On November 3, 2026, Democrats won control of both the House and the Senate. The Associated Press called the Senate late Tuesday night and the House early Wednesday morning. Democrats flipped at least seven Republican-held Senate seats and hold at least 54 seats in the new Senate. Every committee gavel in both chambers changes hands on January 3, 2027.
The reaction from incoming chairs was immediate. Representative Robert Garcia, in line to chair House Oversight, posted two words. Senator Ron Wyden, in line to chair Senate Finance, posted one. Both men will sign subpoenas in January.
This post follows our September analysis, Congressional Crypto Investigations After the 2026 Midterms, which asked what Democrats would investigate if they won. They won both chambers. This post covers what happens first, how fast, and to whom.
Overview: Why the Midterm Results Change the Investigations Calendar
For two years, congressional Democrats could write letters but could not compel anything. That ends in January. Committee chairs will control subpoenas, deposition authority, staff budgets, and the hearing calendar in both chambers. Democrats have said publicly that they spent those two years mapping investigations and sending document requests so that subpoenas could follow on day one.
The targets are already named. Before the election, Representative Jamie Raskin told the New York Times that pardons, government contracting, and the Trump family’s cryptocurrency ventures were on the list. On October 21, Senator Richard Blumenthal, the presumptive chair of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, sought records from White House ballroom donors, including the crypto exchange Kraken. Raskin and Blumenthal have also been pressing law firms about deals cut with the White House and have said those firms stonewalled them. In the majority, an ignored letter is followed by a subpoena.
Our September post explained that a Democratic House alone would face a Justice Department unlikely to prosecute contempt referrals. Democrats now hold the Senate as well. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1365, the Senate can go directly to federal court in Washington to enforce a subpoena against a private person or company. No prosecutor is needed. A court order follows, and defying it is contempt of court.
The law-enforcement timeline matters too. A congressional record built in 2027 will be available to the Justice Department, the SEC, the CFTC, the IRS, and state attorneys general for years. The general federal limitations period is five years. A new administration takes office in January 2029 and inherits every transcript, exhibit, and referral.
Incoming Speaker Hakeem Jeffries has described the approach as following the facts and applying the law. In practice, committee staff build these investigations the way prosecutors do, from records and junior witnesses toward principals.
What Congressional Leaders Have Said About Subpoenas and Investigations
The incoming chairs have been specific about their plans for more than a year.
House Oversight: Robert Garcia
Representative Robert Garcia is the ranking Democrat on House Oversight and the presumptive chair. On election night he posted “LAWYER UP” on X. A statement from his office said the committee would take on the Trump family, corporate corruption, DHS and ICE abuses, and the Epstein files. Before the election, he told Punchbowl News that his staff had been preparing investigations for months and would not be starting from scratch. Garcia has also pointed to the tools the majority brings: subpoenas, contempt proceedings, and court enforcement.
House Judiciary: Jamie Raskin
Representative Jamie Raskin is expected to chair House Judiciary. In late October he told the New York Times that oversight targets include presidential pardons, possible corruption in government contracting, and the Trump family’s cryptocurrency deals. Raskin and Blumenthal have been pressing major law firms about the deals those firms made with the White House and have said the firms refused to cooperate. Raskin has also called on Jared Kushner to recuse himself from Ukraine and Middle East negotiations while Democrats examine Kushner’s foreign investment deals.
Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations: Richard Blumenthal
Senator Blumenthal told Reuters in September that Democrats would use their subpoena power. He has described the crypto space as rife with corruption. On October 21, 2026, as ranking member, he sought records from White House ballroom donors, including Kraken, Cisco, Salesforce, and ServiceNow. As chair, he will have PSI’s deposition authority and staff.
The Five-Committee Senate Statement
On July 10, 2026, the ranking Democrats on five Senate committees issued a joint statement calling on their committees to hold hearings on the national security implications of the President’s cryptocurrency holdings, including the influence of the UAE or unknown third parties. The signers were Elizabeth Warren (Banking), Richard Blumenthal (PSI), Gary Peters (Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs), Dick Durbin (Judiciary), and Ron Wyden (Finance). The statement followed a June 23, 2026 letter from the same five senators demanding hearings on a reported $500 million UAE investment in World Liberty Financial and the arms sales, AI chip approvals, and enforcement rollbacks that followed. Each of those five ranking members is now in line to chair the committee they wrote from.
Senate Finance: Ron Wyden
Senator Wyden posted a single word on election night: “Subpoenas.” Finance has a power other committees lack. Under 26 U.S.C. § 6103(f), the chair can obtain tax returns and return information from the Treasury. Token sales, memecoin proceeds, and foreign payments all raise tax questions that only Finance and House Ways and Means can pursue directly.
Banking and Financial Services: Warren and Waters
Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Maxine Waters began building a record in April 2025, when they asked the SEC to preserve records concerning World Liberty Financial and the SEC’s pause of its enforcement case against Justin Sun, a major investor in the venture. In December 2025, Waters wrote that the SEC had terminated or suspended significant enforcement actions against Coinbase, Binance, and Sun. On October 30, 2026, Waters tied the Binance hack to the Zhao pardon and Binance’s ties to World Liberty. Both will chair their committees in January.
The Leadership Framing
Incoming Speaker Hakeem Jeffries told reporters before the election that Democrats would follow the facts, apply the law, and let the chips fall. He also said one of the first acts of the majority would be to run War Secretary Pete Hegseth out of town.
How Majority Control Changes Subpoena Power
A minority party can request. A majority can compel. The rules of each chamber set out how.
Chairs Can Issue Subpoenas Alone
House Rule XI, clause 2(m), authorizes committees to subpoena witnesses and documents. The same clause allows a committee to delegate that power to its chair. The Congressional Research Service’s survey of committee subpoena rules found that most House and Senate committees have done so. Some rules require the chair to consult or notify the ranking member. None require the ranking member’s consent. In January, Democratic chairs will adopt committee rules for the 120th Congress, and the delegation will be theirs to write.
A chair who holds delegated authority can sign a subpoena the day a letter deadline passes.
Staff Depositions Under Oath
House rules adopted at the start of each Congress authorize committee staff to take depositions, including depositions compelled by subpoena. Those depositions are taken under oath and behind closed doors. Senate committees such as PSI carry deposition authority in their own rules. In the minority, Democratic staff could sit in on depositions but could not notice them. In the majority, they set the schedule and ask the questions.
Two Chambers, Two Enforcement Paths
The House route runs through the Justice Department. Under 2 U.S.C. § 192 and § 194, a chamber certifies a contempt citation to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. The statute says the U.S. Attorney shall present the matter to a grand jury. In practice, the executive branch has treated that step as discretionary. A Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney is unlikely to prosecute contempt arising from an investigation of the President’s family. The House can also sue to enforce a subpoena. That litigation has historically taken years.
The Senate route does not need a prosecutor. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1365, the Senate can bring a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to enforce a subpoena against a private person or company. The statute excludes subpoenas to executive branch officials who assert a governmental privilege. For private witnesses, it is a direct path. The court orders compliance. A witness who disobeys faces contempt of court, with fines or confinement until the witness complies. The CRS report on Congress’s contempt power describes each of these mechanisms and their limits.
For a private crypto executive, investor, or market maker, the Senate result matters more than the House result. A House subpoena could be resisted on the bet that the Justice Department would not act. A Senate subpoena can be enforced in court without the Justice Department.
Inherent Contempt
Each chamber also retains an inherent power to arrest and detain a contemnor through its own officers. The Supreme Court recognized that power in McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 (1927). Neither chamber has used it since 1935. Democrats in the 116th Congress drafted rules to revive it through fines rather than detention. Whether the 120th Congress adopts such a rule is an open question.
Third-Party Subpoenas and Financial Records
Committees subpoena banks, exchanges, custodians, and accountants directly. Federal financial privacy statutes that limit agency access to bank records do not bind Congress. Blockchain analytics vendors work from public ledger data and need no subpoena at all. In practice, committee staff can assemble a wallet-level picture of a target’s transactions before the target receives a letter.
What Did Not Change
Congress still cannot indict. Investigations still require a valid legislative purpose, and questions must be pertinent to the subject under inquiry. Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178 (1957). The Fifth Amendment still applies. Quinn v. United States, 349 U.S. 155 (1955). Courts still will not enjoin a committee subpoena. Eastland v. U.S. Servicemen’s Fund, 421 U.S. 491 (1975). Objections must be raised in writing and on the record, or they are lost in a later contempt proceeding. The Congressional Oversight Manual prepared by CRS remains the standard reference for these tools and limits.
Which Subpoenas Come First
Democrats have been sending letters for eighteen months. The first subpoenas will go to the people who did not answer them.
Ballroom Donors and Access
Blumenthal’s October 21 request to ballroom donors shows the pattern. The question is what each donor sought from the administration and what it received. A donor that declined to respond as a courtesy to a ranking member now faces a chair with PSI’s subpoena and deposition authority. Crypto firms that contributed to administration projects or purchased access through token holdings fall in the same category.
Law Firm Deals With the White House
Raskin and Blumenthal have said that major law firms refused to explain the deals they struck with the White House in 2025. House Judiciary and PSI can now compel the engagement terms, the pro bono commitments, and the communications that preceded them. Law firms are also third-party custodians of client records, which raises privilege questions that committees resolve on their own terms.
World Liberty Financial, USD1, and Foreign Investors
The five-committee Senate statement named the UAE and unknown third parties as the national security concern. Expect subpoenas to World Liberty Financial, its stablecoin issuer, the Emirati investors, and the exchanges that carried USD1. The June 2026 letter tied the $500 million UAE investment to the arms sales and AI chip approvals that followed. Committees will seek the transaction records on one side and the agency decision files on the other.
Pardons, Dismissals, and the Binance Hack
Waters connected the Binance breach to the Zhao pardon and Binance’s relationship with World Liberty on October 30. House Financial Services and House Judiciary will examine the pardon application, the lobbying that preceded it, and the SEC’s termination of its Binance and Coinbase cases. The December 2025 Waters letter to Chairman French Hill listed the dismissed enforcement actions. Committee staff will work from that list.
Prediction Markets and Government Insiders
The prior Republican majority opened this inquiry. In May 2026, Chairman Comer sought internal records from Polymarket and Kalshi over concerns that government employees were trading on nonpublic information. Democrats will inherit that file and widen it. Donald Trump Jr. advises both platforms. The April 2026 prosecution of an Army soldier for betting on Polymarket with classified information showed that the Justice Department and the CFTC will charge these cases. A congressional record of who traded before government announcements will be built from platform data, which the platforms can be compelled to produce. Those records feed the same securities and commodities insider trading theories the SEC and CFTC already use.
Tax Records
Senate Finance and House Ways and Means can obtain tax returns under 26 U.S.C. § 6103(f). Wyden has pressed for crypto tax enforcement for years. Token sale proceeds, memecoin revenue, and foreign payments to Trump-linked entities will be examined through returns that no other committee can see.
Enforcement Decision-Makers
The Justice Department disbanded its National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team in 2025. The SEC dropped most of the crypto cases it inherited. Current and former officials at DOJ, the SEC, and the CFTC will be asked who made those decisions, who they spoke with, and what they knew about the President’s financial interests. Former officials have no executive privilege to invoke on their own behalf.
The Lame-Duck Session
Republicans control the committees until January 3, 2027. The outgoing majority may attempt a final vote on the CLARITY Act in the lame-duck session. Democrats blocked the September motion to proceed over ethics provisions and now hold 54 seats. That vote will not succeed without those provisions. In the meantime, Democratic ranking members will keep sending letters. Every letter sent in November and December fixes a date after which destroying records becomes obstruction.
From Congressional Record to Federal Case
A congressional investigation ends with a report. A criminal case can begin with the same report. The record will be built between January 2027 and January 2029 and read for years afterward.
The Record Outlives the Congress
Every document produced to a committee, every interview transcript, and every deposition can be published or shared with prosecutors. The general federal limitations period under 18 U.S.C. § 3282 is five years. Conduct examined in 2027 remains chargeable into 2032. A new administration takes office in January 2029 with three years left on that clock and a complete investigative file waiting.
State prosecutors do not wait for Washington. A published congressional record is a roadmap for a state attorney general, and a presidential pardon does not reach state crimes. The New York Attorney General’s office has pursued crypto cases under the Martin Act for years. Other states are building the same capacity.
Referrals Carry Weight Even When Ignored
Committees refer matters to the Justice Department, the SEC, the CFTC, and the IRS. A referral compels nothing and has no expiration date. The current Justice Department may decline referrals that touch the President’s family or allies. The same referrals, with the same exhibits, will be on file for the next Attorney General. Referrals to the SEC and CFTC are different. Both agencies have civil authority and career enforcement staff who open matters on their own. The CFTC’s April 2026 complaint in the Polymarket case shows the agency is willing to act on government-insider trading theories now.
The Statements Are the Exposure
For many witnesses, the greatest risk in a congressional investigation comes from their own statements rather than the underlying conduct. The False Statements Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1001(c), applies to investigations conducted under committee authority, including unsworn transcribed interviews and written responses to letters. Perjury applies to sworn depositions and hearings. Obstruction under 18 U.S.C. § 1505 reaches the destruction or concealment of records after notice of a congressional inquiry. Each carries up to five years. Prosecutors in any administration can bring these cases from the transcript and the production record without proving the underlying corruption, trading, or laundering theory.
The April 2026 indictment of a former NIH adviser for concealing emails examined by a House subcommittee followed this pattern. The committee developed the record, and the Justice Department charged the concealment.
Parallel Proceedings Start Now
Companies and individuals who expect a congressional letter are already in a parallel-proceedings posture. Positions taken with a committee will be compared against statements to the SEC, the CFTC, auditors, insurers, civil plaintiffs, and the press. Internal investigations conducted now under privilege allow counsel to know the facts before the committee does. Preservation steps taken now, including suspending auto-delete on Signal, Telegram, and WhatsApp, remove the obstruction theory from the table. Insurance notice given now preserves coverage that may run from the date of the first letter.
Why the Order of Witnesses Matters
Committee staff work like prosecutors. They start with records and junior witnesses and move toward principals. A junior employee interviewed in February 2027 will be asked about conversations, messages, and decisions involving senior executives. The senior executive deposed in June will be confronted with that account. Preparation for the executive begins with understanding what every other witness has already said.
Defense Counsel for the 120th Congress
The investigations announced this week rest on the same three theories we identified in September: public corruption, insider trading and market manipulation, and money laundering. Armstrong & Bradylyons PLLC was founded by former federal prosecutors who built cases on each of them.
In October 2026, Chambers and Partners ranked Armstrong & Bradylyons PLLC a Leading Firm in Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations for the DC Metro market in the Chambers USA Spotlight Guide 2027. The ranking followed an independent market analysis and an assessment of the firm’s experience, expertise, and caliber of talent. Chambers ranked the firm in government investigations, and it ranked the firm in the Washington market where the 120th Congress will conduct them.
Committee staff, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, the district court that hears Senate enforcement actions under 28 U.S.C. § 1365, and the Justice Department components that receive referrals are all in the same city. A witness from Austin, Miami, or Dubai will be represented where the committees sit, where the enforcement court sits, and where the Justice Department decides what to do with a referral. Chambers’ DC Metro ranking reflects the assessment of clients and peers that the firm handles this work at the level the market expects.
Scott Armstrong spent nearly a decade in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division Fraud Section, including as an Assistant Chief in the Market Integrity and Major Frauds Unit. He was lead trial counsel in the first cryptocurrency market manipulation case charged under Title 15, involving more than $300 million in spoof and wash trades, and co-lead trial counsel in the nation’s leading precious-metals futures manipulation prosecution. He supervised cryptocurrency fraud, crypto Ponzi, and digital asset investment fraud prosecutions.
Drew Bradylyons served as Chief of the Financial Crimes and Public Corruption Unit at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. He supervised cryptocurrency Ponzi prosecutions involving hundreds of millions of dollars in losses and coordinated parallel criminal and civil enforcement with the SEC and CFTC. At the Fraud Section, he prosecuted a first-of-its-kind commodities insider trading ring in natural gas futures. His unit handled public corruption and parallel civil and criminal proceedings, the two areas a congressional investigation most often reaches.
The firm’s attorneys have more than 25 years of combined DOJ experience and 25 federal jury trials. Through its congressional investigations defense practice, the firm represents witnesses, executives, and companies before House and Senate committees and in the DOJ, SEC, CFTC, and state proceedings that follow. The firm’s crypto work includes DOJ tracing investigations involving multi-million-dollar freeze and seizure orders, a nine-figure cryptocurrency theft case, and disputes over alleged crypto proceeds in which it obtained reductions of up to 75% of the amounts demanded. Those matters turn on wallet attribution, clustering analysis, and exchange records, the same evidence committee staff will put in front of a witness.
Practice Groups That Meet a Congressional Investigation
The same witness can face a committee deposition, an SEC or CFTC inquiry, a grand jury subpoena, and a board that wants its own answers. The firm’s practice groups cover each.
The firm appears in federal districts nationwide.
Frequently Asked Questions
When does the new Democratic Congress gain subpoena power?
January 3, 2027, when the 120th Congress convenes. Until then, Republicans retain every committee gavel, and Democratic ranking members can only request information voluntarily. Once the new Congress organizes, each committee adopts its rules, and chairs who receive delegated authority under House Rule XI, clause 2(m), or their Senate committee’s equivalent, can issue subpoenas without a committee vote.
Democrats have said the groundwork is already done. Representative Robert Garcia, the presumptive House Oversight chair, told Punchbowl News that his staff had been preparing for months. Reuters reported in September that investigations could launch as early as February 2027. Letters sent during the lame-duck session carry no legal compulsion, but they put recipients on notice for purposes of record preservation.
Can a committee chair issue a congressional subpoena without a vote?
In most committees, yes. House Rule XI, clause 2(m)(3), allows a committee to delegate subpoena authority to its chair under rules the committee prescribes. The Congressional Research Service’s survey of committee rules found that most House and Senate committees have done so. Many require the chair to notify or consult the ranking minority member first. None require the minority’s consent.
Committees adopt these rules at the start of each Congress, so the scope of the delegation in the 120th Congress will be set by the incoming Democratic chairs in January 2027. The practical result is that a subpoena can follow an unanswered letter within days.
How does the Senate enforce a subpoena against a private company?
Through a civil action in federal court. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1365, the Senate may sue in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to enforce a subpoena issued to a private person or entity. The court can order compliance, and disobedience of that order is contempt of court, enforceable by fines or confinement. No prosecutor is involved. The statute does not reach subpoenas to executive branch officials who assert a governmental privilege.
The House has no equivalent statute. It must rely on criminal contempt referrals under 2 U.S.C. §§ 192 and 194, which depend on the U.S. Attorney, or on its own civil suits, which have taken years. Because Democrats won the Senate as well as the House, private witnesses now face the faster path.
Does a letter from a congressional committee require a response?
A letter request is voluntary. A subpoena is not. In practice, unanswered letters are the usual trigger for subpoenas, and a chair with delegated authority can issue one quickly. More important, a letter puts the recipient on notice of a congressional inquiry. Destroying, altering, or concealing records after that notice can be charged as obstruction under 18 U.S.C. § 1505.
Written responses to a letter are also covered by the False Statements Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1001(c). A letter from a ranking member during the lame-duck session, before Democrats take the majority, has the same effect on preservation obligations and the same exposure for inaccurate written answers.
Can Congress subpoena cryptocurrency exchange records and wallet data?
Yes. Congressional subpoena power reaches any person or company holding relevant records, including exchanges, custodians, stablecoin issuers, prediction markets, and blockchain analytics vendors. Committees have subpoenaed banks directly since at least the Deutsche Bank subpoenas litigated alongside Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 591 U.S. 848 (2020). Exchange records include know-your-customer files, deposit and withdrawal addresses, trade logs, and internal communications.
Once a committee holds a wallet address, it can trace every transaction on a public blockchain without further process. Wallet addresses published in a committee report or exhibit remain traceable by anyone, which is why counsel often negotiate confidential treatment or redaction before production.
Can a congressional committee obtain tax returns?
Only certain committees. Under 26 U.S.C. § 6103(f), the chairs of the Senate Finance Committee, the House Ways and Means Committee, and the Joint Committee on Taxation may request returns and return information from the Treasury Secretary. The information is furnished in closed session unless the taxpayer consents. Other committees must obtain tax information from the taxpayer or through other sources.
Senator Ron Wyden is in line to chair Finance and has pressed for crypto tax enforcement for years. Token sale proceeds, memecoin revenue, and foreign payments to domestic entities can be examined through returns in a way no other committee can replicate.
Does a presidential pardon stop a congressional investigation?
No. A pardon ends federal criminal exposure for the conduct it covers. It does not limit Congress’s power to investigate the conduct, the pardon application, or the people who lobbied for it. A pardoned witness also loses much of the Fifth Amendment privilege for the pardoned federal conduct, because the privilege requires a reasonable fear of prosecution.
The privilege still covers unpardoned conduct and state crimes, which a pardon does not reach. The October 2025 pardon of Binance founder Changpeng Zhao is an expected subject of House Judiciary and House Financial Services inquiry in the 120th Congress.
Can Congress compel a foreign investor or foreign company to testify?
Congressional subpoenas generally cannot be served on a foreign national located outside the United States. A foreign witness who enters the country can be served. Foreign companies with U.S. subsidiaries, U.S. bank accounts, or U.S. exchange relationships are reachable through those domestic entities and through third-party subpoenas to the institutions that hold their records.
Foreign bank secrecy and data protection laws do not bind Congress, although the conflict can be raised in negotiating the scope and form of production. The five-committee Senate statement of July 10, 2026 named the UAE and unknown third parties as the national security concern, so foreign counterparties of Trump-linked ventures should expect this question to arise.
Does receiving a congressional subpoena mean a person is under criminal investigation?
No. Congress investigates to legislate and oversee, not to prosecute, and many subpoena recipients are record custodians or fact witnesses with no exposure. The risk is that the congressional record becomes the foundation for a later criminal or regulatory matter. Transcripts, produced documents, and staff reports can be shared with the Justice Department, the SEC, the CFTC, and state attorneys general.
The most common charges that grow out of congressional investigations are false statements, perjury, and obstruction, which turn on what the witness said and did during the inquiry rather than on the underlying conduct. The April 2026 indictment of a former NIH adviser for concealing emails examined by a House subcommittee followed that pattern.
How long does exposure from a congressional investigation last?
Several years beyond the Congress that conducts it. The general federal limitations period is five years under 18 U.S.C. § 3282. Testimony or productions made in 2027 remain chargeable into 2032. A new administration takes office in January 2029 and inherits every referral and exhibit. Congressional referrals have no expiration date.
State prosecutors can act on a published record at any time within their own limitations periods, and state limitations periods for fraud are often longer than five years. Civil plaintiffs can use the same record. A congressional investigation is prepared on the assumption that a prosecutor will read the transcript years later.
What is the difference between an investigation under a House majority and under both chambers?
Coordination and enforcement. With both chambers, committees can divide subjects, share records, and sequence hearings so that a witness who testifies to a House committee can be examined by a Senate committee on the same record. The Senate also brings the civil enforcement statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1365, and PSI’s bipartisan investigative tradition. PSI has produced detailed staff reports on money laundering through global banks that prosecutors later used to build cases.
Our September analysis assumed Democrats might hold only the House, where enforcement depends on a Justice Department unlikely to prosecute contempt. That constraint no longer applies to private witnesses.
What experience do Armstrong & Bradylyons attorneys have with congressional and parallel investigations?
Scott Armstrong and Drew Bradylyons are former federal prosecutors with more than 25 years of combined DOJ experience and 25 federal jury trials. Armstrong served nearly a decade in DOJ’s Criminal Division Fraud Section, including as an Assistant Chief in the Market Integrity and Major Frauds Unit, and tried the first cryptocurrency market manipulation case charged under Title 15.
Bradylyons was Chief of the Financial Crimes and Public Corruption Unit at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia, where he coordinated parallel criminal and civil enforcement with the SEC and CFTC. The firm represents witnesses, executives, and companies in congressional investigations and the DOJ, SEC, CFTC, and state proceedings that follow, with a focus on crypto fraud, insider trading, market manipulation, and money laundering.
Facing a Congressional Subpoena or Document Request?
Armstrong & Bradylyons PLLC defends executives, companies, and individual witnesses in House and Senate investigations and in the DOJ, SEC, CFTC, and state proceedings that follow. Scott Armstrong and Drew Bradylyons built public corruption, market manipulation, and crypto fraud cases as federal prosecutors. Chambers USA Spotlight 2027 ranks the firm a Leading Firm in White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations for the DC Metro market.
