“Mueller Lawyer Admits to Falsifying Evidence to Sabotage trump Presidency, Receives Slap on the Wrist”
Kevin Clinesmith, FISA court, Russia hoax
Mueller investigation, FBI lawyer, Durham recommendation
Judge James Boasberg, falsifying evidence, sabotage Trump presidency
—————–

In a shocking turn of events, FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who was working for Special Counsel Robert Mueller, recently pled guilty to falsifying evidence and lying to the FISA court in order to perpetuate the Russia hoax and sabotage President Trump’s presidency. This revelation has sent shockwaves through the political landscape, raising questions about the integrity of the investigation and the lengths some individuals were willing to go to undermine the president.

Clinesmith’s actions were a blatant abuse of power and a betrayal of the public trust. By falsifying evidence and lying to the FISA court, he not only compromised the integrity of the investigation but also violated the rights of American citizens. His actions call into question the credibility of the entire Russia investigation and cast a shadow over the legitimacy of the findings.

Despite the severity of his actions, Clinesmith received what many consider to be a lenient punishment. While Durham, the U.S. Attorney investigating the origins of the Russia probe, recommended prison time for Clinesmith, Judge James Boasberg ultimately gave him a mere slap on the wrist. This decision has sparked outrage among those who believe that justice was not served and that Clinesmith should have faced more severe consequences for his actions.

The fact that Clinesmith was working for Mueller, who was tasked with investigating alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election, only adds another layer of complexity to this already convoluted story. Mueller’s investigation was highly contentious and polarizing, with many accusing him of bias and political motivations. Clinesmith’s actions only serve to further tarnish the reputation of the investigation and raise serious doubts about its integrity.

The implications of Clinesmith’s guilty plea extend far beyond his individual case. They raise questions about the conduct of other individuals involved in the Russia investigation and the extent to which they may have acted improperly or unethically. They also call into question the credibility of the FISA court and the safeguards in place to prevent abuses of power.

In light of these revelations, it is imperative that a full and thorough investigation be conducted to uncover the truth about the Russia probe and hold those responsible for any wrongdoing accountable. The American people deserve to know the full extent of what happened and to have confidence that justice will be served.

Moving forward, it is essential that steps are taken to ensure that such abuses of power do not happen again. This includes strengthening oversight mechanisms, holding individuals accountable for their actions, and restoring trust in the institutions that are meant to protect the rule of law.

The Clinesmith case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of upholding the principles of justice and accountability in our society. It is a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked power and the consequences of allowing political bias to influence the course of justice. Only by learning from this experience and taking decisive action can we hope to prevent similar abuses from occurring in the future.

LAWFARE: FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, working for Mueller, pled guilty to falsifying evidence & lying to the FISA court to fuel the Russia hoax to sabotage Trump’s presidency. Durham recommended prison, Judge James Boasberg gave him a slap on the wrist. pic.twitter.com/tLx7nbwQNo

— @amuse (@amuse) May 30, 2025

LAWFARE: FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith’s Guilty Plea

In a shocking turn of events, FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who was working for Robert Mueller, pled guilty to falsifying evidence and lying to the FISA court in order to further the Russia hoax and sabotage former President Trump’s presidency. This revelation sent shockwaves through the political landscape, as it exposed a blatant abuse of power within the FBI.

Clinesmith’s guilty plea came after it was revealed that he altered an email from the CIA to make it appear that former Trump campaign aide Carter Page was not a source for the agency, when in fact he was. This crucial piece of misinformation was used to obtain a FISA warrant to surveil Page, leading to further investigations into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Durham’s Recommendation for Prison Time

Following Clinesmith’s guilty plea, John Durham, the special prosecutor appointed to investigate the origins of the Russia probe, recommended that Clinesmith face prison time for his actions. Durham’s investigation revealed a pattern of misconduct and bias within the FBI and Department of Justice, raising serious questions about the integrity of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Durham’s recommendation for prison time underscored the seriousness of Clinesmith’s actions and the impact they had on the political landscape. It was seen as a necessary step towards holding those responsible for the Russia hoax accountable and restoring trust in the institutions tasked with upholding the rule of law.

Judge Boasberg’s Lenient Sentence

Despite Durham’s recommendation for prison time, Judge James Boasberg ultimately gave Clinesmith a slap on the wrist, sentencing him to probation and community service instead. This lenient sentence sparked outrage among those who believed that Clinesmith’s actions warranted a harsher punishment.

Boasberg’s decision to forgo prison time for Clinesmith raised questions about the independence of the judiciary and whether political considerations played a role in the sentencing. Many viewed the lenient sentence as a missed opportunity to send a clear message that misconduct within law enforcement and intelligence agencies would not be tolerated.

The Aftermath of Clinesmith’s Guilty Plea

Clinesmith’s guilty plea and subsequent sentencing marked a significant moment in the ongoing debate over the Russia investigation and the actions of those involved. It served as a stark reminder of the potential for abuse of power within the government and the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions.

The fallout from Clinesmith’s guilty plea continues to reverberate through the political landscape, fueling calls for further investigations into the origins of the Russia probe and the conduct of those involved. The case has also raised questions about the role of the FISA court in overseeing surveillance activities and the need for greater transparency and accountability in the intelligence community.

In conclusion, FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith’s guilty plea for falsifying evidence and lying to the FISA court represents a troubling chapter in the history of the Russia investigation. While John Durham’s recommendation for prison time underscored the seriousness of Clinesmith’s actions, Judge James Boasberg’s lenient sentence sparked controversy and raised questions about the integrity of the judicial system. The aftermath of Clinesmith’s guilty plea serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the rule of law and holding those in positions of power accountable for their actions.