Classified Memo EXPOSES Top Brass Targeting Trump

Department of Justice seal on American flag background.

A classified Justice Department memo reveals that the nation’s top law enforcement officials personally authorized FBI investigations into Trump associates, raising fundamental questions about whether federal power was weaponized against political opponents during the Biden administration.

Story Snapshot

Senator Chuck Grassley released a previously classified April 2022 DOJ memo showing Attorney General Merrick Garland, Deputy AG Lisa Monaco, and FBI Director Christopher Wray personally signed off on investigations targeting Trump associates
The high-level approval contradicts typical investigative procedures where such authorizations occur at lower levels, suggesting unusual political involvement in surveillance decisions
Grassley characterized the memo as evidence of “unchecked government power” being deployed against political opposition during a period when Trump was positioning for his 2024 campaign
The timing occurred 15 months into the Biden administration, amid multiple ongoing investigations involving Trump and his associates
The disclosure connects to broader scrutiny of Biden-era DOJ activities and the Durham investigation into surveillance abuses

The Power of Three Signatures

The April 2022 memo documented something extraordinary in federal law enforcement practice. When Attorney General Merrick Garland, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, and FBI Director Christopher Wray all personally signed authorization for investigations into Trump-affiliated individuals, they created a paper trail that would later expose the extent of high-level involvement in politically sensitive surveillance. This concentration of top-tier approval raises immediate red flags because most FBI investigations proceed with far less executive involvement. The fact that America’s three most senior law enforcement officials felt compelled to personally greenlight these investigations suggests they understood the political sensitivity and potential constitutional implications of targeting opposition figures.

Timing Tells the Story

April 2022 represents a critical moment in American political history. The Biden administration was well into its second year, Trump was actively preparing his 2024 presidential campaign, and the Justice Department was simultaneously managing multiple investigations involving the president and his circle. The memo’s creation during this window cannot be divorced from its political context. Federal surveillance powers were being directed at individuals associated with the most likely opposition candidate in the next presidential election. Whether properly predicated or not, the optics of such timing demand scrutiny. The American people deserve to know whether investigations were launched based on legitimate criminal predication or political calculation.

Senator Grassley’s decision to release this memo on October 23, 2025, adds another layer of significance. Now serving during the second Trump administration, Grassley’s disclosure functions as both historical revelation and contemporary warning about the dangers of politicized law enforcement. The release comes amid ongoing debates about reforming surveillance authorities and imposing stricter oversight on politically sensitive investigations.

The Grassley Factor in Government Oversight

Chuck Grassley built a reputation over decades as one of the Senate’s most persistent watchdogs over executive branch activities. His willingness to challenge both Republican and Democratic administrations on issues of government transparency and accountability lends credibility to his concerns about this memo. Grassley’s characterization of the document as evidence of “unchecked government power” reflects his understanding of how federal law enforcement authority can be abused when directed by political considerations rather than criminal predication. His oversight extends beyond this single disclosure, as evidenced by his simultaneous pursuit of declassified Durham investigation documents that examine broader patterns of surveillance abuses during politically charged investigations.

What Remains Unknown

Critical questions persist that the memo’s release has not answered. The specific predication for these investigations remains undisclosed, leaving the public unable to judge whether surveillance was justified by legitimate criminal suspicion or motivated by political animus. The identities of the targeted Trump associates have not been fully revealed, nor have the results of these investigations been made public. Did these inquiries produce evidence of wrongdoing, or did they conclude without charges, suggesting they should never have been initiated? The absence of this information prevents definitive conclusions about whether the Justice Department acted appropriately or crossed constitutional lines by targeting political opposition.

Institutional Damage and Trust Erosion

The memo’s existence and subsequent disclosure inflict damage regardless of whether the investigations were properly predicated. Public confidence in the Justice Department’s political independence suffers when Americans learn that top officials personally authorized surveillance of opposition political figures. Career prosecutors and FBI agents find themselves caught between political crossfire, potentially affecting recruitment, morale, and operational effectiveness. The revelation feeds existing narratives about a “deep state” weaponizing federal power against conservatives, while simultaneously creating precedents that future administrations might exploit for their own political purposes. This erosion of institutional trust represents one of the memo’s most significant long-term consequences, potentially undermining the Justice Department’s ability to investigate legitimate cases involving politically connected individuals without facing accusations of partisanship.