New revelations have emerged about the White House's role in an FBI investigation related to the 2020 elections.
According to the New York Post, the Biden administration aided the FBI’s 2020 investigation into former President Donald Trump by providing government-issued cellphones belonging to Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence without a warrant.
The operation, dubbed "Arctic Frost," has been at the center of controversy, with some criticizing its motives. Whistleblower disclosures from Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson brought these aspects of the investigation to light. Grassley and Johnson argue that the investigation was improperly initiated by Timothy Thibault, a former assistant special agent in charge.
One significant concern raised is that the FBI did not possess a warrant to acquire Trump and Pence's devices, which were turned over by the Biden White House counsel. According to emails referenced in the investigation, the FBI took the phones into custody on May 4, 2022, with pending search warrants. The same date saw a brief interview conducted with a Deputy White House Counsel.
On May 9, 2022, the U.S. Attorney’s Office followed up with a letter to the White House Counsel seeking further details on the phones. An email from May 10, 2022, listed numerous FBI employees and staff from other federal organizations slated for interviews related to the operation.
Grassley and Johnson requested records regarding the investigation from Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, emphasizing the need for transparency and a financial breakdown by March 27.
Fox News reported that the cooperation of the Biden White House, specifically the Office of White House Counsel led by Dana Remus and Jonathan Su, was pivotal in acquiring the phones. A source commented that the administration played a role in the FBI’s actions against Trump, marking it as a "gotcha" maneuver. The administration’s “blessing and accommodation” were critical for obtaining Trump's and Pence’s phones, according to the source.
“Sunshine is the best disinfectant,” wrote Senators Grassley and Johnson, stressing that Americans deserve to know the full scope of DOJ and FBI actions. “The American people deserve to know the complete extent of the corruption within the DOJ and FBI that led to the investigation into President Trump. We are making this information public for purposes of public accountability and to provide specific examples of past behavior at your institutions that must not be repeated.”
The staffing and resources allegedly committed to "Arctic Frost" set the foundation for former special counsel Jack Smith's election interference case. The operation’s expenses drew attention from the senators, who described the emails and documents as a glimpse into the extensive taxpayer funds utilized by the FBI for this particular investigation.
The investigation planned over 40 interviews and search warrants, with financial costs reflecting a $16,600 travel expenditure planned for June 2022, as an FBI email from May 25, 2022, indicates. Grassley and Johnson hope to shed light on whether individuals actively volunteered to support the inquiry, as the true nature of such involvement remains unclear.
The senators' push for documentation and transparency underscores a broader demand for accountability. They seek a clear trace of the money spent and the decisions made, underscoring the need for clarity on what occurred during "Arctic Frost" and passing a verdict that clearer practices should prevail in future investigations.
As the March 27 deadline for providing records approaches, the spotlight remains on how administrative and enforcement entities navigate politically sensitive probes. The case illustrates ongoing tensions concerning the motivations behind federal investigations.
These revelations regarding the 2020 elections investigation have sparked varied responses, particularly concerning the circumstances under which the Biden White House assisted without a warrant. The scrutiny on "Arctic Frost" serves as a reminder of the delicate balance federal agencies must strike between mandate fulfillment and perceived political motivations.
