Special Counsel Monitored Metadata in 2024

FBI surveillance practices revealed widespread collection of metadata from journalists, attorneys, and political advisors.

Updated on Oct. 5, 2026 in Cybersecurity

Bold flat-color editorial illustration showing a monolithic geometric structure rising against a plain background, representing systemic federal surveillance.
Records released this year reveal that former special counsel Jack Smith authorized the collection of metadata from journalists and political advisors during the Plasmic Echo inquiry. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Do you trust federal agencies to appropriately limit surveillance of political figures and media contacts?

Records released in 2024 confirmed that former special counsel Jack Smith used pen register devices and preservation requests to monitor the communications metadata of Susie Wiles. This surveillance targeted interactions involving at least 5 journalists, 21 defense attorneys, and various political advisers.

Why it matters

The disclosure highlights the methods used by federal investigators during the Plasmic Echo inquiry to track information flow. It underscores the technical reach of law enforcement when securing digital communication records from technology providers.

Investigators utilized pen register devices—hardware and software used to log the metadata, including time and destination, of outgoing and incoming calls—to monitor Wiles. Additionally, the FBI issued formal preservation requests to Google, Microsoft, MSN, and Yahoo to capture email data.

The players

Jack Smith

The former special counsel who led the Plasmic Echo investigation into the handling of classified documents.

Susie Wiles

A political advisor whose phone and email metadata were subjected to federal surveillance.

John Brennan

The former director of the Central Intelligence Agency who met with FBI officials to provide expert testimony.

FBI

The primary federal investigative agency responsible for issuing preservation requests and utilizing pen register surveillance.

The details

The FBI used pen register tools to intercept signaling information, which identifies the origin and destination of communications without capturing the content of messages. Simultaneously, preservation requests forced technology firms to set aside server logs and email metadata for subsequent legal review. These efforts targeted a network that included 5 journalists and 21 defense attorneys, creating a digital trail of who communicated with whom during the Plasmic Echo investigation into classified documents.

Timeline

  1. June 1, 2022: FBI officials discussed potential cooperation with attorneys regarding documents.

  2. February 3, 2023: The FBI sent email preservation requests to Google, Microsoft, MSN, and Yahoo.

  3. April 7, 2023: FBI agents conducted an interview with Susie Wiles.

  4. November 3, 2023: FBI officials met with John Brennan at CIA headquarters to discuss testimony.

  5. 2024: The Special Counsel monitored Susie Wiles' communication metadata.

The Tech Race

This investigative approach follows the standard practices established during the Plasmic Echo inquiry following the Mar-a-Lago raid. It highlights the reliance on automated metadata collection to map relationships between targets and protected professional networks.

The revelation confirms that metadata logs held by major providers like Google and Microsoft are subject to federal preservation orders during investigations. This creates a technical reality where individuals in high-profile networks face increased scrutiny of their digital connectivity records.

The takeaway

The use of pen registers and preservation requests demonstrates the capacity of investigators to reconstruct digital communication webs even without content access. Observers should monitor future Senate Judiciary Committee reports for additional disclosures regarding how this metadata was processed.

Further reading

For more on how government agencies conduct digital surveillance, visit Cybersecurity.

Live Poll

Do you trust federal agencies to appropriately limit surveillance of political figures and media contacts?