Fighting Lawfare Targeting Trump Advisers

[INSIDE JW]

JUDICIAL WATCH SUES FOR RECORDS ON CROSSFIRE HURRICANE INVESTIGATION

[[link removed]]

We are working to get the entire record on the Obama/Biden Justice
Department lawfare against President Trump. It is the worst government
corruption scandal in U.S. history, and the American people deserve to
see the whole story.

We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the U.S. Department of Justice for fully unredacted records
and previously withheld or missing portions of Durham’s
investigation into the origins of Crossfire Hurricane/Russiagate
(_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]
_(No.
1:26-cv-00138)).

We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after
the Justice Department failed to respond to an August 5, 2025, FOIA
request for:

* The complete, unredacted notes taken by former CIA Director John
Brennan during the August 3, 2016, White House briefing, which
reportedly discussed intelligence regarding a Hillary Clinton campaign
plan to link Donald Trump to Russia.
* The full, unredacted Inspection Division Report from the Department
of Justice Office of the Inspector General that critiques the FBI’s
handling of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.
* The 14 missing pages of the Durham Report appendix that have not
been publicly released.

* All unredacted transcripts, summaries, or notes from interviews
conducted by Special Counsel John Durham with the following
individuals regarding the 2016 election and related investigations:

* Hillary Clinton (interviewed May 2022)
* John Brennan (interviewed August 2020)
* Stefan Halper
* Alexander Downer
* Jake Sullivan (interviewed November 2021)
* John Podesta (interviewed January 2022)
* Robby Mook
* All unredacted records of referrals made by Special Counsel John
Durham to the Department of Defense or any other federal agencies.

* All emails and communications between Fusion GPS and _The New York
Times_, _The Washington Post_, or other major media outlets as well as
between Fusion GPS and the Hillary Clinton campaign or the Democratic
National Committee (DNC).
* All unredacted emails, memoranda, or other communications between
former head of British intelligence Sir Richard Dearlove, U.S.
intelligence officials (including CIA and FBI personnel), Stefan
Halper, and Christopher Steele.

In July 2016, during the presidential election campaign between Donald
Trump and Hillary Clinton, the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division
opened the Crossfire Hurricane
[[link removed]]
investigation. In August 2016, then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed
[[link removed]]
President Obama and other senior officials on intelligence reportedly
showing a Hillary Clinton campaign plan to link Trump to Russia.

In May 2019, Durham was appointed special counsel
[[link removed]]
to investigate the origins and conduct of the FBI’s Crossfire
Hurricane investigation.

In May 2023, Durham released his final repor
[[link removed]
[[link removed]],
concluding that
the FBI opened a full investigation based on “raw, unanalyzed and
uncorroborated intelligence” and displayed “confirmation bias”
in pursuing the investigation. The report noted problems with the FISA
(Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) surveillance practices, noting
that unverified information from the Steele dossier was used to help
justify FISA applications targeting Trump campaign adviser Carter
Page. The report also noted that an FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith,
pleaded guilty to altering an email used in a FISA application.

In July 2025, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley
(R-IA) made public the formerly classified Appendix
[[link removed]]
(“Durham Annex”) to John Durham’s 2023 Special Counsel report,
which “contains previously classified information exposing a
reported Clinton campaign plan to falsely tie President Donald Trump
to Russia.”

We have been instrumental in uncovering much of what the public knows
about Crossfire Hurricane/Russiagate, which involved a long list of
Democratic political figures, lawyers, and staffers who shaped the
narrative around the Trump-Russia hoax.

In November 2025, we provided an in-depth recap
[[link removed]]
of
the Crossfire Hurricane/Russiagate debacle.

In May 2025, we sued
[[link removed]]
the
Justice Department for all records regarding the FBI, under
then-Director James Comey, initiating an investigation of
hen-presidential candidate Donald Trump in 2016.

In October 2020, we uncovered
[[link removed]]
heavily redacted email communications among top-level U.S. State
Department officials and a U.S. ambassador expressing skepticism about
reports by Steele’s London-based private intelligence firm Orbis
Business Intelligence. (Steele was the author of the Clinton-funded,
anti-Trump dossier.) The emails show one assistant secretary of state
saying some of Steele’s reports sound “extreme” and others “do
not ring true,” while the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine called some of
the Steele reports “flaky.”

In May 2020, we forced the declassification and release of the
“electronic communication
[[link removed]
used
to launch Crossfire Hurricane, written by former FBI official Peter
Strzok.

In April 2020, we obtained emails
[[link removed]]
between former FBI official Peter Strzok and former FBI attorney Lisa
Page, including an email dated January 10, 2017, in which Strzok said
that the version of the dossier published by _BuzzFeed_ was
“identical” to the version given to the FBI by McCain and had
“differences” from the dossier provided to the FBI by Fusion GPS
co-founder Glenn Simpson and _Mother Jones_ reporter David Corn.
January 10, 2017, is the same day _BuzzFeed_ published the anti-Trump
dossier by former British spy Steele. The emails also show Strzok and
other FBI agents mocking President Trump a few weeks before he was
inaugurated. In addition, the emails revealed that Strzok communicated
with then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe about the “leak
investigation” tied to the Clinton Foundation (the very leak in
which McCabe was later implicated).

In September 2019, we released State Department records
[[link removed]]
revealing that Steele had an extensive and close working relationship
dating back to May of 2014 with high-ranking Obama State Department
officials including Jonathan Winer and Victoria Nuland.

In August 2019, we obtained “302” report material
[[link removed]]
from 2016 FBI interviews of Associate Deputy U.S. Attorney Bruce Ohr,
who was removed from his position in December 2017. (A Form 302 is
used by FBI agents to memorialize interviews they undertake during an
investigation.) In a November 22, 2016, interview, Ohr said that
“reporting on Trump’s ties to Russia were going to the Clinton
Campaign, Winer at the State Department and the FBI.” In a late
September 2016 interview, Ohr described a person (likely Christopher
Steele) as “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was
passionate about him not being the U.S. President.” A report states
that “Ohr knew that [Fusion GPS’s] Glenn Simpson and others were
talking to Victoria Nuland at the U.S. State Department.”

In July 2019, we obtained records
[[link removed]]
revealing a September 2016 email exchange between then-Assistant
Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Special Coordinator for Libya,
Winer, who was a close associate of dossier author Steele, discussing
a “face-to-face” meeting on a “Russian matter.”

In August 2018, the Justice Department admitted in a Judicial Watch
FOIA lawsuit court filing that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court held no hearings
[[link removed]]
on the FISA spy warrant applications targeting Carter Page, a former
Trump campaign part-time adviser who was the subject of four
controversial FISA warrants.

In July 2018, we released records
[[link removed]]
about FISA warrants targeting Page, which appeared to confirm that the
FBI and DOJ misled the FISA court by withholding material information
showing that Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the DNC were behind the
“intelligence” used to persuade the court to approve the FISA
warrants targeting the Trump team.

JUDICIAL WATCH SUES JUSTICE DEPT. OVER FBI CELEBRATING PETER NAVARRO
PROSECUTION

With the Clintons in the news for refusing a congressional subpoena,
it is instructive to look back at how the Left used subpoenas against
Trump’s team.

We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the U.S. Department of Justice for communications of Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents regarding the prosecution of
former Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro (_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S.
Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:26-cv-00079)).

Navarro was sentenced
[[link removed]]
on January 24, 2024, to four months in prison for refusing to appear
before the U.S. Congress to give testimony and produce documents as
required by a subpoena he received from the Democrat-led Select
Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States
Capitol.

The politicization of the Justice Department and FBI against President
Trump and his advisers is a disgrace. The lives of outstanding public
servants were derailed.

We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after
the Justice Department failed to respond adequately to a May 2, 2025,
FOIA request for:

* Records and communications of Special Agent Walter Giardina;
Supervisory Special Agent Blaire Toleman; and Assistant Special Agent
in Charge Timothy Thibault about the investigation, arrest,
indictment, or prosecution of Peter Navarro – including contempt of
Congress referrals regarding Navarro or any former Trump
administration officials.

Giardina was fired
[[link removed]]
from the FBI in 2025, Toleman also was fired
[[link removed]]
in 2025, and Thibault resigned
[[link removed]]
in 2022.

In April 2025 Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley
(R-IA) issued a letter
[[link removed]]
to the Justice Department and FBI pointing out the results of an
initial search into the FBI’s political weaponization against
Navarro. In May 2025 Grassley released
[[link removed]]
a few FBI emails
[[link removed]]
showing
Biden administration FBI agents planning and celebrating the
indictment of Navarro.

We have actively pursued transparency for the lawfare waged against
Trump.

In November 2025, we sued
[[link removed]]
the Justice
Department for the emails of former Special Counsel Jack Smith with
officials in Georgia and New York and with the White House,
congressional and law enforcement offices regarding his investigation
into President-elect Donald Trump (_Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S.
Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:25-cv-03849)).

In September 2025 we sued
[[link removed]]
the Justice
Department for communications between former Assistant Special Agent
in Charge Timothy Thibault and the anti-Trump organization American
Oversight (_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:25-cv–02556)).

In June 2025, we launched a related lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the
Justice Department for records about the FBI’s investigation of
Trump codenamed “Arctic Frost,” which was part of the Biden
administration effort to prosecute and jail President Trump for
disputing Biden’s controversial election victory (_Judicial Watch,
Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:25-cv-02011)).

In March 2025, we sued
[[link removed]]
the Justice
Department for details of any investigations, inquiries, or referrals
concerning potential misconduct of any person working for Special
Counsel Jack Smith (_Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:25-cv-00801)).

Also in March, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis was ordered
[[link removed]]
to turn
over 212 pages of records to a state court judge. The court also
ordered Willis to detail how the records were found and the reason for
withholding them from the public. The records were belatedly disclosed
in response to a Judicial Watch request and lawsuit for communications
with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee.

In January, we were awarded
[[link removed]]
$21,578
for “attorney’s fees and costs” incurred in the case. The court
previously found Willis in default
[[link removed]]
and stated:
“The Court finds Defendant [Willis, in her official capacity] is in
default and has been since 11 April 2024” (_Judicial Watch Inc. v.
Fani Willis et al_
[[link removed]
[[link removed]]
(No. 24-CV-002805)).

In January 2025, a federal court ordered
[[link removed]]
the Justice
Department to provide us information on communications between Special
Counsel Jack Smith and Willis regarding the prosecution of then-former
President Donald Trump. In May, the Justice Department was directed to
search text messages from the Special Counsel’s Office for
responsive records (_Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 23-cv-03110)).

In January 2025, records
[[link removed]]
from the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) showed it and the FBI warning
that law enforcement agencies should be prepared for a surge in
threats from so-called Domestic Violence Extremists (DVEs) following
the August 8, 2022, FBI raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm
Beach, Florida (_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland
Security_
[[link removed]]
(1:22-cv-03275)).

In May 2024, we uncovered
[[link removed]]
a recording of a
phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret
Service in the context of the raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home
(_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security_
[[link removed]
_(No.
1:22-cv-03147)).

In February 2024, the Justice Department asked
[[link removed]]
a
federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top
staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that was
targeting Trump and other Americans (_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S.
Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:23-cv-01485)).

In August 2022, we successfully sued to unseal the search warrant
affidavit
[[link removed]]
used to
justify the unprecedented raid on Trump’s home (
[[link removed].
v. Sealed Search Warrant_
[[link removed]]
(No. 9:22-mj-08332)).



JUDICIAL WATCH SUES CHICAGO TREASURER OVER PLAN TO HALT U.S. TREASURY
PURCHASES

We filed an Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against Melissa Conyears-Ervin, treasurer of the City of Chicago, for
details of her declared plan to stop buying new U.S. Treasury
securities and divest the city of indirect holdings (_Judicial Watch
Inc. v. Chicago Treasurer’s Office_
[[link removed]]
(No. 2026CH00302)).

On November 17, 2025, Conyears-Ervin issued a press release
[[link removed]]
announcing that the city of Chicago “will not invest in a federal
administration that is using the power of government to terrorize
us.” She also stated:

> Before my budget presentation on Wednesday, I informed City Council
> members that I would boycott the purchase of United States Treasury
> securities and seek their authority to grant me freedoms to modify
> the portfolio of the nearly $11 billion in Chicago taxpayer money
> the office manages.

> [We will] immediately stop making new, direct purchases of U.S.
> Treasury marketable securities. Second, with approval from the City
> Council, we will explore reducing our indirect exposure by adjusting
> our holdings in money market funds and other instruments that derive
> their value from Treasurys.

We sued in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Chancery Division, after
the Treasurer’s Office failed to respond to a November 17, 2025,
FOIA request for:

* All internal Chicago City Treasurer’s Office (CTO) emails
discussing whether to purchase U.S. Treasury debt in any form.
* Internal emails and communications from Treasurer Melissa
Conyears-Ervin referencing U.S. Treasury securities and
immigration-related terms; and
* Reports regarding the fiscal impact of purchasing or declining to
purchase U.S. debt.

Conyears-Ervin should focus on Chicago’s crumbling finances instead
of playing national policy maven and engaging in symbolic political
stunts that risk taxpayer money and could undermine the city’s
fiscal stability.

In December 2025, we reported
[[link removed]]
that Illinois released more than 1,700 criminal aliens from jails and
prisons across the state after declining to honor federal immigration
detainers.

In November 2025, we sued
[[link removed]]
Evanston, IL, Mayor Daniel Biss for records related to obstruction of
federal immigration enforcement.

In January 2025, we sued
[[link removed]]
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson for records regarding his vow to resist
the Trump administration’s deportation and other immigration law
enforcement activities. The mayor previously had held a press
conference at which he stated that Chicago would remain a so-called
“sanctuary city.”



AMERICANS PAY BILLIONS TO SUBSIDIZE ILLEGAL ALIENS’ COLLEGE
EDUCATION

Worried about affording college tuition for your children? If so, you
might want to know that your tax dollars are going – against the law
– to illegal aliens for their tuition. Our _Corruption Chronicles_
blog has the details
[[link removed]].

> Although a 30-year-old federal law prohibits giving illegal aliens
> discounted in-state tuition at public colleges and universities, 22
> states and the District of Columbia still do it and the cost to
> American taxpayers is over a billion dollars annually. In an effort
> to force the violators to stop offering undocumented students the
> pricey benefit, a U.S. senator has introduced a bill (Put American
> Students First Act
>
[[link removed]])
> to specifically prevent any alien who is not lawfully admitted for
> permanent residence from obtaining in-state tuition rates at public
> institutions of higher education. The proposed measure notes that
> section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
> Responsibility Act of 1996 already bans states from granting
> discounted tuition and fees to students not lawfully present in the
> U.S. simply because they live—albeit illegally—in that state
> unless the same rates are also offered to citizens of the United
> States regardless of residence.
>
> Besides the discounted tuition, most of the offenders also extend
> additional financial aid to students in the country illegally. The
> Trump administration has legally challenged many of the policies,
> but most continue. The violators include Arizona, California,
> Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland,
> Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,
> Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Washington. Last
> year the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued several states over the
> policy but only three—Texas, Oklahoma and Kentucky—have
> terminated their in-state tuition policies for illegal alien
> students. Others, such as California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado
> and Illinois, have ignored the lawsuits. Illinois has taken it a
> step further by not only blowing off the DOJ’s lawsuit
>
[[link removed]],
> but also passing a special law
>
[[link removed]]
> making undocumented students eligible for state and local financial
> aid, including grants, scholarships and stipends, as of January
> 2026. The measure includes the same perks for transgender students
> who are disqualified for failing to register for selective service.
>
> Over 500,000 illegal immigrants
>
[[link removed]]
> are enrolled in U.S. institutions of higher education, according to
> an alliance of college and university leaders dedicated to
> supporting immigrant and undocumented students and policies that
> create a welcoming environment for them. The Washington, D.C.-based
> group, Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration,
> reveals that three-quarters of undocumented students live in about a
> dozen states and most are in just four states—California, Texas,
> Florida, and New York—and California leads the group with nearly
> 90,000 illegal alien students. The alliance insists that offering
> students in the country illegally discounted tuition at
> taxpayer-funded colleges is “tuition equity” and provides access
> to higher education for all students, which the group claims
> benefits colleges and universities as well as the U.S. economy.
> “Undocumented students are an integral part of American society
> and the U.S. higher education system,” the group claims. “They
> advance scientific innovation, drive economic growth, and make
> valuable contributions as classmates, instructors, scholars, and
> campus leaders.”
>
> But are American taxpayers responsible for funding their education
> in rogue states that refuse to obey a decades-old federal law
> forbidding it? In an effort to force compliance, Arkansas Senator
> Tom Cotton introduced the Put American Students First Act in
> mid-December. The bill points out that the subsidies create a
> perverse incentive for illegal immigration, rewarding unlawful
> presence with benefits unavailable to citizens and legal residents
> of the United States, undermining the rule of law. “Students of
> the United States in higher education, including students from
> modest-income families in neighboring States, are effectively
> penalized by States that provide such subsidies because the students
> pay higher out-of-state rates for tuition and fees while aliens not
> lawfully admitted for permanent residence receive
> taxpayer-subsidized discounts,” the proposed law states.
> “Enforcing this Federal prohibition nationwide is essential to
> restoring fairness, deterring illegal immigration, and prioritizing
> postsecondary education benefits for citizens and lawful permanent
> residents of the United States.” If Congress passes the law, it
> will take effect in July and will empower the Secretary of Education
> to withhold funding from any state that violates it.

Until next week,



[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2026, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]