Trump’s DOJ secretly obtained records of his FBI pick Kash Patel, lawmakers, staffers and media in leak investigations
4 min read
Kash Patel speaks during a campaign event for Republican election candidates in Tucson, Arizona on July 31, 2022. © Brandon Bell, AFP
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has been criticized for secretly obtaining phone records from two members of Congress, 43 staffers, and journalists in a sweeping investigation into leaks during the first term of President Donald Trump. A new report from the DOJ’s inspector general reveals how these investigations, conducted during Trump’s administration, focused on federal employees with access to classified information. Among those targeted were Kash Patel, President-elect Trump’s pick to lead the FBI, and Democratic Congress members Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell. Investigators sought records from CNN, The Washington Post, and The New York Times, investigating the leak of sensitive information to the media.
The Justice Department’s actions raised alarms about the potential for overreach. The report notes that the DOJ issued subpoenas and sought communication records from officials without fully following established protocols for protecting members of Congress and journalists. In particular, prosecutors did not need to inform DOJ leadership that they were targeting members of Congress, and Bill Barr, the former Attorney General, later claimed he had no knowledge of the subpoenas for lawmakers’ records. This lack of oversight was seen as an infringement on Congress’s constitutional duty to oversee the executive branch. In addition, prosecutors issued non-disclosure orders that prevented members of Congress from knowing that their communications records had been seized.
The DOJ’s investigation was aimed at identifying those who had leaked classified information, but the inspector general emphasized that the process of obtaining records based on the timing of a leak and access to classified material created significant risks of infringing on legitimate government functions, such as congressional oversight. This, the report stated, could lead to the appearance of political interference in Congress’s activities.
The inspector general’s report does not recommend criminal charges, noting that there was no evidence of politically motivated actions from career prosecutors. However, it did highlight multiple instances where DOJ policies regarding journalistic protections were not followed, including the failure to consult an internal committee to review subpoenas against journalists. Additionally, the DOJ did not consistently follow required procedures, such as obtaining the necessary certification from the Director of National Intelligence.
Among the cases that were under investigation, the phone and email records of Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr from CNN were secretly obtained by the DOJ in 2017. Starr’s records covered a period between June and July 2017, though the exact nature of the investigation remains unclear. Similarly, The New York Times reported that the investigation into its journalists likely involved a 2017 article on then-FBI Director James Comey’s oversight of investigations related to the 2016 presidential election. The Washington Post’s investigation centered around its reporting on Russian interference in the 2016 election and Trump’s contacts with Russian officials.
The report also emphasized the lack of proper checks when seeking communications from journalists. In some cases, the required internal review process was bypassed, and in others, the DOJ did not inform key officials about the records being sought. This included failing to notify Attorney General Barr, who had previously been unaware of the subpoenas. The DOJ’s failure to follow established procedures for protecting journalists’ rights led to concerns about the integrity of the investigations.
In response to this misconduct, the DOJ later implemented new rules prohibiting the secret collection of journalists’ records, except in limited circumstances. These changes came after public revelations of the department’s efforts to secretly obtain journalists’ communication records, which sparked widespread criticism.
Patel, a former staffer for the GOP-led House Intelligence Committee, sued the DOJ over its investigation into his communications. He discovered years later that his Google account records had been seized by the DOJ in 2017 as part of an investigation into leaks. Patel claimed the subpoena was retaliatory because of his work in Congress, particularly his investigations into the FBI’s Russia probe. Patel’s lawsuit was dismissed by a federal judge in 2023, who ruled that the officials involved in the case were immune from legal action.
In conclusion, the DOJ’s aggressive tactics during leak investigations under the Trump administration, including obtaining the records of journalists and congressional members without proper procedural safeguards, have raised serious concerns about the balance between national security, freedom of the press, and the rights of public officials. While the inspector general’s report did not find evidence of political motivations, it underscored significant flaws in the investigative process that could undermine public trust in government oversight. The ongoing debate over the handling of such sensitive investigations highlights the need for clear boundaries and protections in the face of national security concerns.
About The Author
