MSNBC’s Downplays BOMBSHELL: Biden FBI Spying on Republican Senators
During Attorney General Pam Bondi’s hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Senator Josh Hawley bewailed the newly unearthed fact of President Biden’s FBI investigating himself and eight other Republican members of Congress. MSNBC’s Ana Cabrera Reports took the opportunity to fact-check and downplay the importance of the Arctic Frost operation, almost making it out to be routine.
Hawley repeatedly called the investigation as phone “tapping,” which Ana Cabrera pooh-poohed:
It wasn't listening in to any content of conversations that they had. In fact, this is according to Senator Ron Johnson, also a Republican, as he was among those revealing what they had learned. He said that the information was who was called, date, time, length of call. So again, it was not a phone tap.
That, according to what’s publicly known thus far, was true.
But Cabrera didn’t think it enough to purely set the record straight, and pushed MSNBC legal analyst Catherine Christian into characterizing Republicans’ rightful concern as mere partisanship:
CABRERA: Catherine, is this revelation something to be concerned about? Or do you see this strictly as political posturing from Josh Hawley, this line of questioning?
CHRISTIAN: It's probably political posturing. It makes sense that the Special Counsel would want to know who these particular Senators called and who called them during January 4th to January 7th, 2021.
But it was concerning. The fact that the investigation wasn’t opened until over a year afterwards (by a former agent who may have had a hand in covering up Hunter’s laptop from Hell) proved Biden’s FBI wasn’t singularly interested in apolitical justice.
If Cabrera was actually interested in the usefulness of Congressional hearings, she should have offered a solution. The hearings had largely been reduced to partisan virtue-signaling. Perhaps they should’ve been kept behind closed-doors, or at the very least not broadcasted.
Cabrera then tried to normalize the Arctic Frost investigation:
And a reminder, too, as he frames this as political weaponization of the DOJ under the Biden administration. Jack Smith was a Special Counsel appointed by Merrick Garland to create separation with the Biden Justice Department at the time. And is that an appropriate way for these types of investigations to be handled? And do you see it differently than what we are seeing under the current administration?
The Arctic Frost investigation was both illegitimately opened and expanded into targeting numerous right-wing politicians and organizations, even before it was handed over to Jack Smith.
The probe wasn’t simply looking into any potential wrongdoing surrounding the 2020 presidential election. It was an excuse to surveil all political opposition in hopes of launching lawfare campaigns.
Christian continued to portray the revelation as standard procedure:
It's actually — it's very normal to, as a investigation that this was, to subpoena, it's usually a subpoena, to get phone records of who called who as part of the investigation, particularly for a timeline […] So it was very — it's not out of the ordinary, and particularly during that time period. If Senator Graham said it was going on for months and months and months, then you could be concerned. But since it was limited to that period of the indictment, it makes sense.
The recent uncovering was a small piece of a larger and much more damning puzzle, one many have suspected existed but was now coming to light. But MSNBC wanted you to believe that Republicans were overreacting.
The transcript is below. Click "expand" read:
MSNBC’s Ana Cabrera Reports
October 7, 2025
11:17:00 a.m. EDT
ANA CABRERA: Okay, we're just going to pull out for a quick second to do a fact check, because Senator Hawley keeps on bringing up this idea that the FBI tapped their phones related to the Jack Smith investigation into January 6th and 2020 election interference. What we have learned, and the facts of the matter are, that the FBI did request phone logs or data related to a number of senators, GOP
Senators who had communications on that day in January 6th. And what they asked for was not any information related to a phone tap. It wasn't listening in to any content of conversations that they had. In fact, this is according to Senator Ron Johnson, also a Republican, as he was among those revealing what they had learned. He said that the information was who was called, date, time, length of call. So again, it was not a phone tap.
Catherine, is this revelation something to be concerned about? Or do you see this strictly as political posturing from Josh Hawley, this line of questioning?
CATHERINE CHRISTIAN: It's probably political posturing. It makes sense that the Special Counsel would want to know who these particular Senators called and who called them during January 4th to January 7th, 2021. And Senator Graham used those dates because that was part of the now-dismissed indictment of obstructing that Congressional proceeding, the certification of the election. So they were investigating who did President — then-President Trump speak to? Who, all the other people who — again, the indictments now dismissed — that's related to that. So that's a very particular time period. And there was an indictment. It's now dismissed. But I'm glad you clarified. Tap means listening to phone conversations.
That's not what happened here. It was, who did the senator call? Who called the senator? For how long and what date?
CABRERA: And a reminder, too, as he frames this as political weaponization of the DOJ under the Biden administration. Jack Smith was a Special Counsel appointed by Merrick Garland to create separation with the Biden Justice Department at the time. And is that an appropriate way for these types of investigations to be handled? And do you see it differently than what we are seeing under the current administration?
CHRISTIAN: It's actually — it's very normal to, as a investigation that this was, to subpoena, it's usually a subpoena, to get phone records of who called who as part of the investigation, particularly for a timeline. Particularly if you have a confidential source saying, “I was in the room when this person called that one.” Well, let's find out if Ana Cabrera actually made a phone call at that time, and to the person that this confidential source said he did.
So it was very — it's not out of the ordinary, and particularly during that time period. If Senator Graham said it was going on for months and months and months, then you could be concerned. But since it was limited to that period of the indictment, it makes sense.
