can make well-informed decisions about whether anyone should be charged, and if so, what charges are appropriate.
So their entire goal is to get appropriate information. Responsive, so it means it is related to the request. of the special counsel's team, whether it be a subpoena, a warrant, anything of that nature. It is responsive to the request, what they are seeking. It's not just a fishing expedition where you get every single piece of content ever.
This is a responsive piece of information, and it has to be non-privileged information.
So they get A bunch of data. And they are able to filter out things that do not need to go to the prosecutors. And these individuals on the filter team do not have prosecutorial power. They're not the ones making these decisions. All they are doing is looking at the information and deciding which one gets forwarded on.
On June 2nd, 2023, Thomas Wyndham, Senior Assistant Special Counsel on the Investigative Team, emailed the National Archives and Records Administration's general counsel, Gary Stern, seeking all text messages from October 2020 through January 20th, 2021, from phones associated with the long list of White House personnel. I've gone over those names. The President, Vice President, Cash Patel. Those names, and people that are in government currently now from that first administration. There was a hiccup along the way.
Just nine days later, a different employee at the DOJ sent an email to a contractor managing the filter team's document review software.
So, where the documents would go, they were to view it, and then they'd pass on what was there that said, Apparently, the software's permission settings had been set inappropriately, allowing investigative team members the ability to access documents the filter team had not yet sorted or designated for review.
Now, there's a big question here. What other pieces of material did the special counsel's team Review that they were not supposed to. Because they caught this error on June 11th. twenty twenty three. But good news, that's way before the National Archives Gave The documents to the special counsel.
They fixed it, they caught it. And they said, The Email asked the contractor to adjust the settings to prevent any such access, stating that this is a top priority item. Right now from our end.
So That glitch was allegedly fixed. Before they sent this communications over. But it does raise other questions, and I hope they get to the bottom of this as well. Or, I hope that our FOIAs reveal what else they may have viewed that was not appropriate.
Now, At 12:19 p.m. on August 21st, the General Counsel of NARA. emailed mister Wyndham, that's the senior assistant special counsel. That Nara was producing 54 spreadsheets containing the requested White House custodians' text messages. Nara sent a separate email with a download link and password shortly after.
At twelve forty five that day mister Wyndham, Emailed several members of the investigative team, stated he had already downloaded the spreadsheets containing the texts and asked the team to download the spreadsheets as well. By 1.02, Mr. Wyndham was already emailing members of the team particular texts he had copied from the production. Subsequent emails document the files being saved directly to the special counsel's team's shared drive. Thus, the special counsel's investigative team apparently bypassed the filter team and directly asked the text messages.
Now, here's another thing, too. They could say, oh, maybe it didn't get fixed. Maybe the glitch didn't get fixed. It was 26 minutes after The general counsel said we are producing 54 spreadsheets. Twenty-six minutes later, The Senior Assistant Special Counsel.
Accessed those spreadsheets and downloaded them, told others to, and started disseminating them. In what world? When you have 44 members of Congress that have their communications swept up, no telling who else is in that. Because it's not just the communications with members of Congress, but 54 spreadsheets with lots of information in them. In what world would it take 26 minutes for a filter team?
to separate out the things you can't see. They win immediately. As soon as he got that email, I'm willing to bet. to access the files. We're going to talk about more of that when we come back on Sekulow.
Call me at 1-800-684-3110 to be heard on air. We'll be right back with more on Sekulow, but make sure you support the work of the ACLJ at aclj.org/slash liberty to have your donations doubled. Welcome back to Sekulow, final segment of the broadcast. And if you want to talk to me on air, You've got a few minutes to call in. 1-800-684-3110.
I have a comment, though, from Rumble. That it's one we hear frequently in these discussions, and it's basically. yet nothing ever is going to happen. To these individuals. And that is one thing.
It says, what's going to be done to him, to Jack Smith? Probably nothing like always. And this is something that we see frequently. And I think it's a problem within the conservative space. I think it is a problem really that things have, you know, we see such Blatant abuse of power by a special counsel.
And we've had to live with abuse of power by special counsels, by corrupt ways that intelligence is weaponized. for a long time now. And it does feel one. Like, people are never held accountable. And I'd push back on that.
I think that. One, we see that elections have consequences, that when you have a change in the leadership, You have a change in the people who are doing things about it. And we know that things also happen behind the scenes. We know that there have been many people taken out of the Department of Justice, taken out of the FBI. And while that may not be the perp walks that people want to see, they want to see people in handcuffs.
I think that. That there are people that are working very hard to change. the rot that was in government. And there are good people working on that. Uh I also think This isn't the end of this story.
You are seeing members of Congress that are saying he perjured himself. I think that he is going to. try and thread the needle on that and saying they weren't asking the right question. To try and avoid some sort of perjury charge. But just throwing your hands up saying nothing's going to happen.
I mean, even the fact that This man did everything he could to try and make sure that President Trump couldn't run for office again by weaponizing the system, by throwing out the rule book. in multiple investigations. By going way beyond the scope of what he should have. He didn't succeed. He failed.
And I think the American people, in a large sense, responded to what they tried to do by weaponizing the Department of Justice. Weaponizing the special counsel.
So right there, things have changed.
Now two. The the fact that Members of Congress, the Senate. They aren't just letting this go. They aren't just saying, well. You know, he got the toll records.
Let's just let it be. No, they had the deposition. They keep digging, they keep having people in the Department of Justice.
Now, do you think that? It would have been that easy to get this response from a. Kamala Harris D. O. J.
Because this information did come from the Department of Justice. Office of the Assistant Attorney General. This is from Patrick Davis. Sent directly to the chairman of the committee. There's a lot of ways they can obscure records and documents.
They have people working on this, and sometimes justice is slow. But We don't stop fighting for it. You don't give up. You don't become a conservative nihilist that we see so frequently in the conservative media sphere these days, where they say there's nothing we can do. No one ever is held accountable.
Nothing ever changes. One that's not true. It's not factual. It may not be what you think should be. the case or what you think the punishment should be.
But things do change, and we do fight hard. And there's a lot of people that have the luxury. To get behind a microphone and talk on radio, or talk on a broadcast, or on a podcast, or on YouTube, or Rumble, that can say that.
So easily that There's nothing that can be done. This is terrible. Woe is me. But we don't have that luxury here at the ACLJ. We fight.
To uphold the foundations of this country, to uphold. the constitutional framework. That exists, that our founders so brilliantly came up with. This, this. Popping up here during this 250th year as July.
Here at the ACLJ, we're celebrating America's birthday all month. We're not going to have one day celebration and move on. This is something very important because not only can you celebrate the freedom we have and the framework we have in this constitutional republic, but it also should make you remember. That you have the opportunity to fight, and we have the opportunity to fight for what America is founded on. And we don't give up.
We don't have that luxury for us. For our families, for future generations, we don't just let it go. You don't just throw your hands up and say there's nothing that can be done no one's ever held accountable.
So, yeah, it could frustrate people if in coming months the DOJ isn't able to get a conviction of perjury against. uh someone who very cleverly was able to dodge questions or avoid that. I want to be realistic about that. We are hearing a lot of people saying this is perjury, and it may be. But I also don't want you to think that it's no matter what.
That's the outcome, but I also don't want it to be something that you're disheartened by. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. That is why. We talk about this and show this and don't let this become the norm. Make this be the anomaly that we never let happen again.
And that's why even today that it came out yesterday and they're able to talk to the next most likely next Attorney General of the United States if Todd Blanch successfully gets confirmed by the Senate soon. Say hey. We need more information. We need to know why this happened, how this happened, and how we can also make reforms to make sure this never happens again. But how easily they were able to go by their filter team.
It almost seems like that was the design, not a flaw. How quickly they accessed information.
So, while this may be the revelation today that they got members of Congress' text messages, the actual content of them. I want to know what else they bypassed that filter team on. That's a big, glaring question. And it's right here on the second page of the letter from the Department of Justice, where it says on June 11th. A different employee at the DOJ sent an email to the contractor managing the filter team's document review software to alert them to an issue.
Apparently, the software's permission settings had been set inappropriately, allowing investigative teams Team members the ability to access documents the filter team had not yet sorted or designated for review. The email asked the contractor to adjust the settings to prevent any such access, stating that this is top priority item from our end. Did they make that change? If they did How was Mr. Wyndham able to then access those files so quickly, 26 minutes after they were set?
We're on it, folks. Our team is currently looking at the best path forward to get more information because this isn't the end. This revelation isn't the end of this investigation to ensure it never happens again and that it isn't happening to every one of you. We have to keep fighting. We have to get the truth.
We have to get to the bottom of it. And you can support that work as our attorneys are having to file in court, file lawsuits to get this information. Because even when there's a friendly administration, sometimes you still have to sue them to get the documents. And that's what we had to do earlier this week.
So go to aclj.org today and donate. Aclj.org/slash liberty to have your gift doubled and support this vital work to the American Constitutional Framework. We'll talk to you tomorrow on Sekulow. Uh Uh
