The Briefing, Vol. XIII, Issue 41
Oct. 13, 2025
This week:
- Letitia James’ indictment: A case for restraint and long-term prosecutorial reforms
- First clear evidence Jay Jones is dragging down Virginia Democrats
- Mills enters Maine Senate race
Outlook
Revenge list: In some cases subtlly, and in others not so much, Trump has taken various measures against people who engaged in lawfare or deep-state activities designed to prevent his second presidency, bankrupt him, and destroy his life during the first Trump and Biden administrations.
Some have had their security clearances revoked; others have been targeted in their law firms by the administration; some have been or are being purged from jobs in the intelligence community, the FBI and the Justice Department. Now some are also being indicted in federal court.
If there is a “Trump’s revenge list” anywhere, then surely it includes both former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Both have been recently indicted. The criminal cases are obviously influenced by the politics. They may not stand up in a courtroom or pass muster with a jury. However, in both cases, the accusation that they lied in contexts where such lies constitute serious federal crimes appear to be quite well-founded.
James lied about her residence on mortgage forms that millions of Americans are required to sign and swear to every year under penalty of law. Comey appears to have lied about whether he authorized a leak of information to the media about FBI investigations.
In James’s case, there is something of an irony. The basis of the civil case in which she won a half-billion-dollar verdict against Trump (since overturned) was that he had misrepresented his finances in order to obtain a better interest rate. “When powerful people cheat to get better loans,” she said at the time on X, “it comes at the expense of hardworking people.” James is accused of falsely claiming that a home in Virginia would be used as a residence rather than a rental property so that she could get the lower interest rate that comes with that. She has repeatedly stated that the charges are “baseless,” but the paper-trail forms a very clear basis for the charges, if nothing else. assuming that’s actually her signature on the page. Whether this will persuade a jury is a separate question.
The future of political prosecutions: Two points here.
First, especially if James beats the rap, Congress should really look into the laws governing small discrepancies on mortgage documents. James is facing up to 30 years in prison for each of her two counts, which seems incredibly disproportionate for what is alleged, even if it is clear she knowingly lied. And yes, no one ever gets the maximum sentence, but isn’t that on its own a sign that it should be much lower and based on the amounts of money at stake? As in Trump’s case, no one is alleged to have been defrauded. No one is claiming she ever missed a payment on this mortgage — only that, as a result of false statements, the bank faced slightly more risk in lending to her than it was aware of.
People give small pieces of false information on financial documents more often than anyone would like to admit. Did you ever apply for a credit card when you were younger and exaggerate your income? This is something people will even publicly advise you to do on financial YouTube channels. It is also potentially prosecutable.
Now, if New York’s chief law enforcement officer gets away with what she wrote on a mortgage document, it is a sign that we should reconsider how the law treats such offenses when ordinary people commit them. Ordinary people should not have to live with massively punitive and almost-never-enforced laws potentially hanging over their heads just because the offense in question is connected to the financial system. It creates a “show-me-the-man-and-I’ll-show-you-the-crime” environment, in which you just need to get the wrong person angry in order to become a target.
Legislative solutions: Second and more important is the political prosecution angle to this.
Many on the Right are correctly dismissing the idea that this is precedent-setting and will embolden Democrats to do the same. The reason? Because the Democrats already did it. They set the precedent. Just consider the political lawfare Democrats were just recently waging against Trump and many around him.
Just considering Trump himself, James and others filed dubious civil lawsuits in anti-Trump jurisdictions, brought four separate prosecutions (all dubious to different degrees), and tried illegally to drop Trump from the presidential ballot in multiple states based on specious legal theories. If there are no consequences for such acts, the reasoning goes, they will just do it again next time, only worse.
But this presents a troubling problem. At best, it leaves us accelerating toward constant lawfare and total lawlessness by and against everyone. Whether or not these or any other prosecutions go forward during Trump’s term, Congress and state legislatures need to start actively looking for bipartisan ways to rein in prosecutorial power in general, lower sentences for non-violent and nearly victimless crimes, and establish more stringent guidelines about prosecutions of candidates for office.
There is bipartisan incentive for such a ratcheting-down — otherwise, all of today’s public officials face a future in which they will be aggressively prosecuted for minor transgressions.
As matters stand, the law gives Trump’s prosecutors the power to do what they are doing now, no matter how they were appointed — to empanel grand juries and put charges in front of them.
Governor 2025
Virginia: There is serious talk about the entire Democratic ticket potentially falling apart here after former Rep. Abigail Spanberger’s (D) humiliating debate performance last week.
As we noted previously, the race between Attorney General Jason Miyares (R) and state Rep. Jay Jones (D) took an odd twist after Jones’ texts were released showing him wishing for the death of a Republican politician, his wife, and the “little fascists” (age 2 and 5 at the time) whom they were “breeding.”
Rather than demand Jones drop out of the race, Democrats apparently figured they could run out the clock. The loss of one of their statewide row office nominees would be potentially crippling to party morale, so they have been white-knuckling this and hoping they can hang on to the lead that nearly all polls have been giving Virginia Democrats since this summer.
But the likelihood that they will get through this unscathed appears to weaken by the day.
Since Jones’s texts were released, Spanberger has refused to demand that he drop out of the race. Predictably, therefore, at last week’s debate, she was given multiple opportunities to react to Jones’ depraved behavior. Her responses were varied but all insufficient to put the issue to rest. Sometimes, she replied with word-salads. Sometimes she was totally silent and even avoided making eye contact with her opponent, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle Sears (R), who was asking her how she could take such a position when she herself has young daughters..
Spanberger may yet pull this off, but it seems increasingly unlikely that Jones will. A new poll from Trafalgar — partly taken before the governor’s debate on Oct. 9 — gives Miyares a decisive six-point lead over Jones and puts the governor and lieutenant governor races within the margin of error. Although Trafalgar is a Republican poll, its September survey was right there with the others in predicting a Democratic sweep.
Something is clearly happening in this race. Sears is certain to run the rest of her campaign using clips and debate segments about Jones, and it might just work. The fact that this is even close is a huge reversal of fortune for the Democrats — something no one would have seen coming even just a month ago.
Senate 2026
Maine: Gov. Janet Mills (D) will run for the nomination to take on Sen. Susan Collins (R). She is probably the strongest possible Democrat for this race, and her presence puts the seat in jeopardy. Republicans are definitely concerned, if their reaction to her botched online campaign launch is any indication.
This will be an important race, although Collins must always be favored to win. She is always underestimated and the ultimate Senate survivor, ever since she made it look easy winning her first re-election race in 2002, which was supposed to be highly competitive.
Mills will not have the field to herself, and in fact there could be some left-wing pushback, with several leftist senators having already expressing public support for oyster farmer and Sullivan harbormaster Graham Platner (D), who is of the “scruffy, folksy Democrat” genre of candidate.
Another Democratic candidate currently in this race — interesting to consider in light of recent events — is a former chief-of-staff to former Rep. Katie Porter (D), a California gubernatorial candidate recently seen imploding in a spectacular interview.
Minnesota: In their primary for this open seat, Democrats face a choice between their moderate left and their far left. An internal memo from far-left Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan (D) would have everyone think that the far left is still winning, although it doesn’t provide new polling of her head-to-head race against slightly less woke Rep. Angie Craig (D).
The point of the memo, reported in local media, is to show that both candidates perform more-or-less the same against a generic Republican, so there is no need for progressives to compromise. It doesn’t quite show that, though. Discounting all results obtained through “informed vote” poll-pushing, the initial survey suggests that Flanagan leads by two points with 46 percent, whereas Craig leads by four points with 47 percent.
Texas: A new University of Houston-Texas Southern poll of this Senate race shows Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) with only a nominal lead at 34 percent to 33 percent for incumbent Sen. John Cornyn (R). Houston-area U.S. Rep. Wesley Hunt (R) rounds out the field with 22 percent.
Meanwhile, a poll by the pro-Cornyn PAC Texans for a Conservative Majority shows him leading Paxton by five points but with only 33 percent support — nowhere near the 50 percent needed to avoid a runoff. The survey also suggests that if Hunt were eliminated in a runoff, his supporters are much more likely to break for Paxton.
The UH-TSU poll of Democratic field is much more volatile interesting. Former Rep. Colin Allred (D), who lost to Ted Cruz last year by 8.5 percentage points, is the favorite of those currently in the race, including state Rep. James Talarico (D). But Allred tumbles to the bottom of the heap if a few others — including former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D) and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D) jump in. Crockett now has an incentive to jump into the Senate race due to redistricting forcing her out of her seat, but she’s going to have to move quickly because the Texas primary is March 3 and the candidate filing deadline is Dec. 8.
Incidentally, the UH-TSU poll also shows conservative U.S. Rep. Chip Roy (R) the overwhelming favorite for the state attorney general nomination next year.
