- Trump issued sweeping pardons to 77 loyalists tied to the 2020 election, shielding allies while leaving state prosecutions intact.
- His administration pushed aggressive subpoenas targeting Trump critics and intelligence figures, signaling partisan retribution and fractured DOJ norms.
In a move that’s rippling through the halls of power like a thunderclap, President Donald Trump has unleashed a one-two punch on the American political landscape: a sweeping wave of pardons for his staunchest 2020 election allies and a barrage of subpoenas aimed squarely at those he views as architects of his past torments.
It’s the kind of raw, unfiltered retribution that Trump’s critics have long warned about—and his supporters are cheering as vindication.
But as the dust settles on these late-night revelations and courtroom maneuvers, one thing is clear: the lines between ally and adversary have never been more starkly drawn.
The FrankNez Media Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.
Let’s start with the pardons, because they hit like a blockbuster dropped after midnight. In a proclamation that’s equal parts legal shield and political statement, Trump issued full, complete, and unconditional pardons to 77 individuals tied to his bid to challenge the 2020 election results.
The list reads like a who’s who of the former president’s inner circle—names that dominated headlines during the chaotic post-election scramble.
Details of Trump’s Pardons
We’re talking Rudy Giuliani, the once-swaggering New York mayor turned Trump attorney, now a fixture in Georgia’s ongoing legal battles; Mark Meadows, his chief of staff through the storm; attorneys John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro, whose legal theories on alternate electors fueled the fire; Boris Epshteyn, the sharp-elbowed adviser; and Sidney Powell, the conservative firebrand whose “Kraken” rhetoric became shorthand for the era’s fervor.
The pardons, unveiled via an X post from Department of Justice pardon attorney Ed Martin—Trump’s handpicked enforcer tasked with purging “weaponization” from the department—carry a defiant tone.
“This proclamation ends a grave national injustice perpetrated upon the American people following the 2020 Presidential Election and continues the process of national reconciliation,” Trump wrote in the document, which pointedly excludes the president himself.
Martin, echoing a May post with the rallying cry “No MAGA left behind,” framed it as a long-overdue correction for those who dared question the vote tallies in states like Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, and Nevada.
But here’s the rub: these aren’t get-out-of-jail-free cards for federal woes, at least not yet.
None of the recipients face federal charges—only state-level indictments over the so-called fake electors scheme, where slates of Trump backers posed as legitimate electors to potentially sway Congress.
Presidential pardons don’t touch state crimes, so this is more preemptive armor than immediate relief.
As cases in those battleground states slog through procedural quagmires—none have reached trial, thanks to endless appeals and delays—these pardons serve as a bulwark against any future Democratic administration that might crank up the federal heat come 2028.
It’s Trump playing chess across election cycles, ensuring his foot soldiers sleep a little easier.
And this isn’t happening in a vacuum. On his very first day back in the Oval Office, Trump blanketed over 1,500 January 6 Capitol rioters with pardons or commutations, a gesture that’s already backfired in messy ways.
Some of those freed souls have landed back in cuffs for fresh threats of violence, including one who allegedly menaced House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries.
The pattern extends to the elite too: crypto mogul Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, whose Binance empire has tangled with Trump family ventures, walked free despite federal fraud convictions.
Even a tax evader whose mom shelled out $1 million for a Mar-a-Lago dinner got a nod. It’s a pardon spree that’s as extravagant as it is eyebrow-raising, blending loyalty rewards with eyebrow-raising favoritism.
If the pardons are Trump’s olive branch to his tribe, the subpoenas are the sharpened knives coming out for everyone else.
More Than a Dozen Subpoenas Get the Green Light
Over in Florida’s Southern District, U.S. Attorney Jason A. Reding Quiñones—a Trump appointee with a mandate to dig deep—has greenlit more than two dozen grand jury subpoenas targeting the ghosts of the Russia investigation.
The bullseye? Former CIA Director John Brennan, whose January 2017 intel assessment laid bare Vladimir Putin’s online meddling to boost Trump’s 2016 bid.
Joined on the hit list are ex-FBI counterintelligence hotshot Peter Strzok and lawyer Lisa Page, whose text-message affair became tabloid fodder but whose work helped expose election interference.
These aren’t polite requests; they’re demands for documents and comms stretching from July 2016 to February 2017, with the probe ballooning over the last two months to snare broader “deep state” actions.
Quiñones, fresh off recruiting a squad of prosecutors and spinning up a national security unit, took the reins this fall from David Metcalf, the Pennsylvania U.S. Attorney whose earlier stab at the case fizzled amid complaints of weakness.
It’s all rooted in referrals from Trump’s intel chiefs earlier this year, feeding the narrative of a “grand conspiracy” by Democrats and shadowy bureaucrats bent on Trump’s destruction—a claim that’s echoed through his rallies but crumbled under two prior probes that found zero criminal dirt.
The timing feels surgical: Last week alone saw the grand jury sign off on summons for Brennan, Strzok, and Page, per reports from Fox and CBS.
And it’s not isolated—former FBI Director James Comey is catching heat too, with a rushed indictment in Virginia’s Eastern District courtesy of Lindsey Halligan, a 35-year-old Trump pick (and former beauty queen) whose lack of prosecutorial chops has his lawyers screaming foul.
Federal judges have already sidelined three other unconfirmed Trump U.S. attorneys in similar plays, raising whispers of a shadow DOJ more loyal to the boss than the law.
Comments from DOJ
Jurisdiction questions loom large—why Florida for D.C.-centric drama? And with statutes of limitations ticking (five years for most feds), will any of this stick?
The Justice Department, tight-lipped as ever, offered only: “While we do not confirm or comment on the existence of specific investigations, the American people should know that this department will continue to follow the facts and pursue justice in every case.” Brennan’s camp?
Silent, per The New York Times.
As for the White House, no word yet on the subpoena surge. Zoom out, and this dual-track justice feels like the Trump era on steroids—reward the faithful, rake the rest over the coals.
Democrats decry it as authoritarian payback; MAGA sees it as draining the swamp at last. Legal eagles warn of eroded norms, with state cases grinding on and federal probes probing limits. But in Trump’s Washington, where loyalty is currency and grudges are gospel, these moves aren’t just policy—they’re a promise kept.
The reconciliation he invokes in that pardon proclamation?
It might just depend on whose side of the aisle you’re on. As these threads intertwine, watch for ripples: Will Georgia’s fake-elector trials accelerate under this shadow?
Could Brennan’s subpoena unearth old emails that Durham once chased?
And with midterms looming, how does this play in swing districts? One thing’s for sure—this isn’t the end of the story. It’s barely the opening act.
Also Read: A DOJ Whistleblower Now Makes Revelation That Undermines the Judicial System’s Integrity
