Former Trump personal attorney Kendra Wharton is representing Democratic operative Colin Strother and seeking dismissal of his case, arguing the Justice Department is punishing him unfairly after he cooperated.
The Hill reported that Wharton has taken on Strother as a client ahead of his Nov. 17 sentencing. Strother pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering and agreed to cooperate against his former boss, Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas).
He faces up to five years in prison. Wharton, who now runs her own defense firm, calls the matter an injustice and says the case should be dismissed.
Trump pardoned Cuellar and his wife before trial. Strother got no pardon. That gap sits at the center of Wharton’s argument: a cooperating witness is still staring down prison time after the principals walked free.
Wharton worked on Trump’s personal legal team under Attorney General Todd Blanche, later joined him as an adviser at the Justice Department, and left in July 2025. Her move into private defense work now puts a former Trump orbit lawyer across the table from prosecutors on a Democratic operative’s case, a turn that echoes other recent fights over Todd Blanche’s path to the attorney general post.
In a statement, she tied the unfairness claim directly to the pardon outcome and Strother’s full cooperation from the start.
Wharton said:
"That resolution was beyond Colin’s control, and any frustration prosecutors may have with it should not be directed at a witness who cooperated fully from the outset,"
She added that Strother has already paid a price.
Wharton said:
"Colin has suffered enough, financially and emotionally. He did what the government asked, and he is still being unfairly punished,"
And she made the ask plain:
"His cooperation deserves meaningful consideration. We believe justice calls for dismissal of his case, and we intend to advocate forcefully for that result."
The Biden-era Justice Department indicted Cuellar and his wife in 2024. Prosecutors alleged the Texas Democrat accepted nearly $600,000 in bribes tied to an oil company owned by the Azerbaijan government and a Mexican bank. The case was heading toward trial this year when Trump returned to the White House and issued the pardons.
Strother’s guilty plea and cooperation were meant to strengthen the government’s bribery case against Cuellar. A San Antonio businessman also pleaded guilty in the same scheme. Wharton noted that House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries publicly defended the Cuellar pardons as the right outcome, and that the lead prosecutor on the case no longer works at the Justice Department. The Hill sought comment from the department and received none.
Attorney disputes around Trump’s legal orbit have become a recurring theme, from pushback by a former Trump pardon attorney on pay-to-play claims to courtroom clashes over counsel. Wharton’s entry on Strother’s side keeps that pattern in view without changing the core facts of this case.
Strother admitted that in 2016 a businessman began sending him $11,000 monthly “consulting” payments. He later concluded those payments were a sham. Under instructions, he transferred most of the money, more than $200,000 total, to the congressman’s wife.
That paper trail and his decision to plead and cooperate left him exposed while the Cuellars received clemency. Cuellar is running for reelection this November. Strother’s sentencing is set for Nov. 17, two weeks after that election.
Separate legal fights have also tested Trump’s reach over federal lawyers and appointments, including an Obama-appointed judge blocking removal of a court-picked U.S. attorney and another voiding an IRS settlement and referring counsel to the Florida Bar. Those episodes sit outside Strother’s docket, yet they show how attorney roles and Justice Department decisions keep drawing scrutiny.
Wharton’s position is straightforward on the record she has put forward: Strother did what prosecutors asked, the main targets of the investigation received pardons, and continued punishment of the cooperator is not justice. She intends to press for dismissal before the November sentencing date.
When the government flips a witness, then keeps the hammer over him after the bigger fish go free, ordinary people notice who still faces the cell and who does not.