The Long Deferred Day of Accountability for James Comey
The Comey "grand conspiracy" subpoena is not isolated. It is part of a sprawling investigation that has already issued more than 130 subpoenas in the last few months.
This analysis is free, but with Premium Membership you get MORE. Join today.
by Roger Stone
March 26, 2026
There are chapters in American history that demand to be written not in ink, but in fire.
The Obama administration, cloaked in the sanctimony of intellectualism and the false patina of moral superiority, unleashed a corrosive strain of political malice that did not dissipate with the passage of time. It metastasized. It deepened through the first Trump administration, calcified under the Biden presidency, and even now its vestiges linger like a stubborn contagion within the body politic.
This was not governance. This was something far more insidious; a slow-moving institutional rot. And now, at long last, the day of accountability may be coming.
On March 19, 2026, in a development that has sent tremors through the upper echelons of the intelligence and law enforcement establishment, former FBI Director James Comey received a federal grand jury subpoena from prosecutors in the United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) for the Southern District of Florida (SDFL).
The timing, reported since March 3, 2026, is no accident. Nor is the venue incidental. This subpoena seeks documents related to Comey’s role in the drafting and assembling of the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), the now infamous report that asserted Russia collusion hoax in the 2016 election to benefit Donald Trump. Not testimony. Not yet. Documents. Paper trails. The quiet architecture of decisions made behind closed doors.
This is not an isolated inquiry. It is part of a sprawling investigation that has already issued more than 130 subpoenas since 2025. As a nation we must all pause and ask a question that cuts to the marrow: What exactly are prosecutors looking for that requires such breadth and persistence?
The answer is as unsettling as it is unavoidable. They are attempting to reconstruct a mosaic of conduct that may reveal not mere error, but design in the form of improperly modified political prosecutions waged against those associated with President Trump. Was there a seditious conspiracy that began in 2016 and continued through 2024?
Among those already ensnared in this widening net is former CIA Director John Brennan. Brennan received his own subpoena months earlier, reported in late 2025, focusing on his supervisory role in the very same Intelligence Community Assessment. Brennan was not a peripheral figure. He was central. He oversaw the process. He influenced its contours. And, according to a subsequent CIA Tradecraft Review commissioned under CIA Director John Ratcliffe, that process was anything but orthodox.
The review described the ICA’s construction as chaotic and unconventional. Those are not casual descriptors; in the lexicon of intelligence they are damning. Even more troubling are allegations that Brennan advocated for the inclusion of a summary of the now-discredited Steele dossier in an annex to the report despite internal objections. Why include material that had not been verified? Why attach it to an assessment presented as authoritative? Was this prudence or was it something more calculated?
As has been said before by British historian Lord Acton, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.
CIA Director John Ratcliffe has referred both Brennan and Comey to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for potential prosecution. Among the possible avenues under scrutiny are false statements to Congress and perjury. Brennan, for his part, has denied wrongdoing and protested the process. His attorneys have alleged irregularities, including what they characterize as judge shopping and selective leaks. In other words, Brennan’s lawyers claim the current administration is engaging in precisely the tactics that Brennan himself used.
The list of individuals touched by this investigation reads like a roll call of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus. Andrew McCabe. Peter Strzok. Lisa Page. Charles McGonigal. James Clapper. More than 130 subpoenas have reached current and former officials across multiple agencies. This is not some mere sort of pinprick inquiry. It’s a long overdue and very badly needed systemic excavation.
At the center of this effort lies a singular objective, which is to reexamine the origins and execution of the 2016 to 2017 counterintelligence activities directed at Donald Trump and his campaign. This includes the genesis of Crossfire Hurricane, the composition of the ICA, and the downstream actions that shaped years of investigations, prosecutions, political persecution, corruption, coverups, criminal conspiracy, and media narratives. Prosecutors appear to be exploring whether disparate acts can be woven into a prosecutable conspiracy. Not a political slogan, a legal theory.
Critics have long derided these events as a hoax. Others have defended them as necessary national security measures. But slogans are not evidence. And indignation is not exculpation. The grand jury process exists precisely to pierce through competing narratives and arrive at facts.
The venue itself is as telling as it is promising. The grand jury is impaneled in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, under the supervision of U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. Proceedings are centered in Fort Pierce, Florida within a courthouse whose jurisdiction has already intersected with high profile matters involving President Trump. The U.S. Attorney (USA) overseeing this effort, Jason A. Reding Quiñones, operates in coordination with Department of Justice leadership in Washington. This is not a peripheral jurisdiction. It is a deliberate locus. In fact, I suggested in October 2025 that the proper venue is SDFL.
Beyond the legal architecture and procedural mechanics, there lies a human dimension that cannot be ignored. The weaponization of government is not an abstraction, it is lived experience for many Americans living in constant fear awaiting the other proverbial shoe to drop. It is the knock at the door that never comes, yet is always anticipated. It is the reputational erosion that unfolds in real time. It is the financial devastation wrought by endless legal entanglements. It is the public humiliation and falsehoods sweeping across social media and gossip columns.
Your very name itself becomes clickbait. You stop being you and your identity has now become “Trump associate…”. It is the psychological toll of being cast as a target for no crime other than proximity to power or truth. And it’s the betrayal from evil people within the government of the country we love which never fails to intrude upon your thoughts, causes illnesses to worsen, leads to sleepless nights, results in paranoia, sometimes justified and sometimes not.
I have seen this machinery up close and witnessed how lawfare operates not as a scalpel, but as an axe that can and will bludgeon you. Families are dragged into the vortex. Livelihoods are imperiled. Health is compromised. And through it all, the architects of these campaigns often remain ensconced behind layers of institutional protection. Is this justice? Or is it the inversion of justice?
Let us be unequivocal because it is of paramount importance that justice is served, this moment is not about vengeance. It is not about settling scores or indulging in political retribution. It is about restoring a principle so fundamental that its absence threatens the very legitimacy of the Republic: equal application of the law.
If the ICA was produced through irregular means, and I believe that it was, then it must be thoroughly examined. If unverified material was deliberately included to shape perception, that must be scrutinized. If officials misled Congress or the public, that must be addressed. These are not partisan concerns. They are constitutional imperatives.
For years, Americans were told to trust the system. To defer to institutions. To accept conclusions handed down from on high. But trust is not a perpetual entitlement; trust is earned through demonstrating loyalty, honesty, and integrity. So when that trust is betrayed by government officials and agencies, it must be destroyed and rebuilt through transparency and accountability.
The subpoenas issued to Comey, Brennan, and the 130 or so others are not the conclusion of this story. They are the beginning of what may prove to be one of the most consequential inquiries of our time. Whether it culminates in indictments, convictions, exonerations, prison sentences, or anything that resembles a semblance of justice remains to be seen, but it’s the process itself that matters because a nation that refuses to examine its own misconduct is a nation that invites its own decline.
The reckoning returns, not as a slogan, but as a test.
— This essay first appeared at Stone Cold Truth.
Recent Articles:
 | A guest post by
|
I’m happy to see this and I was tempted to send this out to my various chat groups who don’t read your Substack or some of the other ones that I read. However, until we start seeing actual prosecutions trials and convictions, then to me, this is just background and what we like to call hopium.
As much as I would enjoy seeing a bunch of deep-state bad actors suspended by their fuzz, I'm afraid it would not address the root problem, to which this piece alluded in paragraph ten: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. To the extent that high Federal office, elected or appointed, grants extreme power, jockeying for those offices will inevitably lead to corruption.
Our government must be restructured so that office-holders serve the people rather than wield power over them. This requires relinquishing almost all of the "government services" that we have become accustomed, over the past century, to thinking we must have. That includes entitlements, and *that* absolutely includes Social Security and Medicare. (If you don't think these programs entail "wielding power", ask yourself how they get paid for. I'm on Social Security and Medicare now, and it'll require more than a little belt-tightening for me to give them up, but needs must when the devil drives -- I want my republic to outlive me and not to devolve into despotism.)
There is a reason why the original Constitution did not delegate responsibility for these things to the Federal government: The founders knew quite well that they would eventually, inevitably, lead to tyranny. Returning to their visionary design will require revolutionary change, but it need not be violent. It *does* require that we open our eyes and accept the stark truth that the acts of Comey et al. were merely symptoms of a more fundamental problem.