2026-09-22T16:42:22-04:00 / 福克斯新闻频道
众议院司法委员会公布了5名检察官和一名前司法部监察长特工的证词
作者：斯蒂芬妮·普莱斯、利奥·布里塞尼奥、查尔斯·克赖茨 福克斯新闻
发布时间：2026年9月22日 美国东部时间下午4:42 | 更新时间：2026年9月22日 美国东部时间下午6:43
，杰克·史密斯及其盟友抨击司法部刑事转介
福克斯新闻记者大卫·斯彭特在《特别报道》中报道了众议院司法委员会主席、俄亥俄州共和党众议员吉姆·乔丹就前特别检察官杰克·史密斯向司法部提出刑事转介一事。
全新功能：您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章了！
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/e1795999-1332-4059-9c33-133461e2e79e
收听本文
7分钟
众议院共和党人于周二公布了六份备受关注的证词笔录，首次披露了前特别检察官杰克·史密斯对前总统唐纳德·特朗普以及共和党议员展开的争议性调查的内部细节。
众议院共和党议员指控调查人员在“北极霜冻”调查中，不当传唤了十多名共和党议员的通话记录，并申请了禁言令，阻止议员得知拜登-哈里斯政府的司法部获取了他们的通话记录。
这些笔录整体上为调查决策背后的逻辑提供了大量细节，尤其是关于他们在调查特朗普2020年大选后是否试图阻挠和平政权交接时，如何处理议员通信调查的方式。它们揭露了史密斯团队为确保调查遵循适用于任何调查的规范和流程所做的努力，但也暴露了该调查在实际执行方式上与大多数调查的关键差异。
这些文件包括特别检察官办公室五名成员的证词，他们是J·P·库尼、莫莉·加斯顿、雷·赫尔瑟、塔德·杜里和托马斯·温德姆，均为史密斯团队成员。公布的文件还包括布莱恩·伯内特的证词，他是司法部监察长办公室（OIG）的一名特工。
新披露的信息尤其聚焦于从宾夕法尼亚州共和党众议员斯科特·佩里处获取的通信记录，他是此次调查中唯一一名手机被扣押的议员。
前特别检察官杰克·史密斯于2026年1月22日在华盛顿特区国会大厦雷伯恩众议院办公大楼出席众议院司法委员会听证会前准备作证。（阿尔·德拉戈/盖蒂图片社）
根据史密斯团队检察官蒂莫西·“塔德”·杜里的证词，调查人员决定通过搜查令扣押佩里的手机，原因是他与特朗普关系密切，且曾试图寻找法律策略帮助特朗普在败选后继续留任。值得注意的是，佩里是特朗普与杰弗里·克拉克之间的中间人，后者是司法部级别最高的官员，愿意就2020年大选的所谓漏洞展开调查。
杜里将此次搜查令程序比作其他调查。
“如果你试图自愿获取某物，人们可以选择不给你，这是显而易见的一点。但证据有无数被篡改、销毁、添加的可能。在此次搜查令中，和其他任何搜查令一样，对我和我们团队来说，以未受污染的方式获取证据至关重要。”杜里在证词中说道。
此次行动包括对佩里的手机进行定位追踪。
托马斯·温德姆作证称，调查人员获得了一份“位置搜查令”，结果显示佩里当时正在新泽西州度假。根据杜里的笔录，特工找到了佩里，扣押了他的手机并进行了镜像备份，随后将手机归还。
“在这个特定案件中……整个团队都希望对手机进行镜像备份，并尽快归还给佩里众议员。我们非常努力地以干扰性最小的方式完成此事，尽可能保持尊重，避免让佩里众议员陷入尴尬境地，比如我们在独立大道雷伯恩大楼前当场扣押手机，或是引发轩然大波。”温德姆回忆道。
更广泛地说，调查人员还向议员们保证，史密斯对传唤国会议员的通信记录一直持谨慎态度。史密斯团队的另一名检察官雷·赫尔瑟表示，他们曾努力缩小被认定为必要传唤对象的范围。
“嗯，我和他讨论过这个问题，”赫尔瑟在谈到遴选过程时回忆道，“随着我们推进5月份的传唤，你可以看到，不仅名单范围很窄，而且都有书面的正当理由。因此，如果我们要向议员发出传票，他希望我们非常谨慎。”
自然，获取议员的通信记录会带来诸多复杂问题。
杜里承认，围绕议员手机记录传票的法庭保密令，往往会阻止议员在禁令有效期内对传唤提出质疑。杜里表示，他不太记得在与调查人员的面谈中提到的有关传唤得克萨斯州共和党众议员奇普·罗伊手机记录的具体细节。
共和党众议员奇普·罗伊于2026年7月16日周四在国会大厦参加完本周最后一轮投票后，在国会大厦外与记者交谈。（汤姆·威廉姆斯/CQ报团/盖蒂图片社）
调查人员并未向罗伊直接送达传票，而是从他的手机运营商处获取了记录。保密令（NDO）阻止运营商通知用户政府的调取要求，实质上阻止了议员提出质疑。
杜里承认了这一实际限制。保密令“将禁止持有该电话号码的人就传票相关问题提起诉讼”，他作证称。
随后有人追问他是否认为这种行为违反了保护议员的宪法言论或辩论条款。
杜里并未承认获取议员的通话记录违反了言论或辩论条款。在证词的后续部分，他坚持认为检察官认为他们索要的记录不受该条款保护，同时承认在调查过程中出现了“法律某些方面的模糊不清”。
“我想说我们非常警惕，极其清楚言论或辩论条款的边界。我们知道必须妥善处理言论或辩论条款的问题。我们对此非常认真。”他说道，并补充称，虽然关于该条款的判例法看起来“不够完善”，但他对此非常重视。
“[这是]很常见的情况，尤其是在复杂的调查中，会遇到法律中尚未完全明确的灰色地带。”他说道。
尽管部分证词强调了调查人员严格按章办事的努力，但其他部分则凸显了一些不同寻常的特点。
根据史密斯团队检察官塔德·杜里笔录的第7页，2022年4月，司法部公共诚信部门在批准调取乔丹的通话记录这一调查步骤时，就已知晓调查人员的目标。然而，向威瑞森电信送达传票的OIG特工布莱恩·伯内特并不清楚该号码所属的具体人员，据称直到很久之后才弄清楚。
“直到我退休后，此事登上新闻，有讨论称乔丹先生的通话记录被调取，网上也出现了相关传票，我才知晓。”伯内特在自己的笔录中作证称。
“但直到今天，我都不知道那是不是他的号码。”
他表示，如果当时知道通话记录属于谁，他会向上级提出这个问题。伯内特说，联邦检察官（AUSAs）索要的记录通常都是匿名的：“只有电话号码，”他说道。
这些证词揭示了程序上的漏洞——司法部公共诚信部门知道某个被索要的电话号码属于乔丹，但这一信息并未告知下级工作人员。
笔录证词还显示，史密斯的工作方式比其他调查更为亲力亲为。
一名被指派负责杰弗里·克拉克调查案的资深特工作证称，此次调查的运作方式“是我30多年执法生涯中从未见过的独特模式”，根据乔丹委员会公布的笔录文件显示。
共和党众议员吉姆·乔丹于2024年12月10日在华盛顿特区国会大厦参加众议院共和党会议后离开。（汤姆·威廉姆斯/CQ报团/盖蒂图片社）
他表示，检察官会指导通常由特工负责的调查步骤，将这种动态描述为“自上而下”的模式：根据此次公布的六名受访人员之一布莱恩·伯内特的说法，当法医特工收到传票结果时，结果会直接交给检察官，而非发出传票的特工。
伯内特在2024年退休前曾在司法部监察长办公室工作15年，此前还在弗吉尼亚州里士满郊区的切斯特菲尔德县警长办公室担任了9年的高级缉毒警探。
当被问及在其职业生涯中是否遇到过其他检察官以这种方式主导调查的案件时，伯内特回答道：“在我整整30年的执法生涯中，从未有过。”
斯蒂芬妮·普莱斯是福克斯新闻的撰稿人，专注于西海岸和中西部新闻、失踪人员案、全国及国际犯罪报道、凶杀案以及边境安全。
House Republicans drop Jack Smith transcripts in explosive Arctic Frost records fight
2026-09-22T16:42:22-04:00 / Fox News
The House Judiciary Committee published testimony from 5 prosecutors and a former DOJ watchdog agent
By Stepheny Price, Leo Briceno, Charles Creitz Fox News
Published September 22, 2026 4:42pm EDT | Updated September 22, 2026 6:43pm EDT
, Jack Smith, allies slam DOJ criminal referral
Fox News correspondent David Spunt reports on House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, issuing a criminal referral to the Justice Department against former Special Counsel Jack Smith on ‘Special Report.’
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/e1795999-1332-4059-9c33-133461e2e79e
Listen to this article
7 min
House Republicans released six closely watched transcripts Tuesday, offering a new-look inside former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s controversial investigation of President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers.
Committee Republicans allege investigators improperly subpoenaed phone records belonging to more than a dozen GOP lawmakers during the Arctic Frost probe, and secured gag orders preventing lawmakers from learning the Biden-Harris Justice Department had obtained their records.
Taken together, they add substantial detail about the reasoning behind investigatory decisions — especially concerning how they approached probing lawmaker communications — as they investigated whether Trump had attempted to block the peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election. They reveal efforts that Smith’s office took to make sure the investigation followed the norms and processes that would apply to any investigation. But it also laid bare key differences in the way the investigation was practically carried out that separated it from most probes.
The documents include testimony from five members of the special prosecutor’s office, including J.P. Cooney, Molly Gaston, Ray Hulser, Tad Duree and Thomas Windom, all members of Smith’s team. The released files also include testimony from Brian Burnett, an agent for the Office of Inspector General (OIG).
The new revelations focus especially on communications gathered from Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., the only lawmaker who had his phone seized as a part of the investigation.
Former Special Counsel Jack Smith prepares to testify during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill, Jan. 22, 2026, in Washington, D.C.(Al Drago/Getty Images)
According to testimony from Smith’s prosecutor, Timothy “Tad” Duree, investigators had decided to seize the phone using a warrant because of his proximity to Trump and his hand in trying to find a legal strategy to keep Trump in office after he lost. Notably, Perry was a go-between from Trump to Jeffrey Clark, the highest-ranking DOJ official willing to explore weaknesses in the 2020 election.
Duree described that warrant process as comparable to other investigations.
“If you seek to obtain something voluntarily, people can just choose not to give it to you. That’s one obvious thing. But there are myriad opportunities for evidence to be altered, tampered with, deleted, added to. And in this search warrant, same as any others, it was important to me and our team to obtain evidence in a way that it was unadulterated,” Duree said in his testimony.
The operation entailed pinging Perry’s phone to find its location.
Thomas Windom testified investigators obtained a “location-warrant” — which found Perry to be on vacation in New Jersey. According to Duree’s transcript, agents located Perry, seized his phone and imaged it, then returned it.
“In this particular case … the whole team wanted to image the phone and get it back to Congressman Perry as quickly as possible. We were trying real hard to do this in a way that was minimally disruptive, it was as respectful as it could be, and it didn’t put Congressman Perry in an awkward spot where we’re seizing a phone right out on Independence [Avenue] in front of the Rayburn Building or it’s some big hubbub,” Windom recalled.
More broadly, investigators also reassured lawmakers that Smith had been cautious about subpoenaing communications from members of Congress. Husler, another one of the prosecutors on Smith’s team, said that they had looked to narrow the scope of which ones were deemed necessary.
“Well, I talked with him about it,” Husler recalled about the selection process. “And, as we got into the May subpoenas, you could see, not only was it [a] narrow list of people, but there were written justifications for it. So he wanted to be very careful if we were going to be getting subpoenas for members.”
Naturally, securing the communications of lawmakers came with complications.
Duree acknowledged that court-ordered secrecy surrounding subpoenas for lawmakers’ phone records often prevented the lawmakers from challenging the demands while the orders were active. Duree said he did not particularly remember specifics from correspondence about obtaining Rep. Chip Roy’s, R-Texas, phone records that were raised during his interview with investigators.
Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, talks with reporters outside the U.S. Capitol after the last votes of the week on Thursday, July 16, 2026.(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Rather than serving the subpoena on Roy, investigators sought the records from his phone provider. A nondisclosure order (NDO) prevented the provider from notifying the subscriber about the government’s demand, essentially preventing the lawmaker from asking questions.
Duree acknowledged the practical limitation. A nondisclosure order “will prohibit a person who holds that phone number from litigating issues surrounding the subpoena,” he testified.
He was then pressed as to whether he believed the act violated the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution that protects lawmakers.
Duree did not concede that obtaining the lawmakers’ toll records violated the Speech or Debate Clause. Later in his testimony, he maintained that prosecutors believed the records they sought were not protected by the clause, while acknowledging there was a “lack of clarity on certain points” of the law that arose during the investigation.
“I would say we were hypervigilant and extremely aware of the contours of the Speech or Debate Clause. We knew that Speech or Debate was something that we had to navigate. We treated it seriously,” he said, adding that while case law on the clause can appear “underdeveloped,” he took it seriously.
“[It’s] a common thing, particularly in complex investigations, to run into the corners of the law that aren’t fully built out,” he said.
While parts of the testimony underscored efforts to manage the investigation by the book, other parts highlighted some unusual characteristics.
The Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section knew investigators were seeking Jordan’s phone records when it approved the investigative step in April 2022, according to page seven of the transcript of Jack Smith team prosecutor Tad Duree. However, the OIG agent who served the subpoena to Verizon – Brain Burnett – did not know who the particular number belonged to, and only purportedly figured it out much later.
“It was not until I had been retired and this was on the news and there was conversation about Mr. Jordan’s toll records being subpoenaed and then there was a subpoena that came up on the internet,” Burnett testified, according to his own transcript.
“But I do not know, as we sit here today, if that was his number or not.”
He said that if he had known just who the toll records belonged to, he would have raised the issue with his superiors. Burnett said that the records sought by “AUSAs” – federal prosecutors–were typically nameless: “Just phone numbers,” he said.
The testimony illustrates a gap in the process – in that the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section knew a particular phone number sought belonged to Jordan, while that information was not disclosed to subordinates.
Transcript testimony also revealed that Smith’s work was more hands-on than other investigations.
A veteran agent assigned to the Jeffrey Clark investigation testified that the probe operated in a way “unique, as far as the over 30 years of law enforcement experience I have,” according to transcript documents released by Jordan’s panel.
Rep. Jim Jordan leaves a House Republican Conference meeting at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 10, 2024.(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Prosecutors directed investigative steps normally handled by agents, he said, describing the dynamic as “top down,” in that when a forensics agent receives the results of a subpoena, it would go back to the prosecutor – not the agent who subpoenaed the records, according to Brian Burnett – one of six individuals whose interviews were released.
Burnett spent 15 years in the DOJ’s inspector general’s office before his 2024 retirement, and was a senior narcotics detective with the Chesterfield County Sheriff’s office in a Richmond, Virginia suburb for nine years.
Asked whether he had encountered another case during his career in which prosecutors dictated the investigation in that manner, Burnett responded, “Not in my entire 30 years of law enforcement.”
Stepheny Price is a Writer at Fox News with a focus on West Coast and Midwest news, missing persons, national and international crime stories, homicide cases, and border security.
发表回复