As the Trump-era scandals continue to unravel, one name has surfaced repeatedly: Judge James E. Boasberg. His controversial role in the Russia Hoax FISA court scandal, and his connection to the smear campaign against Trump ally Carter Page, have raised red flags about his impartiality and fitness to preside over high-profile cases, particularly those involving the Trump administration.
Boasberg, a U.S. District Court judge, made headlines for his involvement in the prosecution of Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer who falsified evidence to secure a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant against Carter Page, a former Trump campaign associate. Clinesmith’s actions were part of the broader “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation, a biased and politically motivated probe into Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia—an investigation that many conservatives argue was a blatant attempt to undermine a duly elected president.
Despite Clinesmith’s guilty plea in 2020 for falsifying a statement that led to illegal surveillance of Page, Boasberg handed down a mere slap on the wrist: probation. This leniency has sparked outrage, especially among those who see it as a clear sign of judicial bias. It’s also raised questions about Boasberg’s broader involvement in the Russia Hoax, as he served as the judge on the FISA court that approved the warrant to surveil Page in the first place. Critics argue that Boasberg’s connection to this scandal is far too deep to ignore and calls into question his ability to render fair decisions in any case involving Trump or his allies.
At the heart of the controversy is the false information provided to the FISA court, which relied on fabricated evidence to approve surveillance of Page. Despite knowing that Page had been working with the CIA and was not a Russian agent, Clinesmith manipulated documents to mislead the court. This violation of trust had profound consequences, causing irreparable harm to Page, who was wrongfully targeted by the FBI. As Page himself noted, the scandal turned his life upside down, forcing him to live as a fugitive and severing ties with his family.
Yet, in a shocking turn, Boasberg dismissed the severity of Clinesmith’s actions, claiming that the warrant likely would have been approved even without the fraudulent information. Such a statement has been widely criticized as both dismissive and naive, showing a disturbing lack of accountability for a government official who was directly responsible for fabricating evidence that violated one of the most fundamental principles of justice: fairness.
This leniency has not gone unnoticed. Critics on social media have been quick to point out that Boasberg’s ruling on Clinesmith’s sentencing was not an isolated incident. One commenter noted, “Boasberg gave Clinesmith a slap on the wrist. For a felony. 12 months probation. Clinesmith was then reinstated by the DC bar. Meanwhile, I’m at 30 months suspended without pay, just for making protected disclosures to Congress. Clinesmith is walking free while others suffer.”
Another commentator highlighted Boasberg’s troubling history with the FISA court: “This is the same Judge Boasberg who sat as presiding judge on the FISA court. The same Judge Boasberg who gave Clinesmith a slap on the wrist for manufacturing evidence used in the Carter Page FISA application that defrauded the court.”
As the investigation into the Russia Hoax continues, questions about Judge Boasberg’s role in perpetuating this scandal will likely remain a key point of contention. His leniency toward Clinesmith, combined with his involvement in the FISA court’s approval of the surveillance warrant, suggests a pattern of judicial behavior that many conservatives believe is biased, politically motivated, and potentially illegal.
For those who care about the integrity of our justice system, it’s clear that Boasberg’s actions merit further scrutiny. His role in the Russia Hoax, and his continued influence in high-profile cases, is a glaring reminder of the deep state forces at work to undermine America’s political institutions. The push for accountability continues—and Boasberg’s past may well come back to haunt him.
