![\"Probe](\"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Screenshot_287-1764085710-q80.webp\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The FBI memo that initiated the Biden-era Arctic Frost investigation into President Donald Trump and hundreds of his allies over their activities related to January 6 lacked substantial evidence and clear legal justification, according to several former prosecutors and FBI agents who reviewed the newly released document and identified multiple deficiencies.<\/p>\n
The investigation, code-named Arctic Frost, was initially led by an FBI supervisor who had expressed anti-Trump sentiments and was later taken over by Special Counsel Jack Smith.<\/p>\n
The probe treated the effort by Trump\u2019s allies to submit alternate electors to Congress during the 2020 election certification as a potential criminal conspiracy \u2014 despite similar actions in two prior instances of U.S. history not resulting in prosecution,\u00a0Just the News reported.<\/p>\n
According to the newly released materials, the FBI memo that launched the investigation in spring 2022 \u2014 around the same time Trump announced his bid for the presidency \u2014 relied heavily on interview clips from CNN as primary evidence \u201csuggesting\u201d Trump\u2019s involvement in the alleged conspiracy, the outlet added.House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan said Wednesday that he believes the FBI memo authorizing the Arctic Frost investigation was legally flawed and reflected the same politicization and investigative overreach seen in the 2016 Russia collusion probe, code-named \u201cCrossfire Hurricane.\u201d<\/p>\n
Jordan obtained the document from current FBI Director Kash Patel and told Just the News that both investigations targeted Trump based on weak evidence and partisan motives before ultimately being discredited.<\/p>\n
\u201cSure looks that way. \u2026 and it looks like this was just the same old weaponization, same old political focus, focus on politics, going after your political enemies,\u201d Jordan said during a wide-ranging interview on the Just the News, No Noise TV show.<\/p>\n
\u201cSame mindset that said we\u2019re going to put the dossier in the intelligence community assessment, even though we know the dossier is garbage, we know there\u2019s no underlying intelligence support,\u201d he continued.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat same mindset that was there in 2016 is the mindset we see now in 2022 with Arctic Frost, and then as it transformed into Jack Smith, special counsel, later in 2022\u2014same mindset. So yeah, that\u2019s what it sure looks like,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n
Smith has denied any wrongdoing and said he intends to present his side of the story. Jordan has invited Smith to testify before the committee, warning that he will issue a subpoena if Smith declines to appear voluntarily.<\/p>\n
Documents released in recent weeks by Patel indicate that the Arctic Frost investigation was approved at the highest levels of the Biden administration, including by Attorney General Merrick Garland, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, and FBI Director Christopher Wray, with assistance from a lawyer in the White House.<\/p>\n
The inquiry centered on efforts by Republican officials in several states to submit alternate slates of electors ahead of Congress\u2019s certification of the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021.<\/p>\n
The probe was later transferred from the FBI to Smith\u2019s office, which issued subpoenas to hundreds of Trump allies.<\/p>\n
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on Wednesday released 197 subpoenas that Smith and his Justice Department team issued \u201cas part of the indiscriminate election case against President Trump,\u201d identifying more than 400 Republican groups and individuals whose information was sought.<\/p>\n
The halls of the Senate Judiciary Committee are usually places of decorum \u2014 calculated questions, measured answers, and the kind of political theater that feels rehearsed. But when former FBI Director\u00a0<\/p>\n
The hearing, which was intended to revisit the FBI\u2019s handling of politically charged investigations, quickly turned into one of the most blistering interrogations in recent memory. Senator Kennedy, famous for his blend of Southern wit and razor-sharp cross-examination, came ready to deliver a message \u2014 and a warning.<\/p>\n
From the first question, Kennedy made it clear he wasn\u2019t there to exchange pleasantries. He went straight to the heart of his grievance: that Comey\u2019s leadership had irreparably damaged the reputation of America\u2019s premier law enforcement agency.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou did more to undermine the FBI\u2019s reputation than any person in modern history,\u201d Kennedy charged, his Louisiana drawl underscoring every syllable. \u201cYou didn\u2019t just make mistakes, Mr. Comey \u2014 you politicized the badge.\u201d<\/p>\n
Comey, composed but visibly tense, defended his record as one of necessity and integrity, arguing that his decisions during the\u00a02016 election<\/strong>\u00a0were made \u201cunder extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances.\u201d But Kennedy wasn\u2019t having it.<\/p>\n \u201cSir,\u201d the Senator pressed, \u201cyou didn\u2019t just lose public trust. You\u00a0torched<\/em>\u00a0it.\u201d<\/p>\n The exchange marked the culmination of years of political and public resentment over the FBI\u2019s handling of both the\u00a0<\/p>\n Kennedy\u2019s questions weren\u2019t random. They followed a precise and pointed logic \u2014 each one designed to frame Comey not as a victim of circumstance, but as the architect of the FBI\u2019s perceived decline.<\/p>\n 1. The Reputation Question<\/strong> 2. The Russia Probe Origins<\/strong> \u201cYou didn\u2019t just open a file,\u201d Kennedy said. \u201cYou opened a wound that still hasn\u2019t healed.\u201d<\/p>\n 3. Accountability and Legacy<\/strong> \u201cThe politicization of the FBI started with James Comey,\u201d he declared. \u201cAnd if this body doesn\u2019t learn from that, it\u2019ll happen again.\u201d<\/p>\n For his part, Comey stood by the decisions that have defined \u2014 and haunted \u2014 his public service career. He insisted that his actions were driven by duty, not politics.<\/p>\n \u201cI tried to do the right thing, even when the right thing was hard,\u201d Comey said. \u201cI would rather have people angry at me than believe the FBI acted dishonestly.\u201d<\/p>\n He described the 2016 election period as \u201ca perfect storm\u201d where he faced \u201cno good options, only less bad ones.\u201d But Kennedy quickly countered that explanation as a \u201ccop-out dressed in moral language.\u201d<\/p>\n The exchange between Kennedy and Comey was more than a political skirmish \u2014 it was a symbolic showdown over\u00a0trust, accountability, and the line between public duty and political influence<\/strong><\/p>\n For Kennedy and his allies, Comey represents what happens when unelected officials use their discretion to influence democratic outcomes. For Comey\u2019s defenders, he remains a scapegoat \u2014 a man who made impossible choices in a polarized era.<\/p>\n Political analysts have noted that the viral clip of the exchange struck a nerve not because it revealed new facts, but because it distilled a larger frustration shared across party lines: a loss of faith in institutions once viewed as untouchable.<\/p>\n Within hours of the hearing, clips of Kennedy\u2019s questioning were circulating online, drawing millions of views. Hashtags like\u00a0#KennedyVsComey<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0#FBIHearing<\/strong>\u00a0trended across platforms as users weighed in.<\/p>\n Supporters of Kennedy hailed his performance as \u201ca long-overdue reckoning.\u201d<\/p>\n Critics accused him of turning a serious oversight hearing into political theater.<\/p>\n Journalists described the hearing as \u201cpart accountability session, part show trial.\u201d<\/p>\n Yet even detractors acknowledged one thing:\u00a0Kennedy\u2019s blunt, unfiltered delivery cut through the usual Washington varnish.<\/strong><\/p>\n His questioning was not built on complex policy jargon or legal nuance. It was built on plain, almost brutal English \u2014 the kind that lands like a gavel. It\u2019s a style that resonates deeply with voters who feel alienated by bureaucratic doublespeak.<\/p>\n At its core, the confrontation raised an uncomfortable question about America\u2019s political landscape: Was Senator Kennedy conducting the kind of hard-nosed accountability the Senate is meant to uphold, or was this another act in Washington\u2019s never-ending cycle of televised outrage?<\/p>\n For some observers, it was both.<\/p>\n On one hand, Kennedy\u2019s interrogation spotlighted real issues \u2014 internal bias, procedural inconsistencies, and a loss of public confidence in federal institutions. On the other, it played out like a political drama designed to dominate headlines rather than produce policy change.<\/p>\n Regardless of where one stands on the Comey legacy, this hearing will likely be remembered as one of the most volatile moments in recent congressional history. It underscored the erosion of trust between politicians, law enforcement, and the public \u2014 a divide that may take decades to bridge.<\/p>\n Comey left the chamber looking composed but weary. Kennedy left having cemented his reputation as one of the Senate\u2019s most unpredictable questioners \u2014 half statesman, half showman.<\/p>\n As one political analyst put it after the hearing:<\/p>\n \u201cIt wasn\u2019t just a Senate hearing. It was a referendum on how America defines truth \u2014 and who gets to tell it.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The FBI memo that initiated the Biden-era Arctic Frost investigation into President Donald Trump and hundreds of his allies over their activities related to January 6 lacked substantial evidence and clear legal…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":20615,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-20616","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-breaking-news"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20616","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=20616"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20616\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/20615"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=20616"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=20616"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news2.watchtowatch.top\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=20616"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Kennedy argued that Comey\u2019s public announcements and press conferences during the Clinton investigation \u2014 particularly his decision to publicly rebuke Clinton while declining to pursue charges \u2014 \u201cblurred the line between law enforcement and politics.\u201d<\/p>\n
Kennedy accused Comey of opening the Trump-Russia investigation without sufficient evidence and in a manner that \u201cinvited political chaos.\u201d<\/p>\n
In perhaps the hearing\u2019s most dramatic moment, Kennedy issued a warning to the FBI\u2019s current leadership.<\/p>\n
Was this oversight \u2014 or performance?<\/strong><\/p>\n