Trump administration escalates probes of rivals with Russia grand jury
The Trump administration’s launch of a grand jury probe into Obama-era officials marks an escalation in its use of the justice system to go after political adversaries, amid mounting pressure to release the Epstein files.
It’s the first sign the Justice Department is acting on criminal referrals made by Trump intelligence officials, including after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused officials of a “treasonous conspiracy” related to Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The documents released by her office, however, do not appear to back that claim, instead largely showing officials discussing what they acknowledged shortly after the election — that Russia was never able to manipulate vote totals.
Nonetheless, the White House broke with the practice of maintaining secrecy around grand jury proceedings, confirming the probe in pointing to “the compelling case” outlined by Gabbard, which they argue “exposed clear and blatant weaponization by corrupt intelligence officials acting at the behest of the Democrat Party and likely former President Obama.”
The White House further argues the Obama officials “worked to sabotage the Trump administration.”
“It doesn’t get more serious than this. This is a criminal conspiracy. The evidence is clear there’s a criminal conspiracy here and nobody is above the law,” Mike Davis, an ally of President Trump who runs The Article III Project, said on Fox News.
The administration’s attempts to focus attention on the Russia findings come as Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi face pressure, including from many Republicans, to release more information related to the case of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Among the possible targets are former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who in a joint op-ed blasted the accusations against them as “patently false” while falsely minimizing Russia’s 2016 efforts.
“Every serious review has substantiated the intelligence community’s fundamental conclusion that the Russians conducted an influence campaign intended to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election,” the two wrote.
“Contrary to the Trump administration’s wild and baseless claims, there was no mention of ‘collusion’ between the Trump campaign and the Russians in the assessment,” they added.
CIA Director John Ratcliffe said beyond Clapper and Brennan, he also made referrals for former FBI Director James Comey as well as Hillary Clinton.
Critics argue that launching a grand jury probe is yet another instance of Trump weaponizing the government against his political foes. He has previously revoked security details from those he disagrees with, targeted universities that do not align with his administration’s policies and gone after law firms with ties to Democrats. And over the weekend, the Office of the Special Counsel acknowledged a probe into former special counsel Jack Smith.
The court action quickly prompted criticism that the Trump administration was abusing the Justice Department.
“Trump – ‘the hunted’ – has indeed become the hunter – facts and law, be damned. These folks are using the court of law to shape the court of public opinion. They’re also making a mockery of grand jury secrecy rules, which are in part designed to protect uncharged individuals,” Anthony Coley, who served as a spokesman for the Obama Justice Department, wrote on X.
The probe comes after Bondi announced the creation of a “Strike Force” to investigate claims related to the 2016 election.
It’s not clear where the grand jury has been empaneled — a detail that could matter in the Democrat-heavy jury pool of Washington, D.C., which might be skeptical of claims of wrongdoing in an election Trump won.
It’s also not clear what conduct it might be exploring.
Republicans have, at turns, accused intelligence officials of lying to Congress in the prior reviews of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and the intelligence community response.
But the documents supplied by Gabbard — which accuse leaders of “suppression of intelligence” — largely show figures like Clapper discussing how Russia was not able to manipulate the vote even as the adversary tried to sow chaos in the 2016 election.
Gabbard also released a previously classified House Intelligence Committee Republican assessment that called into question whether Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to help Trump win; however, all assessments found the country was seeking to impact the election.
Trump on Tuesday denied that he had any involvement in the Justice Department’s decision to open a grand jury investigation, though he has not hidden his approval of the move.
“Pam is doing a great job,” Trump said on CNBC of Attorney General Pam Bondi. “I have nothing to do with it. I will tell you this, they deserve it. I was happy to hear it.”
Davis, who runs the conservative advocacy group the Article III Project, argued those being investigated could face potential perjury charges related to their previous testimony about Russian interference in the 2016 election. He also pointed to potential conspiracy charges, arguing that the alleged ongoing “cover-up” would mean that the statute of limitations has not expired.
“I would say to these lawfare Democrats, lawyer up,” Davis said on Fox News. “Because justice is definitely coming.”
Some lawmakers have said any eventual charges could actually be fruitful in fighting the claims forwarded by Gabbard and others.
“The reason I want her to bring charges is that there is not a court in the United States that will do anything other than to laugh hysterically over the bulls‑‑‑ that Tulsi Gabbard is peddling right now,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told The Hill last month when the DNI first began releasing documents.
“They’re not dumping documents. They’re making up lies,” Himes added.
The issue of Russian interference in the 2016 election has been a fixation for Trump for roughly eight years, as he has repeatedly claimed he was the victim of “spying” and politically motivated probes around Russia’s influence campaigns.
Gabbard’s findings, and the decision to launch a grand jury investigation, also carry political ramifications for the White House.
Some Democrats, including a spokesperson for Obama, have dismissed the Russia claims as an attempt at distracting from the Epstein controversy.
“The real politicization is the calculated distortion of intelligence by administration officials, notably Mr. Trump’s directors of national intelligence and the C.I.A., positions that should be apolitical,” Brennan and Clapper wrote in their op-ed.
“We find it deeply regrettable that the administration continues to perpetuate the fictitious narrative that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 election.”