# Prosecutorial Threat The use of criminal investigation and prosecution against political opponents, advocacy groups and critics, whether or not any crime has occurred. That includes merely floating an investigation in public. The threat does its work whether or not a charge is ever filed. It raises the cost of opposition, forces targets to hire lawyers, and signals to everyone watching. As an analytic category in this KB, it covers the whole range from a cabinet official's on-camera warning to a grand-jury indictment. ## The ladder Second-term cases climb a recognizable sequence. Most stop partway up, and the lower rungs are cheap enough to use constantly. 1. **Public flotation.** An official says on camera that a critic may be in legal trouble: [[Tom Homan - AOC in trouble now]], [[Kash Patel - first antifa terrorism charges]]. It costs nothing and needs no evidence. 2. **Presidential direction.** On April 9, 2025, Trump signed memoranda ordering reviews of former officials Chris Krebs, who as CISA director had called the 2020 election secure, and Miles Taylor, the "Anonymous" author. Each memo named its target. On Sept. 20, 2025, Trump posted what he reportedly meant as a private message to [[Pam Bondi]]: "What about Comey, Adam 'Shifty' Schiff, Leticia???... JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!" 3. **Referral.** Agency heads outside the Justice Department generate criminal referrals. FHFA Director [[Bill Pulte]]'s mortgage and insurance referrals against [[Letitia James]], [[Adam Schiff]] and [[Lisa Cook]] are the model. 4. **Personnel.** Prosecutors who won't bring the case are replaced. In the Eastern District of Virginia, [[Erik Siebert]] was pushed out and Trump's former personal lawyer [[Lindsey Halligan]] installed. 5. **Charge.** [[James Comey]] was indicted Sept. 25, 2025, five days after the post, and Letitia James in October. See [[Comey Indictment]]. ## Where it has been checked The courts and, more often, grand juries have been the working brakes: - **Nov. 24, 2025.** A federal judge dismissed both the Comey and James indictments because Halligan was unlawfully appointed. - **Dec. 4 and Dec. 11, 2025.** Two separate grand juries refused to re-indict James. - **Feb. 10, 2026.** A D.C. grand jury declined to indict the six Democratic lawmakers who had recorded the "illegal orders" video, including [[Jason Crow]], [[Mark Kelly]] and [[Elissa Slotkin]]. - **Comey, again.** He was re-indicted in North Carolina on April 28, 2026, this time on threat charges over an Instagram photo of seashells. On Sept. 25, 2026 the trial was pushed into 2027, past the midterms. The failures are part of the design, not evidence against it. A case that ends in a no-bill has still cost its target months and legal fees and made headlines, and it tells the next critic what opposing the administration costs. ## Telling it apart from legitimate prosecution No single fact proves a case is political. These signs, taken together, are what this KB tracks: - **The target is named before the evidence.** The President identifies the defendant publicly, and the case follows. - **Process irregularities.** Career prosecutors resign or are removed, an unusual venue is chosen, or someone is appointed to bring the specific case. - **Charges tied to speech or dissent.** Threat counts built on social-media posts. Investigations of officials over a video about unlawful orders. - **Selectivity.** Comparable conduct by allies goes uncharged or is pardoned ([[J6 Mass Pardons]]), and the same Justice Department prosecutes a line prosecutor over a copied report ([[Carmen Lineberger]]). - **Quotas and targets set from above.** [[DOJ Case Quota Directive]]. ## See also - [[Weaponization of Government]] · [[Weaponization Working Group]] · [[Lawfare Timeline]] · [[Elite Impunity]] - [[Violence Inversion Rhetoric]] · [[Stochastic Terrorism]] · [[Criminalizing Whistleblowers]] · [[Fraud Enforcement Inversion]] - [[Comey Indictment]] · [[Letitia James]] · [[Lindsey Halligan]] · [[Erik Siebert]] · [[Ed Martin]]