Jack Smith Subpoenaed Ted Cruz’s Phone Records; AT&T Refused to Hand Them Over
“By the way, they launched Arctic Frost — this witch hunt — just three days after Donald Trump launched his reelection campaign. This was all about politics.”
Earlier this month, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) disclosed that special counsel Jack Smith tracked the communications of eight Republican senators (and one congressman) as part of his Arctic Frost investigation into President Donald Trump’s actions after the 2020 presidential election.
The group included Sens. Marsha Blackburn (TN), Lindsey Graham (SC), Bill Hagerty (TN), Josh Hawley (MO), Ron Johnson (WI), Cynthia Lummis (WY), Dan Sullivan (AK), Tommy Tuberville (AL) and Rep. Mike Kelly (PA).
This document shows the Biden FBI spied on 8 of my Republican Senate colleagues during its Arctic Frost investigation into "election conspiracy" Arctic Frost later became Jack Smith's elector case against Trump
BIDEN FBI WEAPONIZATION = WORSE THAN WATERGATE pic.twitter.com/V2JyiVlX48— Chuck Grassley (@ChuckGrassley) October 6, 2025
During a Tuesday night appearance on Fox News’ Hannity, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) revealed that the Biden Department of Justice had also tried to obtain his telephone records. Fortunately, his cell phone carrier, AT&T, objected to the request.
Cruz said:
They issued a subpoena … and AT&T, to their credit, said no — we’re not going to hand this over.
The Biden DOJ subpoenaed the phone records of nearly 20% of Republicans in the United States Senate. This was a fishing expedition. It was an abuse of power. By the way, they launched Arctic Frost — this witch hunt — just three days after Donald Trump launched his reelection campaign. This was all about politics.
And Arctic Frost is, I think, the Biden Department of Justice’s Watergate; it is pure weaponization, going after their political opponents. … And I think the Biden DOJ needs to be held to account.
Sen. Ted Cruz torches Jack Smith after learning the DOJ tried to seize his phone records:
"They issued a subpoena, and AT&T, to their credit, said no—we’re not going to hand this over. The Biden DOJ subpoenaed the phone records of nearly 20% of Republicans in the United States… pic.twitter.com/ikmZWoDRzp
— Sean Hannity 🇺🇸 (@seanhannity) October 22, 2025
Sources “directly familiar” with the matter confirmed Cruz’s allegations to Axios.
In response to a request for comment from Axios, Cruz issued the following statement:
Arctic Frost was the Biden administration’s 21st-century digital Watergate.
They weaponized the DOJ and FBI to try to access records on me, President Trump, and other political opponents of the Democrat Party.
It was intentional, targeted political spying that likely went to the very highest levels of the administration — demonstrating utter contempt for the Constitution and separation of powers — and there should be the broadest possible investigations and accountability.
Last week, the House Judiciary Committee demanded that Smith testify about what his “prosecutorial misconduct and constitutional abuses” in his investigation of Trump.
In the Committee’s October 14 subpoena to Smith, Committee Chairman Jim Jordan wrote:
Among the disturbing tactics employed in that prosecution, your team sought to silence President Trump by restricting his public statements about the case, conducted an unnecessary and abusive raid of his residence, attempted to improperly pressure defense counsel with the promise of political patronage, and manipulated key evidence in the investigation.
For his part, Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) — whose record of lying to the public may even eclipse that of Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) — issued a statement rejecting the subpoena’s allegations. Raskin wrote:
An extraordinary years-long MAGA cover-up has deprived the American public of the opportunity to read this special counsel report that the taxpayers paid for.
When our Republican colleagues complete their nostalgic rerun investigations of the Biden Administration and fail yet again to identify even a whiff of wrongdoing in Jack Smith’s work, we hope they will join Committee Democrats in demanding serious accountability from this DOJ.
Given the recent indictments of Trump’s former national security advisor John Bolton, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and former FBI Director James Comey, Democrats have been quick to accuse the Trump DOJ of weaponizing the law against his enemies.
The key difference between the 88 criminal counts filed against Trump across four indictments and the accusations involving Bolton, James, and Comey, is that the former appear to have been fabricated, while the latter are far more specific, substantive, and — if proven — constitute actual crimes supported by evidence.
In Trump’s case, the Biden Department of Justice and state prosecutors often had to contort existing laws to transform misdemeanors into felonies or to revive expired claims. For example, in E. Jean Carroll’s civil rape case against Trump, the statute of limitations had long since expired — until New York lawmakers passed a law in 2022 creating a one-year window that allowed previously time-barred civil suits for sexual assault to proceed.
As Democrats try to cover up the extraordinary lengths they went to in their unwarranted, relentless, and unprecedented pursuit of Trump after he announced his 2024 presidential bid, they’ve developed a collective case of amnesia about their actions.
While their continued gaslighting may satisfy their base, the party seems to have lost much of the middle, who were paying attention to the documents released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe in July. Maybe that’s why the Democratic Party’s overall approval has cratered over the past year.
I look forward to watching Jack Smith testify before Congress. After years as a seasoned prosecutor, he’s unlikely to reveal much. Still, his demeanor and even the questions he refuses to answer will speak volumes — and perhaps, just perhaps, a flicker of the truth will shine through.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Why is Jack Smith still walking free after impersonating a US attorney?
Better question: why is Jack Smith still walking?
He lost his Metro card?
He didn’t. He was appointed by the Attorney General to a position that at the time was universally considered an inferior office that didn’t need the senate’s consent, and believed in good faith that that appointment was valid. Seth Tillman’s theory that superior and inferior offices are defined by the degree of independence they have hadn’t yet gained whatever respectability it has now. Like most of Tillman’s theories, everyone dismissed it until a district court took it seriously, and then a Supreme Court justice took it seriously, and suddenly it became a respectable theory. But that’s still all it is. It has never been established, beyond Judge Cannon’s district, that it’s valid.
Tillman’s like that. He’s almost always right, but no one takes him seriously because they just “know” he’s wrong, and then they’re astonished when a court considers it and decides he’s making sense.
thank you, seth
If Garland really didn’t know that US attorneys require Senate approval then he himself was unqualified to hold the office.
Sheesh. Did you read what I wrote? Smith was not appointed as a US Attorney, and no one ever claimed he was. He was appointed under DOJ rules as a special counsel, which until last year everyone believed to be an inferior office.
Tillman was the only one who had this wacky theory that superior and inferior offices are not just whatever you choose to call things, they’re actual functional designations. And you know Tillman, he has all sorts of wacky theories that are obviously wrong. There’s no need to pay him any attention. Until a judge heard the theory and said “Hmm, that actually makes sense”; and then people still didn’t take it seriously until a Supreme Court justice said the same thing. This is what usually happens with him. He’s almost always right, but because he’s so out of the mainstream people ignore him and don’t give his theories a fair consideration, until suddenly they do.
Because he hasn’t been convicted of anything yet. He is still a member of the bar in DC I think but has been over in Europe for years.
First, Smith’s lawyer will attempt to evade the subpoena. When that doesn’t work, Smith will negotiate times and places and conditions. After that fails, he’ll claim the fifth.
Don’t forget that the Xiden DOJ coordinated with the local prosecutors. Including sending the number 3 DOJ attorney to work with Bragg. Scum bag does t begin to describe these people.
Not mentioned above: What these 8 Senators had in common was that they were opposed to voting “yea” on certifying the election results.
They were promoting a vote to have a two week delay prior to having a vote to certify, and to use those two weeks to examine the evidence of voter fraud in six swing states.
This is something the Senate can, and ought, to do in a tight election when there is substantial evidence of voter fraud that could alter the results.
What Jack Smith, the FBI, and Biden’s DOJ did here was to try to criminalize this.
So, yeah, the Watergate break in was about 0.0001% as bad as this. What the D’s did to Nixon after that was worse than this. It was our nation’s first successful coup.
No, it is not something the senate can do, at least not if the Electoral Count Act is valid. (I think there’s a strong case to be made that it isn’t valid, but even then there’s nothing authorizing the senate to delay the count.)
The most newsworthy thing about this entire article is not anything Jack Smith did or didn’t do, but the fact that a major tech giant stood up for the privacy interests of one of their customers, never mind one of their conservative customers. It’s unheard of.
Now, they almost surely wouldn’t have given me the same deference that they gave a household-name Senator, but amazingly, this is STILL a step beyond anything they have ever done.
The only two players I know of who ever did anything like this are Apple refusing to backdoor their encryption, and Twitter — POST Musk — (Dorseys original Twitter was more than eager to roll on its back and spread ’em).
I’m just surprised AT&T had the guts to stay out of it and tell Smith to pound sand. The fact that Smith didn’t push it shows to me that he knew what he was doing had no legal merit.
hopefully the fascist Smith will end in jail and get the same treatment that nazi women got from the victorious Red Army. MillHouse would enjoy that
Rape is not funny.