FBI agents raided a California home as part of an investigation into former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) on Tuesday, adding to a rapidly lengthening list of law enforcement actions that have a political component, just one week before the midterm elections. The day before, it emerged that the Department of Justice (DOJ) was seeking, for a third time, to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey, who has had a place near the top of President Trump’s list of foes for almost a decade.

Prior to that, FBI agents searched the Washington-area home of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), apparently as part of an investigation into her family’s immigration process roughly 30 years ago. Meanwhile, two former FBI officials were charged last week, supposedly for downplaying their involvement in probes conducted into then-President Biden’s son Hunter Biden. Swalwell, Comey, Omar and the two former FBI personnel — Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides — all deny wrongdoing.

Separate from those cases, the DOJ also set off a political firestorm last week when it filed a preemptive suit that could block certification of the result of the U.S. Senate race in Alaska if Democratic candidate Mary Peltola defeats incumbent Sen. Dan S. Sullivan (R) by a narrow margin. The DOJ is taking exception to the presence on the ballot of a similarly named candidate, Dan J. Sullivan, despite the Alaska Supreme Court having already considered the matter.

Trump later told reporters he was the person who told the DOJ to “do it,” in relation to filing the Alaska suit. Taken together, the developments have raised the ire and anxiety of Trump critics who see the aggregate effect as a weaponization of the justice system for political aims. They note, among other things, that the DOJ has typically abided by the custom of not taking conspicuous action within 60 days of an election, for fear of being seen to be trying to affect the outcome.

There can be exceptions to this practice — for example, to prevent a planned crime from being committed or to prevent destruction of evidence. But it is far from clear that those issues apply to any of the key cases now. Meanwhile, the people being accused or investigated face the challenge that they cannot fully dispel suspicion between now and Election Day. Omar is the only serving politician in the group, and she is not expected to be in any electoral trouble in her heavily Democratic district.

But the FBI raid could besmirch Democratic standing with voters more generally, including in the competitive Senate race in Minnesota. In the interim, Omar is trying to push back against leaks to Trump-friendly media outlets, which have offered varying descriptions of what exactly is being investigated. Neither Omar nor Swalwell, who resigned from Congress earlier this year, has been charged with any crime. Comey and the former FBI officials will not have the opportunity to rebut the charges against them at trial — if their cases even proceed that far — until the midterm elections are distant in the rearview mirror.

There are obvious differences between a current Democratic officeholder (Omar), a former lawmaker (Swalwell), and nonparty figures like Comey, Floris and Benavides. But the fear is that all the cases can be pushed together to try to buttress Trump’s frequent allegations that nefarious Democrats and shadowy "Deep State" figures are conspiring to damage him. Many critics acknowledge it is possible wrongdoing could emerge in some cases. But they also assert that the current administration cannot expect the presumption of good faith.

They tend to highlight things like the president’s public message last year to then-Attorney General Pam Bondi, urging her to expedite prosecutions of his enemies. The current attorney general, Todd Blanche, told a podcast last week: “They accuse me of not suffering from independence. I don't. I work for President Trump.”

For administration critics, it’s all ominous stuff. “I’m actually surprised that it took this long to pursue these types of aggressive actions that smell of political retribution,” said attorney Mark Zaid, who has represented whistleblowers during Democratic and Republican administrations. “That’s not to say there might not be smoke behind the fire. But this administration has set those fires for perceived political reasons.”

Zaid himself fought an attempt earlier in the Trump administration to strip him of his security clearance. The most high-profile targets are emphatic that the probes they face are political in nature. Comey in a video on Monday said: “Well, they’re back — again. It would almost be funny if it weren’t such an appalling abuse of the Department of Justice — one that we cannot become numb to.”Omar’s office issued a statement soon after the raid on her home in which it called the action “an outrageous abuse of power” and added: “No president should be able to use the power of the federal government to intimidate his political enemies.”

Trump, Blanche and other administration figures insist the actions they are taking are just. Trump told reporters Monday he wasn’t aware of the Comey charges before they became public, though he did once again inveigh against the former FBI director as a “dirty cop.”Susan Del Percio, a Republican strategist but Trump critic, countered that the administration is doing lasting damage. “The harm that has been inflicted on the institutions will take years to rebuild,” she said.

But Del Percio also argued that any attempt to use the wheels of justice to smooth the GOP’s way in the midterms could backfire. Recent actions are showing what Trump’s priorities are, she said. “It is retribution, not focusing on the American people. That’s why the president’s numbers are so low.”The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.