In a recent interview on Newsmax TV, Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) boldly proclaimed that the days of special counsel Jack Smith are numbered. This assertion comes in the wake of revelations surrounding Smith’s redacted warrant, which sought user data from former President Donald Trump’s account on the X platform.
The warrant, disclosed in a report by Conservative Brief on November 30, 2023, dated January 17, raised eyebrows due to its extensive scope, including requests for information on users who had interacted with Trump’s account in various ways, such as following, unfollowing, muting, unmuting, blocking, or unblocking.
Undeterred by potential implications, Higgins expressed pride in being on Smith’s list, emphasizing the commitment of American patriots to defending the republic through legal and peaceful means within the confines of the Constitution.
More Read
This defiant stance coincides with a bombshell dropped by Trump’s legal team during a recent court hearing, claiming to possess evidence of “extensive communications” between Smith’s office, the Justice Department, the National Archives, and the Biden White House prior to Trump’s indictment.
Investigative reporter Julie Kelly amplified these claims, pointing to a trove of evidence, including “years” worth of security footage from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence. According to Kelly, this evidence underscores “extensive communications” between the White House, National Archives, intelligence agencies, and the Justice Department—a collaborative effort aimed at shaping the documents included in Smith’s indictment.
The controversy traces back to the unprecedented FBI raid on Trump’s estate in late August 2022. Contrary to initial claims, Just the News reported that the Biden White House collaborated with the Justice Department and National Archives to initiate the criminal probe into alleged mishandling of documents.
Memos exchanged between White House Deputy Counsel Jonathan Su, the FBI, DOJ, and National Archives as early as April reveal intricate planning leading up to the raid. By May, Su communicated to the Archives that President Biden would not object to waiving executive privilege claims, facilitating the DOJ in obtaining a grand jury subpoena compelling Trump to surrender any remaining materials. These revelations, unfolding in the spring of 2022, precede the FBI’s eventual raid on Trump’s Florida compound.
Against this backdrop of political intrigue, Higgins’ warning to Smith adds a layer of uncertainty to an already complex investigation. As the controversy unfolds, questions about the impartiality of the legal process, potential political interference, and the delicate balance between privacy rights and government investigations come to the forefront. The nation watches with bated breath as the intersection of politics, law, and privacy continues to shape the narrative surrounding this high-profile investigation.
