Hey, what about Rep. Mike Kelly? What does he get?

[berg80]

Bipartisan funding bill would allow senators to sue over government searches of their phone records​

WASHINGTON — A provision tucked into the funding package the Senate passed Monday night as part of a bipartisan deal to reopen the government would allow senators to sue the federal government for potentially millions of dollars if their data is obtained without notifying them.

The legislative language would uniquely benefit eight Republican senators who were recently found to have had their phone records — but not the contents of their calls or messages — accessed as a part of the investigation that led to former special counsel Jack Smith’s probe of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

While the bill does not explicitly mention Smith’s probe, the language would retroactively apply to data requests that were made on or after Jan. 1, 2022, meaning the request for the Republican senators’ data, which was made Sept. 27, 2023, would be susceptible to a lawsuit.

The eight senators who had their phone records accessed are: Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee.

The provision in the bipartisan bill, first reported by The New York Times, appears to only apply to senators, even though Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., also had his phone data requested as a part of the previously disclosed probe.
The provision requires that senators be notified if their data has been disclosed. If they aren’t and they successfully sue, the court would be required to award “the greater of statutory damages of $500,000 or the amount of actual damages” for each violation.

Bipartisan funding bill would allow senators to sue over government searches of their phone records

Eight GOP senators were recently found to have had their phone records obtained without their knowledge during a probe related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

www.nbcnews.com

For that matter, what does every other American get? Every other American who may have their phone records subpoenaed in an investigation don't get to sue the DoJ. Because it's an entirely legal, routine procedure in certain types of cases.

It's bad enough the twice indicted guy in the Oval wants $230M for committing crimes against the American people. Now the senators who may have spoken to the convicted felon about his plot to subvert democracy want to be paid for being part of Smith's investigation? So they passed a bill allowing them to get $500K for each instance! Shut the front door.

 

[Polishprince]

Rep. Kelly, who BTW, represents me in Washington and is doing a tremendous job isn't "entitled " to anything. He just has the right to sue the DOJ and Jack Smith who may have violated his constitutional rights.

Merrick Garland and Jack Smith shouldn't have illegally looked at the congressman's phone records if they didn't want sued.

 

[berg80]

Rep. Kelly, who BTW, represents me in Washington and is doing a tremendous job isn't "entitled " to anything. He just has the right to sue the DOJ and Jack Smith who may have violated his constitutional rights.

Merrick Garland and Jack Smith shouldn't have illegally looked at the congressman's phone records if they didn't want sued.

Not illegal.

While GOP senators reacted with shock to news that their phone records were obtained, those details were referenced in Smith's report, which was made public in January.

Attorneys for Smith responded to the claim that the requests were improper by sending a letter to Grassley saying the subpoena for records "was entirely proper, lawful, and consistent with established Department of Justice Policy.” Smith’s representatives then offered to have him testify publicly, an offer Grassley declined, saying, “the Senate Judiciary Committee is in the process of gathering these records through its constitutional oversight role and will need time to obtain and review them prior to formally calling for a hearing on this matter.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, blasted the provision in a statement Tuesday.

“The Senators may not like being treated like the rest of America, but these phone-record subpoenas and non-disclosure orders are routine in grand jury investigations at the state and federal level," he said. "No one has an absolute right to be notified that their call records have been subpoenaed, much less the right to a million bucks if it happens. This provision would not give any Americans other than U. S. Senators these rights."

 

[berg80]

Rep. Kelly, who BTW, represents me in Washington and is doing a tremendous job isn't

Sounds like he must be a sycophantic trumple.

 

[Polishprince]

Not illegal.

While GOP senators reacted with shock to news that their phone records were obtained, those details were referenced in Smith's report, which was made public in January.

Attorneys for Smith responded to the claim that the requests were improper by sending a letter to Grassley saying the subpoena for records "was entirely proper, lawful, and consistent with established Department of Justice Policy.” Smith’s representatives then offered to have him testify publicly, an offer Grassley declined, saying, “the Senate Judiciary Committee is in the process of gathering these records through its constitutional oversight role and will need time to obtain and review them prior to formally calling for a hearing on this matter.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, blasted the provision in a statement Tuesday.

“The Senators may not like being treated like the rest of America, but these phone-record subpoenas and non-disclosure orders are routine in grand jury investigations at the state and federal level," he said. "No one has an absolute right to be notified that their call records have been subpoenaed, much less the right to a million bucks if it happens. This provision would not give any Americans other than U. S. Senators these rights."

Jack Smith will have every opportunity to defend himself in a court of law before 12 angry men.

Let the process work its way through the system, and not assume that this unconfirmed pretend prosecutor is innocent.

I'd actually love to see Jack Smith get subpoenaed and hear his side of the story in Congress for an investigation.

 

[Marener]

Jack Smith will have every opportunity to defend himself in a court of law before 12 angry men.

Let the process work its way through the system, and not assume that this unconfirmed pretend prosecutor is innocent.

I'd actually love to see Jack Smith get subpoenaed and hear his side of the story in Congress for an investigation.

You don’t understand the information provided in the article.

 

[berg80]

Jack Smith will have every opportunity to defend himself in a court of law before 12 angry men.

Why would he have to do that? He legally conducted an investigation. trump might not like that, those senators may not like that, but that's too effing bad.

 

[berg80]

I'd actually love to see Jack Smith get subpoenaed and hear his side of the story in Congress for an investigation.

A subpoena isn't necessary. Smith is asking to testify publicly.

 

[Polishprince]

A subpoena isn't necessary. Smith is asking to testify publicly.

Let him testify PRIVATELY, behind closed doors.

Criminals don't get to choose how they get to offer their cases

 

[Marener]

This is so incredibly corrupt. I’m sad it won’t get more attention.

 

[berg80]

Let him testify PRIVATELY, behind closed doors.

Criminals don't get to choose how they get to offer their cases

Not a criminal. Why would R's object to public testimony?

 

[berg80]

This is so incredibly corrupt. I’m sad it won’t get more attention.

It's so ridiculous it appears to be a bizarre way for Senate R's to give a backhanded slap to Smith for doing his job. Looking at phone records of trump loyalists who may have known details about the plot to subvert democracy in the process.

 

[MarcATL]

Interesting.

 

[berg80]

Interesting.

This doesn't register too highly on the chaos meter but under normal circumstances it would be a scandal garnering quite a bit of attention. It's nothing more than another attempt to discredit Smith's investigation with a financial component 8 R senators stand to benefit from.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Bipartisan funding bill would allow senators to sue over government searches of their phone records​

WASHINGTON — A provision tucked into the funding package the Senate passed Monday night as part of a bipartisan deal to reopen the government would allow senators to sue the federal government for potentially millions of dollars if their data is obtained without notifying them.

The legislative language would uniquely benefit eight Republican senators who were recently found to have had their phone records — but not the contents of their calls or messages — accessed as a part of the investigation that led to former special counsel Jack Smith’s probe of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

While the bill does not explicitly mention Smith’s probe, the language would retroactively apply to data requests that were made on or after Jan. 1, 2022, meaning the request for the Republican senators’ data, which was made Sept. 27, 2023, would be susceptible to a lawsuit.

The eight senators who had their phone records accessed are: Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee.

The provision in the bipartisan bill, first reported by The New York Times, appears to only apply to senators, even though Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., also had his phone data requested as a part of the previously disclosed probe.
The provision requires that senators be notified if their data has been disclosed. If they aren’t and they successfully sue, the court would be required to award “the greater of statutory damages of $500,000 or the amount of actual damages” for each violation.

Bipartisan funding bill would allow senators to sue over government searches of their phone records

Eight GOP senators were recently found to have had their phone records obtained without their knowledge during a probe related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

www.nbcnews.com

For that matter, what does every other American get? Every other American who may have their phone records subpoenaed in an investigation don't get to sue the DoJ. Because it's an entirely legal, routine procedure in certain types of cases.

It's bad enough the twice indicted guy in the Oval wants $230M for committing crimes against the American people. Now the senators who may have spoken to the convicted felon about his plot to subvert democracy want to be paid for being part of Smith's investigation? So they passed a bill allowing them to get $500K for each instance! Shut the front door.

Reasonable point.

Senator always look out for themselves and each other.

Are you surprised? Is this the first political story you've ever read about?

 

[berg80]

Senator always look out for themselves and each other.

Cite an example of a D senator doing something equivalent.

 

[YoursTruly]

I'm not wanting to change the subject here, but the root of this problem goes way deeper than suing because the US government spied on certain people. It's the FISA law itself. Especially FISA 702. Warrantless spying on Americans.

Which is something that both Trump and Biden supported.

It's something the TL's support when Trump is president. And reject when Biden and or Obama was president.
The left supported when the tables were turned.

From a political independent and constitutional stand point, we reject it when any of them reauthorize it.

You die hard republicans and democrats can bicker and argue all you want about which side is worse, but in the end, you're both supporting some unconstitutional BS.

FISA 702 (and a few other unconstitutional laws), makes it crystal clear that there's not enough difference between Trump/Biden/Harris to shake a stick at. It's all just some unconstitutional, deep state, swamp/sewer BS.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Cite an example of a D senator doing something equivalent.

For D Senators to have voted themselves a settlement for a weaponized prosecutor searching their phone records that would have had to happen to D Senators. In fact, the settlement add on would apply to Senators of any party who had their phone records accessed, as far as I know.

 

[Marener]

For D Senators to have voted themselves a settlement for a weaponized prosecutor searching their phone records that would have had to happen to D Senators. In fact, the settlement add on would apply to Senators of any party who had their phone records accessed, as far as I know.

Adam Schiff's records were obtained during the Trump administration.

Trump's Justice Department obtained House Democrats' data in leaks investigation

The New York Times, which first reported the subpoenas, said the data of at least a dozen people connected to the committee was seized.

www.cbsnews.com

The law passed by Republicans is retroactive, but it doesn't date back far enough for Schiff to get compensated.