Democrats Exhibit Amnesia About Biden-Era Lawfare
Authored by Kenin M. Spivak via RealClearPolitics,
Democrats who denounce federal indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James as unprecedented weaponization of the Justice Department exhibit amnesia about the norm-eviscerating, undemocratic lawfare they launched during the Biden administration.
A federal grand jury in Virginia indicted Comey last month for lying to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding by “willfully and knowingly” lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee when he testified that he had not “authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports” concerning the FBI’s 2016 investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of private email for confidential information.
A 2018 inspector general report suggests that the main factual dispute may be whether Comey authorized, or was merely informed of, the leaks.
Documents published by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA director John Ratcliffe, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley show that while serving as Barak Obama’s FBI director and then Trump’s first FBI director, Comey used the Steele dossier, which he knew to be unsubstantiated Clinton campaign disinformation, to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, doctor an intelligence assessment to falsely claim the purpose of Russian interference in the 2016 election was to benefit Trump, and entrap Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
Grassley also issued reports establishing that Comey gave Clinton special treatment during the investigation of her emails and intended to exonerate her even before her FBI interview.
This month, Letitia James was indicted for filing a fraudulent mortgage application that described an investment property she was purchasing in Norfolk, Virginia, as her second home. By doing so, she allegedly reduced her interest and fees by $18,933 over the life of the loan.
James ran for Attorney General in New York on the promise that she would “get Trump.” When she was unable to find grounds to pursue criminal charges, she made unprecedented use of a consumer fraud law to pursue Trump for allegedly defrauding Deutsche Bank by overstating the value of Mar-a-Lago. Judge Arthur Engoron implausibly found that Mar-a-Lago’s $18 million tax assessment was its true value. Though Deutsche Bank officials testified they were not defrauded, lost no money, and would happily again work with Trump, Engoron banned the Trump family from doing business in New York, and imposed a penalty that, with interest, topped $500 million.
James vigorously sought to execute the judgement and foreclose on Trump’s properties. An appellate court stepped in, reducing Trump’s appeal bond to $175 million, and later throwing out the financial penalty.
Both indictments were secured by former Trump lawyer Lindsey Halligan, appointed to serve as interim U.S. attorney in Virginia when experienced prosecutor Erik Seibert declined to pursue the cases, and came just days after Trump posted a caustic text on Truth Social directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute Comey and James.
Democrats have been more muted about last week’s indictment in Maryland of former Trump National Security Advisor John Bolton for mishandling classified information.
I previously wrote about Democrats’ hypocrisy in objecting to investigations of their colleagues who engaged in lawfare against Trump and his supporters, though I cautioned the administration against prosecutions based on laws that are not traditionally enforced.
The facts suggest the three cases are indeed retribution. That does not void the indictments. Every lawyer is taught that the purpose of criminal justice is rehabilitation, retribution, and deterrence. Rather, the issue is whether these are selective prosecutions of laws that are not enforced against others. That is difficult to establish, particularly for these laws and by officials who hold a public trust.
The Biden administration prosecuted former White House aides Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro for refusing to testify before Congress, former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen for lying to Congress, and numerous Trump aides and supporters for lying to the FBI. Pre-Biden prosecutions for lying to Congress include Reagan National Security Advisor John Poindexter, Nixon chief of staff H.R. Haldeman, and baseball player Roger Clemens, among others.
James correctly observed that “Everyday Americans cannot lie to a bank to get a mortgage, and if they did, our government would throw the book at them.” Her alleged crime is regularly prosecuted, albeit usually when it involves larger amounts. Conversely, there are reports that James may have a history of mortgage abuse.
Mishandling of classified information is routinely prosecuted.
By pre-Biden standards, these types of prosecutions were often not seen as a good use of Justice Department resources. But the Biden administration’s use and support of novel legal theories to aggressively pursue Trump, his lawyers, and supporters have significantly lowered the bar for prosecuting those who hold public office.
I make no prediction about the outcome of these cases. For example, Comey's defenders claim Halligan’s appointment may be invalid. If so, the time has expired to re-indict Comey. Nonetheless, insincere Democrats should learn the lesson of Matthew 26:52: “… for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.” Amen.
Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and a frequent speaker and contributor to media, including RealClearPolitics, The American Mind, National Review, television, radio, and podcasts.
Tyler Durden
Thu, 10/23/2025 – 11:00