Republican Congressman Brandon Gill of Texas has officially dropped the hammer — filing articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg for his central role in the Biden administration’s surveillance scandal, Operation Arctic Frost.
Boasberg was the judge who rubber-stamped the subpoenas that gave Special Counsel Jack Smith the green light to spy on Republican lawmakers — a breathtaking abuse of power that reads like something out of an Orwell novel. This wasn’t oversight. It was overreach:
“Chief Judge Boasberg has compromised the impartiality of the judiciary and created a constitutional crisis. He is shamelessly weaponizing his power against his political opponents, including Republican members of Congress who are faithfully serving the American people within their jurisdiction,” Rep. Gill told
“Judge Boasberg was an accomplice in the egregious Arctic Frost scandal where he equipped the Biden DOJ to spy on Republican senators. His lack of integrity makes him clearly unfit for the gavel. I am proud to once again introduce articles of impeachment against Judge Boasberg to hold him accountable for his high crimes and misdemeanors,” he added.
The articles of impeachment charge Boasberg with one count of abuse of power, according to text obtained by Fox News.
“Ignoring his responsibility to wield the power of his office in a constitutional manner, Chief Judge Boasberg granted Special Counsel John L. Smith authorization to issue frivolous nondisclosure orders in furtherance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation project codenamed ARCTIC FROST,” the text read.“These nondisclosure orders covered Members of Congress who were acting in accord with their legislative duties and privileges guaranteed by Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution.”
Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the Constitution couldn’t be clearer — members of Congress have the absolute right to speak, debate, and legislate without interference or intimidation from outside forces. It’s one of the bedrock protections against tyranny — and exactly what Operation Arctic Frost trampled over.
The trove of Arctic Frost documents released last month by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) exposed just how far the Biden DOJ and Judge James Boasberg were willing to go. They revealed subpoenas for the phone records of 10 U.S. senators and one House lawmaker — along with gag orders to Verizon and AT&T instructing them not to alert the targets. Verizon quietly complied; AT&T refused.
What’s still unclear is what, if any, documentation Boasberg reviewed before greenlighting this outrageous violation of constitutional privilege.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg — the same prosecutor who’ll turn a blind eye if you assault someone but throw the book at you for defending yourself — spent more than a year and millions of taxpayer dollars going after then-private citizen Donald Trump. His crusade? Thirty-four flimsy felony charges of “falsifying business records” that legal experts across the spectrum called a stretch from day one.
And yet, in the left’s favorite city for political theater, Bragg got his convictions.
Late Monday night, Donald Trump struck back — filing an appeal with New York’s Appellate Division demanding that his conviction be overturned, calling it “the most politically charged prosecution in our Nation’s history.”
In the 111-page filing (some reports list it at 96 pages), Trump’s legal team blasted Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg’s case as nothing more than “Radical Democrat Lawfare”
:
“President Trump’s legal team filed a powerhouse appeal in the Manhattan DA’s Witch Hunt, as the President continues his fight to put an end to the Radical Democrat Lawfare once and for all,” a spokesman for the president’s legal team told Fox News Digital.
Newly declassified FBI interview documents have reignited claims that Senator Adam Schiff ordered the leak of confidential information during the height of the Trump-Russia probe.
According to documents, between 2017 and 2023, an unidentified whistleblower — described as a Democratic intelligence officer working for the House Intelligence Committee — repeatedly told the FBI that Schiff approved classified material leaks to damage then-President Donald Trump politically. Schiff was the committee’s ranking House Democrat at the time, and he ultimately became chairman.
The whistleblower claimed that Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California was most likely the direct source of the leaks, which they stated were intended to advance the so-called “Russiagate” narrative.
“When working in this capacity, [redacted staffer’s name] was called to an all-staff meeting by SCHIFF,” one FBI interview summary states. “In this meeting, SCHIFF stated the group would leak classified information which was derogatory to President of the United States DONALD J. TRUMP. SCHIFF stated the information would be used to indict President TRUMP.”
Swalwell has refuted any such implication and asserted that FBI Director Kash Patel is pursuing him for political motives.
According to the whistleblower, Schiff promised him the role of CIA Director if Hillary Clinton won the 2016 presidential election. That pledge was never fulfilled following Clinton’s defeat, but the whistleblower alleges Schiff continued to press for leaks that would disrupt Trump’s presidency.
The same source claimed they directly watched Schiff approve such disclosures and reported their concerns to federal officials. According to the declassified records, Justice Department officials expressed little interest in investigating Schiff’s alleged actions. The whistleblower claims they were immediately fired after informing the FBI.
The charges took on new dimensions when investigative journalist Paul Sperry of Real Clear Investigations alleged that Schiff’s leaks may have been directed to Washington Post national security reporter Ellen Nakashima.
Sperry cited previous reports that identified Nakashima as a significant media contact for senior intelligence officials, including former CIA Director John Brennan, during the early years of the Russiagate scandal.
Declassified records reviewed by Sperry show that Brennan and other intelligence officials employed Nakashima to plant at least three significant news stories on the Russia probe.
Those stories, published between 2016 and 2017, contributed to the public perception that Trump’s campaign was seriously suspected of colluding with Moscow — a narrative that persisted for years despite Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s eventual finding of insufficient evidence of criminal conspiracy.
Critics contend that if Schiff did really allow the release of secret information to the press, it would be a significant breach of national security and a possible criminal offense. The Intelligence Committee’s work frequently entails access to highly sensitive information, and its members are required by law to secure classified data from unauthorized disclosure.
Schiff’s office has yet to provide a public reaction to the most recent charges. Previously, he denied leaking sensitive information, accusing his detractors of aiming to undermine legitimate oversight of the Trump administration.
The revelations also underscore enduring partisan differences regarding the application of intelligence and law enforcement powers in the 2016 election and its aftermath.
It’s unclear whether the fresh disclosures will lead to any legal prosecution.
For the time being, the most explosive claim — and there are many of them to date — is that the decision to leak classified information was not the result of a renegade staffer but rather was explicitly endorsed in a committee-wide meeting conducted by Schiff himself.
If true, such a claim might have serious legal and political ramifications, especially considering Schiff’s current position as a US senator. Schiff, however, has maintained for years that he has done no wrongdoing despite dozens of allegations from Republicans and many others.