267. Oops! DOJ spied on its new FBI Director Kash Patel—and other Congressional staffers at the time
Dec 11, 2024
auto_awesome
Jason Foster, an attorney and the founder of Empower Oversight, discusses a shocking incident where the DOJ spied on congressional staffers, including Kash Patel, Donald Trump's FBI Director. He reveals the chilling challenges faced by whistleblowers and the dangerous implications of unauthorized surveillance on privacy and transparency. The conversation highlights the erosion of constitutional protections, concerns about government transparency, and the adversarial relationship between Congress and federal agencies, shedding light on the need for accountability.
The DOJ's surveillance on Congressional staffers raises profound concerns about transparency and the separation of powers within the federal government.
Invasive actions against oversight personnel create a chilling effect on whistleblower communications, undermining accountability and discouraging vital disclosures of misconduct.
Deep dives
Surveillance of Congressional Staff
The Department of Justice conducted surveillance on congressional staff members involved in oversight of their activities, specifically during investigations into allegations against Donald Trump. Communications records, including metadata such as call durations and email exchanges, were secretly collected from staff using grand jury subpoenas related to an alleged leak of classified information. This action targeted legal advisors like Jason Foster, who was conducting whistleblower investigations at the time, and highlighted the government's attempts to monitor those tasked with holding it accountable. The secrecy surrounding these actions raises significant concerns about transparency and the mishandling of power within the federal government.
Impact on Whistleblower Communications
The surveillance created a chilling effect on whistleblower communications, as potential informants may fear that their discussions with congressional staff could lead to exposure and repercussion. Foster emphasized that such invasions of privacy undermine the integrity of congressional oversight and discourage individuals from coming forward with critical information regarding misconduct within federal agencies. The continuous collection of metadata, even after the related investigation had concluded, poses risks to the balance of power between congressional oversight and executive actions. This situation exemplifies a breakdown in the constitutional principle that should protect the ability of Congress to function independently without executive interference.
Legal and Political Implications
The case raises serious legal and political implications concerning the extent of government authority in surveilling individuals who are responsible for oversight. Foster discusses how minimal standards were required for obtaining the metadata, which allowed the government to bypass the necessary scrutiny that should accompany such actions, especially regarding congressional staff. Ongoing efforts to unveil the details surrounding the subpoenas aim to question the justification provided to courts for such invasive orders, revealing potential misuse of power. This situation highlights a chronic issue of inadequate checks on executive actions, thereby prompting calls for greater accountability in the treatment of oversight personnel.
The fascinating and outrageous story, straight from one of the victims, of how the DOJ spied on Congressional staffers conducting oversight of the agency. An Inspector General report out this week confirmed the scandal that raises serious questions about constitutional separation of powers.
Subscribe to my two podcasts: “The Sharyl Attkisson Podcast” and “Full Measure After Hours.” Leave a review, subscribe and share with your friends! Support independent journalism by visiting the Sharyl Attkisson store.
