>>22153619
Intelligence Collection Efforts in the Lead Up to the January 6, 2021 I'm reviewing the first 4 pages of the report, and it starts with how the Press had documents and info seized by DOJ that had reported on J6 events, and goes into the DOJ and IC agency taking, stealing, secretly listening to Members of Congress, their staff etc.so it seems like they are talking about Rod Rosenstein and Wray's investigation on Devon Nunes, Kash Patel and many others.
I don't know why this report is about J6 yet,but starting out with this seems like a BIG Justification what they did to citizens at J6.So, theDOJ under Rosenstein seized Media docs and Congressmen and staffers docs, without notice, and Biden continued:
Chapter One: Executive Summary and Background I. Executive Summary In the spring and summer of 2017, CNN.com (CNN), The New York Times, and The Washington Postpublished articles containing classified information, some of which was classified as Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information.
In May and June 2021, multiple news media outlets reported that, in 2020, the Department of Justice (Department or DOJ) issued compulsory process to obtain non-content communications records of reporters at CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post in an attempt to identify the sources of the leaked classified information. 1 The reported revelations sparked widespread concern, including from the news media, that the Department’s use of compulsory process was an encroachment on the news media’s ability to report on government activities. Concerns also were raised about the Department’s use of non-disclosure orders (NDO)—sought by the Department and issued by federal courts—that prevented the reporters and newsroom leadership from learning about the use of compulsory process to seek reporters’ noncontent email records.2 Such NDOs could prevent reporters and news media companies from having an opportunity to challenge the compulsory process in court. 3 Concerns also were expressed that the NDOs impeded the news media’s ability to report on the orders, thereby hindering public scrutiny of the government’s activities.4 ….
In response to this reporting,Members of Congress expressed concerns that their records had been obtained for political reasonsand/or that issuing the compulsory process violated the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government.8 Similar to the news media’s criticism..
On June 11, 2021, the DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated a review to examine whether the Department’s use of compulsory process to obtain communications records of Members of Congress and affiliated persons and members of the news media in certain investigations of alleged unauthorized disclosures of classified information to the news media complied with Department policies and procedures…
This report summarizes the results of our review and describes theDepartment’s use of compulsory process to obtain records of Members of Congress, congressional staffers, and members of the news media in four criminal investigationsinto the unauthorizeddisclosure of classified information that were opened in 2017. The Department did not charge anyone in these investigations with unauthorized disclosure of classified information,and all four of the investigations are now closed. As described in this report, we make several findings regarding the Department’s use of compulsory process to obtain non-content communications records of Members of Congress and congressional staff and members of the news media. With respect to Members of Congress and congressional staff, which are the focus of Chapter Two, we found the Department issued compulsory process for thenon-content communications records of 2 Members of Congress and 43 individuals who were congressional staffersat the time the articles containing the classified information were published as part of the investigations to identify the sources of the leaked classified information.
Both Members of Congress were Democrats, and of the 43 congressional staffers, 21 worked for Democratic Members of Congress or the Democratic staff of a congressional committee or congressional leadership office, 20 worked for Republican Members or the Republican staff== of a congressional committee or congressional leadership office, and 2 worked in nonpartisan positions for congressional committees.