Posted on 09/29/2026 12:53:53 PM PDT by DFG
Special Counsel Jack Smith’s sweeping investigation into President Donald Trump included the financial data of everyday supporters across 50 states who gave as little as $1 to the president and allied groups, new documents reveal.
Smith’s team obtained at least 4,782 checks from everyday Americans making mainly small-dollar donations. Smith’s sweep — though ostensibly focused on the events of Jan. 6, 2020 — hoovered up checks from September 2019 to August 2023.
The Biden administration wielded the country’s most powerful law enforcement tools to spy on Republicans with little concern for whether it violated the Constitution, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley said.
Grassley released the documents as part of an ongoing probe into the investigation the FBI codenamed “Arctic Frost” that formally began in April 2022 into a 2020 fake elector scheme. Arctic Frost and two other FBI investigations — one relating to Jan. 6 codenamed “Project Coconut” and one related to Mar-a-Lago documents codenamed “Project Cranberry” — mired Trump’s return to the White House and ensnared hundreds of conservative individuals and entities.
Smith testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday, where Grassley pressed Smith on the apparent overreach.
“Did you obtain possession of donor data, to include financial information, yes or no?” he asked.
After a pause, Smith said, “our investigation was focused on investigating matters under my mandate including whether any person or entity violated the law with attempts to block the peaceful transfers of power.”
“Let me ask the question again. Did your special counsel operation obtain possession of donor data, to include financial information, yes or no?” Grassley pressed.
“Yes we acquired financial information. As I sit here right now I cannot recite to you every subpoena we issued. I can tell you why we issued subpoenas,” Smith said. “It was to conduct a criminal investigation into one of the most serious crimes in our nation’s history. I had a duty to collect facts.”
“You answered yes … The list includes checks from constituents in every state of every single member of this committee, both Republicans and Democrats,” Grassley replied. “Every member on this committee ought to be outraged for what happened to their constituents. Which one of my Democratic colleagues will join me in that outrage?”
Smith did not include any reference to this data in his public report, Grassley pointed out.
The intrusion may still jeopardize these Americans’ privacy, as the Department of Justice and FBI continue to possess these donors’ home addresses, bank account and routing numbers, and signatures, Grassley said.
In his opening statement, Grassley lambasted Smith for casting as wide a net as possible in his Jan. 6 probe, appearing to map out the entire Republican Party as complicit in the “crime” of supporting Trump.
Among the targets of the probe: The toll records of 16 members of Congress, the records of hundreds of Republican groups and individuals, and intrusions into 87 Trump White House phones. The White House records included communications with a further 44 members of Congress and dozens of media outlets.
The outlets include 60 Minutes, Associated Press, Bloomberg, CBS, CNBC, CNN, Fox News, LA Times, Mark Levin Show, Media Research Center, NBC, NPR, NY Magazine, Reuters, The Federalist, The Washington Post, Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal.
Grassley also pointed to an apparent double standard: The FBI never conducted a fulsome investigation of possible criminal activity related to donors to the Clinton Foundation and the Hillary Clinton campaign.
For instance, the FBI recorded a conversation between Clinton and Indian hotel magnate Sant Singh Chatwal in which Clinton discussed donations to the foundation and her remaining 2008 campaign debt.
But when Clinton arrived to the FBI in July 2016 to answer questions about her use of a private email server in a separate investigation codenamed “Midyear Exam,” D.C. agents asked nothing about the allegations of pay-to-play with foreign governments or use of the global charity as a slush fund.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
“I can tell you why we issued subpoenas”
Proceeds to lie.
How about releasing a list of donors whose info was provided?
Then each one can sue him for violating their rights in civil court, yes?
These hearings are a waste. Since no one has been held to account for this BS, it will jinn up again as soon as Trump’s out of office, and possibly as soon as the mid-terms.
Don’t the folks who work for Trump now realize that they are going to be bankrupted by lawfare in a couple years?
Ok, so who is going to file the class action lawsuit?
The face of the deep state.
I did Nazi this coming from Jerk Smith.
Ok, so who is going to file the class action lawsuit?
~~~
Aside from DFG’s point that the people who were spied on probably don’t know who they are, and also that a judge could easily just ask “can you prove monetary damages?”, you know some lefty judge would gladly throw it out under the auspices of protecting any future (potentially legitimate) investigations from fear of civil litigation.
Jack Smith and his group of overzealous prosecutors were “investigating” anyone associated with President Trump’s campaign as if they were all a part of a large criminal enterprise. These are the tactics of a totalitarian regime be it communist, socialist or fascist. I shudder to think what would have happened if Kamela had won the last election. This is just plain scary and should wake up the American public as to the Democrats true colors.
Seems like a public horse whipping is in order. Did I say that out loud? Excuse me.
And we’re expected to lay down for the infringements on our privacy through FLOCK, AI. cell phone tracking, internet use tracking, and whatever else they have going.
Then you can sue for remedy in court. Even if there are no financial damages, you can possibly sue for "nominal" and "punitive" damages as well as getting your own legal fees reimbursed.
Do your own internet search on "remedy for violation of rights" for specific info.
It would be nice to see this bastard have to personally answer to thousands of court cases throughout all the courts in the 50 states.
I've never donated to a political party so this is not something I can pursue.
60 year old grandma walking past the Capitol on January 6th = 4 years in Jail/ no writ of habeas corpus.
Jack Smith = soon to be forgotten ‘inquiry’.
Jacks duty once the Democrats reinstate him with full back pay, will be to require all this AI, Cell Phone and Flock camera data.
That is if he can pry it away from jealous law enforcement husbands monitoring their girl friends and ex wives.
Remember when in WW2 and after the nazis and communists use records like this to round up opposition and imprison them...
Government agents have proven that they cannot be trusted with existing information gathering and analysis technologies ... yet have the insufferable gall to demand more.
For our "safety", of course.
I’d like to see the scope of investigation memorandum that Merritless Garland issued as guidance for Smith’s investigations. I’d bet it didn’t include collecting banking information on Trump supporters.
Trump needs to announce he will do the same.
Who is on that list?
How can we find out if Jack got our info????
What is her name? So much for the resolution of geolocation ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.