- President Trump reposts Fox’s Gregg Jarrett claiming he was “framed” by intelligence officials.
- DOJ has reportedly opened criminal probes into Brennan and Comey over 2016 Russia assessment.
- Focus is on alleged misuse of Steele dossier and process manipulation to influence the ICA.
- Legal experts question statute of limitations and political motivations behind investigation.
- Critics label the DOJ probe a “ghost investigation” lacking prosecutorial substance.
President Donald Trump has once again thrust the 2016 Russia investigation into the spotlight, this time by reposting a fiery commentary from Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett. In his Truth Social post, Trump echoed Jarrett’s claim that he was deliberately framed by former CIA Director John Brennan and ex-FBI Director James Comey.
The commentary accuses senior Obama-era intelligence leaders of manipulating the 2016 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) and weaponizing the Steele dossier to mislead the public and sabotage the incoming Trump administration.
What triggered the claims?
According to a Fox News Digital report, a CIA internal review—called a “Tradecraft Review”—criticized the way the 2016 ICA was assembled. The review argued that the “high confidence” assertion that Russian President Vladimir Putin preferred Trump could have been downgraded to “moderate.”
It also flagged FBI insistence on appending the Steele dossier, which senior CIA analysts reportedly found unverified and unfit for inclusion. Though ultimately appended with disclaimers, its reference lent weight to questionable claims, thereby undermining the ICA’s credibility.
DOJ referral and investigation
Former CIA Director John Ratcliffe reportedly sent a criminal referral to the DOJ, and Fox News says a criminal investigation into both Brennan and Comey has been opened. However, DOJ sources have yet to confirm any subpoenas, indictments, or grand jury actions.
Critics note that Brennan and Comey left office over eight years ago. Since most relevant felonies carry a five-year statute of limitations, any criminal exposure would likely hinge on more recent testimony—such as Comey’s September 2020 congressional appearance or Brennan’s interview in August 2020.
Legal skepticism grows
Analysts at Lawfare Media and The Atlantic argue that the investigation appears more symbolic than substantive. Benjamin Wittes called it a “ghost investigation,” designed to fuel a political narrative rather than pursue prosecutable offenses.
“Come talk to me when a grand jury issues a subpoena or hears from a witness,” Wittes wrote. “Until then, I’m going to assume that the Fox News story announcing the investigation is the investigation.”
What’s not disputed
Despite process critiques, the core finding that Russia favored Trump in 2016 remains unchallenged by the Tradecraft Review. According to Wittes’s analysis, while the review questions methodology, it does not reverse the conclusion that Russian actors sought to help Trump win.
Bottom line
While Trump’s repost of Jarrett’s claims has reenergized supporters, legal experts caution against overstating the significance of the DOJ’s reported actions. Unless concrete investigative steps follow, the effort may serve more to validate political grievances than to produce legal accountability.
(With inputs from Fox News Digital, Lawfare Media, The Atlantic, and Truth Social)
A global media for the latest news, entertainment, music fashion, and more.
