A Maga loyalist US attorney in Miami has widened the Trump US attorney investigation into intelligence officials, targeting former FBI and intelligence leaders linked to the 2016 Russia inquiry.
The expansion comes despite recent court setbacks for the US justice department, including dismissed indictments against two long-time Trump adversaries after judges raised procedural concerns.
Former prosecutors and legal experts have criticised the Miami-based probe, describing it as a politically driven “fishing expedition” lacking credible factual foundations or prosecutorial necessity.
The investigation has reportedly issued more than two dozen subpoenas, seeking evidence against former officials previously scrutinised and effectively cleared by multiple exhaustive inquiries.
Those earlier reviews include two special counsel investigations and a Republican-led Senate intelligence committee examination into Russia’s interference during the 2016 presidential election.
The probe is led by Jason Reding Quiñones, the Trump-appointed US attorney for Florida’s southern district, who maintains close ties to attorney general Pam Bondi.
Reding Quiñones is also viewed as aligned with prominent Maga figures, and his office has accelerated the inquiry with new prosecutors and expanded grand jury activity.
The investigation reportedly intensified in November, with subpoenas issued to several high-profile former intelligence and law enforcement officials from the Obama era.
Among those reportedly subpoenaed are former CIA director John Brennan, former director of national intelligence James Clapper, and former FBI counter-intelligence agent Peter Strzok.
Lisa Page, a former FBI lawyer involved during the Russia investigation period, has also reportedly received a subpoena under the widening Miami inquiry.
Concerns about the direction and tactics of the Trump US attorney investigation into intelligence officials have reportedly prompted resignations within the prosecutorial team.
According to multiple reports, two younger prosecutors assigned to the case resigned after expressing reservations about the scope and basis of the inquiry.
Michael Bromwich, a former Department of Justice inspector general, represents Andrew McCabe, the former FBI deputy director subpoenaed by investigators.
Bromwich was sharply critical of the Miami investigation, questioning its legal grounding and adherence to established Department of Justice standards.
“There is simply no factual basis for this investigation. It violates both DoJ and FBI standards that require a factual predicate,” Bromwich said.
“It is a fishing expedition where it has been clearly established – by two prior independent counsel investigations and a congressional investigation led by the current Secretary of State – there are no fish,” he added.
Bromwich further criticised the lack of transparency surrounding the probe’s legal theory and jurisdictional justification.
“The government has refused to provide the basis for venue in Florida, nor has it been willing to describe the statutory violations it is pursuing,” he said.
“That is unprecedented in my 40 plus years of federal criminal practice,” Bromwich added, underscoring his concerns about prosecutorial overreach.
Other former prosecutors echoed similar criticisms, arguing that the inquiry undermines long-standing norms governing federal criminal investigations.
Barbara McQuade, a former US attorney for eastern Michigan and current University of Michigan law professor, described the renewed probe as deeply suspect.
“The Russia investigations have already been probed and ended with a whimper,” McQuade said, referencing previous exhaustive reviews.
“The idea that Trump loyalists are now going to investigate again should make us all suspicious of their motive,” she added.
McQuade emphasised that sufficient evidence to support criminal charges would have already emerged if it genuinely existed.
“If evidence sufficient to support criminal charges existed, we would have seen it by now,” she said, dismissing claims of hidden wrongdoing.
Jeffrey Sloman, a former senior prosecutor in the same Miami office, warned that the investigation risks violating core legal traditions.
“Our laws and traditions forbid federal prosecutors to use their awesome prosecutorial powers to conduct a grand jury investigation for the sole purpose of vanquishing a political enemy of the president,” Sloman said.
Trump has consistently denounced the 2016 Russia inquiry as a “witch-hunt,” despite findings that Moscow interfered in the election.
The 2019 report by special counsel Robert Mueller concluded Russia interfered “in a sweeping and systematic fashion” to help Trump win.
However, Mueller’s report did not establish evidence of coordination or conspiracy between Russia and Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Trump’s hostility toward former intelligence officials has remained visible long after the investigation formally concluded.
In January 2023, Trump reposted an image on Truth Social depicting Brennan, Clapper and others behind bars.
The image carried the headline: “Now that Russia collusion is a proven lie, when do trials for treason begin?”
Under Reding Quiñones, critics argue loyalty to Trump has been prioritised in staffing and prosecutorial decisions within the Miami office.
The inquiry focuses in part on a 2017 intelligence assessment concluding the Kremlin intervened to help Trump win the election.
Reding Quiñones was the first US attorney confirmed by the Senate this year, securing confirmation in August.
He notably invited Pam Bondi to administer his oath of office, deviating from customary judicial swearing-in practices.
At his swearing-in ceremony, Reding Quiñones pledged to “restore impartial justice,” suggesting dissatisfaction with previous leadership.
Before his appointment, Reding Quiñones served both as a federal prosecutor in the same district and as a state judge.
Observers note that rightwing attorney Mike Davis appears influential in shaping the probe’s direction and political messaging.
Davis, a longtime Trump ally, has publicly supported aggressive investigations targeting officials involved in past probes of Trump.
Last month, Davis posted online that “justice is coming,” alongside a photograph of himself with Reding Quiñones.
Reports suggest Davis encouraged the justice department to assign Florida prosecutors to pursue conspiracy-based cases against Trump critics.
Davis previously played a key role during Trump’s first term, assisting with Senate confirmations of conservative supreme court nominees.
He now leads the Article III Project, which claims to combat what it calls “leftist lawfare” in defence of the rule of law.
Earlier this year, Davis and Reding Quiñones appeared together at a conservative legal conference discussing “Modern Lawfare and the American Democracy.”
Panel discussions reportedly expressed resentment toward special counsel Jack Smith’s investigations into Trump’s conduct.
During the event, Davis argued that Trump’s justice department should pursue sweeping conspiracy charges against investigators.
Such charges, he suggested, could allege efforts to deprive Trump of his civil rights, a statute traditionally used in police misconduct cases.
“There must be severe consequences,” Davis told the audience during the panel discussion.
“There has to be severe legal, political and financial consequences for this unprecedented republic-ending lawfare,” he added.
The Miami probe originated from an earlier investigation led by a US attorney in Pennsylvania focusing on Brennan.
That inquiry was transferred to Florida in September, where Reding Quiñones expanded it and empanelled a new grand jury.
The Fort Pierce grand jury is scheduled to begin proceedings in January, further escalating the Trump US attorney investigation into intelligence officials.
In October, Davis told conservative podcasters the grand jury would consider charges against numerous former federal officials.
He alleged a decade-long conspiracy against Trump, spanning the Russia inquiry and criminal cases tied to the 2020 election.
Those cases include allegations surrounding efforts to overturn Trump’s election loss and mishandling classified documents after leaving office.
On The Charlie Kirk Show, Davis said his “buddy” Jason Quiñones empanelled the grand jury after sustained pressure from him.
Davis told another conservative commentator: “I’ve been publicly calling for this for three years.”
“I’m going to make damn sure that these ‘lawfare Democrats’ go to prison during the four years of President Trump’s second term,” he added.
Trump himself has publicly urged prosecutions of former officials accused by allies of weaponising the justice system.
“They cheated and rigged the 2020 Presidential Election,” Trump wrote on social media.
“These Radical Left Lunatics should be prosecuted for their illegal and highly unethical behavior!” he added.
Legal experts note that statutes of limitations may block many potential charges related to events from 2016 or 2017.
Davis has nevertheless argued prosecutors could frame alleged misconduct as part of a longer-running conspiracy.
McQuade warned the Miami probe resembles a “name and shame” strategy rather than a legitimate prosecutorial effort.
“That philosophy violates legal ethics and DoJ policy,” she said, noting prosecutors must reasonably expect to secure convictions.
“The statute of limitations alone seems like a bar to conduct occurring in 2016,” McQuade added.
Sloman expressed concern over reports that remaining prosecutors may feel pressured to continue the investigation.
“Two bright young people at the US attorney’s office in Miami who bravely refused such an assignment recently resigned,” he said.
“It appears others remain who are intimidated enough to accept this assignment,” Sloman added.
He urged current leadership to reverse course and restore trust within what he described as a once-proud institution.
While the Miami inquiry expands, other Trump-backed prosecutions have faltered in federal courts.
Read also:Jenny Kwan among Canadian MPs blocked from West Bank, highlighting Israel entry tensions
Recent rulings dismissed indictments against former FBI director James Comey and New York attorney general Letitia James.
Judges cited procedural irregularities and lack of prosecutorial experience by those who brought the charges.
Critics argue these cases illustrate a broader strategy to publicly damage political opponents, regardless of conviction prospects.
NYU law professor Stephen Gillers said Trump views the law primarily as a weapon against enemies.
“A grand jury investigation and a trial can do that even if there is no conviction,” Gillers said.
“Conviction would just be icing on the dessert,” he added.
