A federal grand jury in Maryland has indicted John Bolton, United States President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, over his handling of classified documents, charging him with retaining and transmitting national defence information.
The indictment, filed in federal court in Maryland on Thursday, charges Bolton with eight counts of transmission of national defence information and 10 counts of retention of national defence information, all in violation of the Espionage Act.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Each count is punishable by up to 10 years in prison if Bolton is convicted, but any sentence would be determined by a judge based on a range of factors.
Bolton’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said in a statement that his client “did not unlawfully share or store any information.”
Bolton served as US ambassador to the United Nations as well as White House national security adviser during Trump’s first term before emerging as one of the president’s most vocal critics. He described Trump as unfit to be president in a memoir he released last year.
President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with Argentina’s President Javier Milei in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Tuesday, October 14, 2025, in Washington, DC, United States [Alex Brandon/AP Photo]
The charges come two months after FBI agents searched Bolton’s home and office, seeking evidence of possible violations of the Espionage Act, which makes it a crime to remove, retain or transmit national defence records, according to partially unsealed search warrants filed in federal court.
In his Maryland home, agents seized two cellphones, documents in folders labelled “Trump I-IV” and a binder labelled “statements and reflections to Allied Strikes”, according to court documents.
In Bolton’s office, agents found records labelled “confidential”, including documents that referenced weapons of mass destruction, the US mission to the United Nations, and other materials related to the government’s strategic communications, according to court records.
The indictment levied Thursday alleges Bolton transmitted confidential information via personal email, used private messaging accounts to send sensitive documents that were classified as top secret and illegally retained intelligence documents in his home, according to the Department of Justice.
Bolton is accused of sharing more than 1,000 pages of information about government activities with relatives, according to the indictment.
The indictment says the notes Bolton shared with the two people included information he gleaned from meetings with senior government officials, discussions with foreign leaders, and intelligence briefings.
Prosecutors said a “cyber actor” tied to the Iranian government hacked Bolton’s personal email after he left government service and accessed classified information. A representative for Bolton told the government about the hack but did not report that he stored classified information in the email account, according to the indictment.
“These charges stem from portions of Amb. Bolton’s personal diaries over his 45-year career – records that are unclassified, shared only with his immediate family, and known to the FBI as far back as 2021,” Bolton’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said in an emailed statement. “Like many public officials throughout history, Amb. Bolton kept diaries – that is not a crime.”
Trump, who campaigned for the presidency on a vow of retribution after facing a slew of legal woes once his first term in the White House ended in 2021, has dispensed with decades-long norms designed to insulate federal law enforcement from political pressures.
In recent months, he has actively pushed Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Justice Department to bring charges against his perceived adversaries, even driving out a prosecutor he deemed to be moving too slowly in doing so.
Asked by reporters at the White House about the Bolton indictment on Thursday, Trump said: “He’s a bad guy.”
Bolton served as national security adviser during Trump’s first term from 2018 to 2019. In that time, he clashed with the president over Iran, Afghanistan and North Korea before getting fired in 2019.
He has subsequently criticised Trump’s approach to foreign policy and government, including in a 2020 book titled The Room Where it Happened, which portrayed the president as ill-informed on foreign policy.
The search warrant affidavit said a National Security Council official had reviewed the book manuscript and told Bolton in 2020 that it appeared to contain “significant amounts” of classified information, some at a top-secret level.
Earlier this month, New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led a legal case against Trump over alleged fraud in his businesses, was charged with lying on a mortgage application, drawing accusations of political vindictiveness by the White House.
Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted on September 25 on charges of making false statements and obstructing a congressional investigation, which he denies. Trump has feuded with Comey since the Russia investigation, which examined possible ties between Trump’s 2016 election campaign and Moscow.
The Justice Department has also launched investigations into US Senator Adam Schiff and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. Schiff and Cook have not been charged, and both reject any suggestion of wrongdoing.
A 10-second bit by ABC comedian Jimmy Kimmel plunged Walt Disney Co. into a full-blown crisis that rippled across America.
President Trump, the Federal Communications Commission chief and others were angered this month over Kimmel’s remarks about the Charlie Kirk shooting, which they said had suggested the suspect was a “Make America Great Again” Republican. Kimmel asserted Trump supporters were “trying to score political points” from the tragedy.
TV station groups pulled the program and Disney benched the comedian, sparking a bigger backlash. Protesters lit into the Mouse House for seemingly kowtowing to the Trump administration, consumers canceled Disney+ and Hulu subscriptions and more than 400 celebrities, including Tom Hanks, Jamie Lee Curtis and Lin-Manuel Miranda, signed a letter calling for a defense of free speech. Some investors bailed, briefly erasing nearly $4 billion in corporate market value.
Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger and his team turned the tide last week when they returned Kimmel to his late-night perch.
“This [situation] isn’t going away anytime soon,” Nien-hê Hsieh, a Harvard Business School professor, said in an interview. “How it is managed certainly matters a lot.”
The Kimmel controversy exposed cracks at the Burbank company that has long meticulously managed its image. It also highlighted the fraught environment facing Disney’s next leader during a period of significant challenges for the entertainment juggernaut.
“Succession is difficult for any company — the stakes are high,” Hsieh said. “But Disney also is kind of a lightning rod that attracts criticism because of its brand and its prevalence and prominence.”
Iger, 74, is retiring for a second time in late 2026, when his contract expires. Within a few months, Disney’s board is expected to name a replacement — a pivotal decision for a company that has long struggled with succession.
Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger is expected to retire at the end of 2026 after nearly 20 years leading the Burbank entertainment giant.
(Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)
Four internal candidates are vying for the job, including Dana Walden, co-chairman of Disney Entertainment, who oversees television and streaming and managed the Kimmel crisis with Iger.
Also in the CEO mix are ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro; and Disney Entertainment Co-Chairman Alan Bergman, who oversees movies, including the Marvel, Pixar and Star Wars franchises, and, in concert with Walden, entertainment streaming services.
“The next leader needs to be very attuned to how the company is perceived and valued by its customers and clients,” Hsieh said. “This is a moment for people to be very clear about their values.”
Disney’s values were questioned by many after the decision to yank Kimmel from the air.
As protesters buzzed around Disney’s Burbank headquarters and Kimmel’s darkened theater on Hollywood Boulevard, the voice of the company’s former chief rang out.
“Where has all the leadership gone?” Michael Eisner asked in a stinging Sept. 19 social media post. “If not for university presidents, law firm managing partners, and corporate chief executives standing up against bullies, who then will step up for the first amendment?”
Disney hadn’t formally addressed the situation. The only public message was a terse ABC statement on Sept. 17 — minutes after Iger and Walden moved to suspend the show: “ ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live’ will be pre-empted indefinitely.”
Kimmel was furious. It was about an hour to showtime and his studio audience was queued up outside the El Capitan Entertainment Centre. He had intended to clarify his words that night.
But Walden and Iger were worried the comedian was dug in, and his planned remarks would only inflame the situation.
Disney’s move to bench Jimmy Kimmel prompted protests, including days of demonstrations outside the El Capitan Entertainment Centre, where “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” is taped.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
What was initially viewed by Disney executives as a social media storm — vitriol from Trump supporters — had morphed into an existential threat for ABC when Carr, the FCC chairman, threatened to go after station licenses.
Nexstar pulled Kimmel’s program, followed by the politically conservative Sinclair Broadcast Group. The two companies own stations that provide 22% of ABC’s coverage.
Protesters called for a Disney boycott this month outside the darkened stage of ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ The comedian returned Sept. 23.
(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)
ABC’s ambiguous seven-word statement suggested to many that Kimmel wasn’t returning.
“Great News for America: The ratings challenged Jimmy Kimmel Show is CANCELLED,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform that night. “Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done.”
Disney executives privately said they were simply hitting pause. ABC executives and talent were getting death threats, according to one insider who was not authorized to discuss the situation. Later, in Sacramento, a gunman fired three shots into the lobby of an ABC-affiliated station. No one was injured.
But Disney’s initial response was roundly criticized for being weak, an abdication of the 1st Amendment. “To surrender our right to speak freely is to accept that those in power, not the people, will set the boundaries of debate that define a free society,” Anna M. Gomez, the sole Democrat FCC commissioner,said in a statement.
Executives defended the ABC statement, noting that anything Disney had said at that moment could have exacerbated its troubles with the FCC and station groups. One insider added that company also needed time to weigh whether it was worth bringing back the show.
Iger and Walden held a Sunday sit-down with Kimmel on Sept. 21 to clear the air. The following day, Disney announced his show would return.
“It wasn’t a reaction to any regulatory threats or political threats — it was an editorial decision because we felt the comments were ill-timed and, thus, insensitive given the topic,” Horacio Gutierrez, Disney’s chief legal and compliance officer, said in an interview Monday. “We felt our responsibility was to avoid further inflaming the situation during a very delicate and emotional time for the nation and that couldn’t be achieved in the heat of the moment.”
Gutierrez said narratives about Disney’s motives were inaccurate.
“The guidance we were given by Bob as we were thinking this through was to do the right thing, and that’s what we did in both preempting the show and in putting it back on the air,” he said. “Other people can comment about what they would have done or said … but the reality is the action of the company speaks louder than any words.”
Brian Frons, a former senior ABC executive and a UCLA Anderson School professor, said the way the crisis was handled reflected Iger’s measured leadership style.
“This situation could have turned into a firefight with the [Trump] administration — a direct confrontation,” Frons said. “It could have been Florida-Chapek all over again.”
Disney’s last major public relations debacle was in early 2022, when former Disney CEO Bob Chapek tumbled into a political quagmire with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
Disney belatedly opposed a Florida law banning school conversations about sexual orientation, the so-called Don’t Say Gay bill, prompting DeSantis to retaliate with a takeover of a Central Florida land-use board overseeing development around Walt Disney World.
Chapek’s shaky handling of the Florida dispute, which led conservatives to declare the company had become “woke,” was among the reasons Disney board’s fired him in November 2022, returning Iger to the top job.
Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger (left) and Bob Chapek (right) who served 2 1/2 years as chief executive. Chapek was removed in November 2022 to make way for Iger’s return.
(Business Wire)
Chapek had been Iger’s hand-picked successor but lasted in the job just 2½ years as pandemic dealt a crushing blow to theme parks, movie theaters and sporting events.
“In our instant-response culture, we want managers to have an immediate response and confrontation,” Frons said. “Sometimes, the instant solution might not be the best one.”
The Kimmel crisis and Chapek’s stormy tenure hover over succession.
Disney’s Achilles’ heel has long been its leadership handoffs. Over the years, Iger postponed several planned retirements, prompting at least one prospective successor, Tom Staggs, to exit the company in frustration.
The switch to Iger from Eisner 20 years ago was even more tumultuous, a move made to tamp down a shareholder revolt.
Before Iger was in the wings, Eisner recruited Creative Arts Agency co-founder Michael Ovitz — a debacle that ended in a court battle and a $140-million Disney payout.
Walt Disney Co. Chairman James P. Gorman is the former chief executive of Morgan Stanley.
(China News Service / China News Service via Getty Images)
Last year, Disney turned to James P. Gorman, Morgan Stanley’s former executive chairman, to oversee the succession process amid past criticism that some board members were too deferential to Iger. (A source close to the company disputed that characterization.)
Gorman became chairman of Disney’s board in January. He’s credited with orchestrating a smooth transition at the bank where he served as CEO for 14 years.
Disney’s board has said it would consider internal and outside candidates when determining who’s best equipped to lead the $206-billion company.
Walden was viewed as the early favorite, but some believe that Trump’s election last November might have changed that. The 60-year-old television executive has long been supportive of Democrat causes and is a friend of former Vice President Kamala Harris.
Walden joined Disney in 2019 after Disney swallowed Rupert Murdoch’s Fox entertainment properties, including the Fox television and movie studios and a controlling stake in Hulu. She oversees ABC, ABC News, Disney Channel, National Geographic and, with Bergman, the streaming services.
It’s not clear whether the Kimmel controversy helped or hurt her chances. By the end of last week, both Nexstar and Sinclair had abandoned their boycotts, returning the show to their ABC-affiliated stations.
“If this situation holds, Dana may have proved herself as a very effective crisis manager,” Frons said.
Clockwise from top left: Alan Bergman, Josh D’Amaro, Dana Walden and Jimmy Pitaro.
(Evan Agostini, Chris Pizzello and Richard Shotwell / Invision via AP)
D’Amaro, the parks and experiences chief, is thought to have an edge. Neither Disney nor the board have signaled that there is a front-runner.
The 54-year-old executive runs Disney’s biggest and most prosperous unit — theme parks, resorts, cruise lines and experiences, including video games. D’Amaro is an architect of Disney’s $60-billion campaign to expand and revitalize its parks and resorts and double the number of cruise ships.
The charismatic D’Amaro brims with enthusiasm for Disney where he’s spent most of his adult life — more than 27 years.
Bergman, 59, is a savvy executive who runs Disney’s film studios, its major creative franchises, as well as theatrical and streaming releases and marketing. He oversees Disney Music Group and its Broadway show unit.
And Pitaro, the Connecticut-based ESPN chief, has helped lead Disney’s push to streaming as the once lucrative cable business has contracted. The 56-year-old executive, a former consumer products and Yahoo executive, has managed Disney’s dealings with the NFL, NBA and Major League Baseball.
Some worry that none of the candidates will match Iger’s skills.
“This idea that you’re going to replace the CEO — a person who is at the height of their power — with somebody in a similar place is pretty hard,” Frons said. “Instead, you have to ask: Who is the person who can best position Disney for the future in all the businesses that are important today and might be important in the future?”
Political analyst Matthew Dowd lost his contributor role at MSNBC because of comments he made about Charlie Kirk after the young right-wing activist was murdered Wednesday.
Shortly after Kirk was shot to death while speaking on stage at Utah Valley State University, Dowd told MSNBC anchor Katy Tur that “hateful thoughts lead to hateful words which then lead to hateful actions.”
The angry reaction on social media was immediate after Dowd’s comments suggested that Kirk’s history of incendiary remarks led to the shooting.
MSNBC President Rebecca Kutler issued an apology Wednesday night.
“During our breaking news coverage of the shooting of Charlie Kirk, Matthew Dowd made comments that were inappropriate, insensitive, and unacceptable,” Kutler said in a statement. “There is no place for violence in America, political or otherwise.”
The network then severed ties with Dowd, according to a person briefed on the decision who was not authorized to comment.
“My thoughts and prayers are with the family and friends of Charlie Kirk,” Dowd later wrote on his Bluesky account. “I was asked a question on the environment we are in. I apologize for my tone and words. Let me be clear, I in no way intended for my comments to blame Kirk for this horrendous attack.”
Dowd is a political consultant who served as the chief strategist for George W. Bush’s successful 2004 presidential reelection campaign. Dowd broke away from the Republican party due to his unhappiness with Bush’s handling of the Iraq war.
Dowd previously served as a political analyst for ABC News.
WASHINGTON — A federal magistrate judge on Thursday angrily accused Justice Department prosecutors of trampling on the civil rights of people arrested during President Trump’s law enforcement surge in the nation’s capital.
Judge Zia Faruqui, a former federal prosecutor, said leaders of U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro’s office have tarnished its reputation with how they are handling the deluge of cases. He said Pirro’s office is routinely bringing cases that don’t belong in federal court and needlessly keeping people in jail for days while they evaluate charges.
“It’s not fair to say they’re losing credibility. We’re past that now,” Faruqui said. He later added, “There’s no credibility left.”
The judge lambasted Pirro’s office during a hearing at which he agreed to dismiss the federal case against a man accused of threatening to kill Trump while in police custody. The defendant, Edward Alexander Dana, spent more than a week in jail before a federal grand jury refused to indict him.
It is extraordinarily rare for a grand jury to balk at returning an indictment, but it has happened at least seven times in five cases since Trump’s surge started nearly a month ago. Faruqui said it is ironic that an occupying force is at the mercy of the occupants” serving on the grand juries.
Pirro has been critical of Faruqui, one of four magistrates at the district court in Washington. On Thursday, the top federal prosecutor for Washington responded to Faruqui’s latest remarks by saying the judge “has repeatedly indicated his allegiance to those who violate the law and carry illegal guns.”
“This judge took an oath to follow the law, yet he has allowed his politics to consistently cloud his judgment and his requirement to follow the law,” she said in a statement. “America voted for safe communities, law and order, and this judge is the antithesis of that.”
Faruqui said there is no precedent for what is happening at the courthouse over the last few weeks. He said Trump administration officials are frequently touting the arrest figures on social media with seemingly no regard for how the arrests are affecting people’s lives.
“Where are the stats on the people illegally detained?” he asked.
Assistant U.S. Atty. Conor Mulroe said prosecutors from Pirro’s office are working around the clock on the influx of new cases.
“You are busy because you all have created this mess,” he told Mulroe. “I’m not saying it’s your problem. It’s your office’s problem.”
Mulroe was the only representative of Pirro’s office who attended Thursday’s hearing. Faruqui questioned why Pirro or her top deputies “don’t have the dignity to come here” and defend their charging decisions.
“That’s what leaders do,” he said.
The White House says over 1,800 people have been arrested since the operation started Aug. 7. Over 40 cases have been filed in district court, which hears the most serious federal offenses, including assault, gun and drug charges.
Dana was jailed for about a week after his arrest on Aug. 17. A different judge ordered his release on Aug. 25. On Thursday, Pirro’s office opted to drop the federal case against Dana but charge him with misdemeanors, including destruction of property and attempted threats, in D.C. Superior Court.
Dana’s attorney, assistant federal public defender Elizabeth Mullin, said prosecutors should have known that this case didn’t belong in federal court.
“A 15-year-old would know,” she said. “It was obvious from the outset.”
Dana was arrested on suspicion of damaging a light fixture at a restaurant. An officer was driving Dana to a police station when he threatened to kill Trump, according to a Secret Service agent’s affidavit. Dana also told police that he was intoxicated that night. Mullin said Dana’s “hyperbolic rambling” didn’t amount to a criminal threat.
Faruqui ordered prosecutors to file a brief explaining why they didn’t immediately inform him of its charging decisions in Dana’s case. The judge apologized to Dana “on behalf of the court” and suggested that Pirro’s office also owes Dana an apology.
Pirro said in an earlier statement that a grand jury’s refusal to indict somebody for threatening to kill the president “is the essence of a politicized jury.”
“The system here is broken on many levels,” she said. “Instead of the outrage that should be engendered by a specific threat to kill the president, the grand jury in D.C. refuses to even let the judicial process begin. Justice should not depend on politics.”
Aug. 3 (UPI) — The Iranian government announced Sunday that it had formed a new National Defense Council for handling the country’s affairs in wartime.
The Iranian government said that the council also aims to review defense plans and centralize military decision-making.
The new council will be chaired by President Masoud Pezeshkian and will include the heads of the Iranian Armed Forces and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, among other ministries, according to the pro-Iranian political blogger Middle East Spectator.
In another article, the Tasnim News Agency likened the structure and purpose of the new council to that of the United States’ National Security Council, noting that the American agency “plays a coordination in national security and defense policymaking.”
The move comes in the aftermath of the 12-day war between Iran and Israel earlier this year, which marked one of the most direct and intense confrontations between the two nations in decades.
Although both sides claimed victory, Iran emerged from the conflict with significant military and economic setbacks. Israeli strikes reportedly damaged key air defense systems, missile infrastructure, and IRGC command centers in western Iran.
Meanwhile, Iran’s retaliatory attacks failed to breach Israeli missile defenses in a meaningful way, highlighting vulnerabilities in Iran’s conventional military capabilities.
Since the conflict, Iran has faced renewed domestic pressure as its economy, which is already strained by international sanctions. The Iranian leadership has focused on consolidating internal power structures, streamlining military command, and projecting efforts of international diplomacy with other Muslim nations.
Iranian Army Maj. Gen. Amir Hatami said Sunday that Iran believes threats from Israel are not over and that it had only witnessed a glimpse of its rival’s “brutality.”
United States Attorney General Pam Bondi has emerged as one of the most embattled top officials in the administration of United States President Donald Trump, amid fallout over her handling of disclosures related to the sex trafficking case of billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Trump has so far stood by Bondi, who has been instrumental in his reshaping of the Department of Justice, but the president has continued to voice frustration that public fixation on the scandal – and criticism from both within his base and among his opponents – has refused to die down.
Democrats have adopted the issue as their latest political cudgel, while Republicans in Congress have promised to continue their own probe when they return from summer recess, with plans to hear testimony from Bondi, as well as subpoena the case files and testimony from Epstein confidant Ghislaine Maxwell.
Two lawmakers are even pushing a bill that would compel Bondi to release the documents in question, a move Republican Thomas Massie has said is aimed at “justice for the victims and transparency for Americans”.
So who is Bondi and how did the 59-year-old attorney general come to be one of Trump’s most loyal cabinet members?
What did Bondi do before becoming attorney general?
Bondi spent 18 years as a public prosecutor in Hillsborough County, Florida before breaking into statewide office.
The lengthy career gave her more direct prosecutorial experience than any preceding US attorney general, according to the Heritage Foundation, the conservative group that has had an outsized role in shaping the policy of Trump’s second term.
Speaking last year to the Tampa Bay Times, former colleagues recounted Bondi’s reputation for jury-turning charisma that saw her quickly rise through the ranks of felony prosecutions.
But it was regular media appearances as a legal analyst on national news networks that helped her to build public recognition, which was credited with her victory in Florida’s open attorney general race in 2010. Bondi, who took office in 2011, was also buoyed by the endorsement of former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
As attorney general, Bondi led crusades against so-called “pill mills”, clinics that loosely prescribe pain medications, while leading some Republican pet causes, including a multi-state effort to overturn former President Barack Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act.
She also led efforts to uphold Florida’s ban on same sex marriage, before its nationwide legalisation by Supreme Court order in 2015, as well as the ability for same sex couples to adopt.
During that period, Bondi sought to establish herself as a champion against sex trafficking and child sex abuse, launching the state’s council on human trafficking and an investigation into past abuse by Catholic priests.
As Florida’s top cop, she also had her first brush with Epstein, with critics accusing her of remaining willfully silent on a controversial non-prosecution agreement Epstein and his co-conspirators had struck with her predecessor.
They have said Bondi could have intervened as victims launched lawsuits challenging the deal, which saw Epstein plead guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution but serve only months in prison.
“But Bondi kept her distance from the state’s most prominent sex-trafficking case, even as Epstein’s victims pleaded with the courts to invalidate provisions of his non-prosecution agreement and filed lawsuits alleging he abused them when he was on work release from jail,” wrote Mary Ellen Klas, a Bloomberg opinion writer and former Miami Herald Bureau Chief.
“Her inaction helped to perpetuate what victims describe as a government cover-up that, along with Epstein’s death, has robbed those victims of their chance to get answers and hold their abusers to account,” she wrote.
Then-Florida attorney general Pam Bondi, right, speaks as Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, centre, and his wife Ann, left, look on during a campaign rally, Sunday, October 7, 2012, in Port St Lucie, Florida [Lynne Sladky/AP Photo]
How did Bondi enter Trump’s orbit?
Bondi’s connections with Trump drew scrutiny even before he entered office, after it was revealed in 2016 that authorities had launched an ethics probe related to the soon-to-be president. At question was whether Bondi had solicited contributions from Trump in 2013, as her office was weighing joining a lawsuit against Trump University.
Her office denied any wrongdoing, and the investigation was later dropped.
Despite those early contacts, Bondi was not an early adherent to Trump’s presidential ambitions or his nascent “Make America Great Again” movement.
Instead, she initially supported former Florida Governor Jeb Bush in the 2016 Republican primary. When Jeb dropped out of the race, she threw her lot in with Trump. From there, things accelerated quickly.
While still Florida’s attorney general, Bondi served on Trump’s first White House transition team. She left her post in Florida in 2019 and soon joined the Ballard Lobbyist group, representing the interests of Amazon, General Motors, and Uber, among others.
From there, she joined the White House legal team, defending the president during his first impeachment trial in the US Senate, in which Trump was accused of conditioning weapons to Ukraine in exchange for dirt on then political opponent Biden.
After Trump’s election loss, Bondi was among those spearheading unfounded claims that the vote was marred by widespread fraud. She helped coordinate former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s infamous news conference at the Four Seasons Landscaping in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where she flatly and falsely claimed that Trump had “won Pennsylvania”.
She went on to chair the America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a pro-Trump think tank that oversaw “a series of concerning lawsuits in recent years, particularly in the voting rights and elections arena”, as described by the Brennan Center for Justice. Publicly, she also floated prosecuting career federal law enforcement officials who investigated Trump.
In criticising her appointment, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee in January said that Bondi had “the ultimate qualification” to be Trump’s attorney general: “loyalty”.
Bondi’s tenure at the Justice Department
That loyalty has generated much consternation since Bondi took office, with opponents accusing her of shaping the country’s top law enforcement agency in Trump’s likeness.
That has included hundreds of layoffs at the department, including investigators and prosecutors in the two federal criminal cases lodged against Trump before his November election victory last year.
She has also launched a task force to probe those investigations, while publicly decrying what she has framed as a conspiracy against Trump amid the career staff, saying the staff of the FBI and Justice Department were rife with employees “who despise Donald Trump, despise us”, as she told Fox News.
More recently, she launched a strike force to investigate how the intelligence community, under former President Obama, handled information related to Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, in what some have seen as an attempt to distract from the Epstein imbroglio.
Attorney General Pam Bondi speaks at a news conference at the Drug Enforcement Administration, Tuesday, July 15, 2025, in Arlington, Virginia [Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo]
She has also announced a misconduct complaint against federal Judge James Boasberg, escalating a standoff over judges who have ruled against Trump’s early actions, most notably his use of the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport alleged Venezuelan gang members with little requirement for proof.
But it was Bondi’s embrace of theories pushed by Trump’s staunchest supporters that has landed her in the current predicament. In February, she brazenly told Fox News that she had Epstein’s long-sought “client list” – thought to contain the names of the powerful figures the billionaire blackmailed via his sex scheme – “sitting on my desk right now”.
Months later, the White House would say Bondi was referring to the entirety of Epstein’s case files, and not specifically the list long sought by MAGA’s most influential voices.
That came shortly after the Justice Department in July released a memo, stating flatly: “This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list’”.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department on Monday filed a misconduct complaint against the federal judge who has clashed with President Trump’s administration over deportations to a notorious prison in El Salvador.
Escalating the administration’s conflict with U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said on social media that she directed the filing of the complaint against Boasberg “for making improper public comments about President Trump and his administration.”
The complaint stems from remarks Boasberg allegedly made in March to Chief Justice John Roberts and other federal judges saying the administration would trigger a constitutional crisis by disregarding federal court rulings, according to a copy of the complaint obtained by the Associated Press.
The comments “have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,” the complaint says, adding that the administration has “always complied with all court orders.” Boasberg is among several judges who have questioned whether the administration has complied with their orders.
The meeting took place days before Boasberg issued an order blocking deportation flights that Trump was carrying out by invoking wartime authorities from an 18th century law.
The judge’s verbal order to turn around planes that were on the way to El Salvador was ignored. Boasberg has since found probable cause that the administration committed contempt of court.
The comments were supposedly made during a meeting of the Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary’s governing body. The remarks were first reported by the conservative website The Federalist, which said it obtained a memo summarizing the meeting.
Boasberg, the chief judge in the district court in the nation’s capital, is a member of the Judicial Conference. Its meetings are not public.
The complaint calls for an investigation, the reassignment of the deportations case to another judge while the inquiry is ongoing and sanctions, including the possible recommendation of impeachment, if the investigation substantiates the allegations.
Trump himself already has called for Boasberg’s impeachment, which in turn prompted a rare response from Roberts rejecting the call.
The complaint was filed with Judge Sri Srinivasan, chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
More than 250 Venezuelans who were deported to a Salvadoran mega-prison known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, were sent home to Venezuela earlier this month in a deal that also free 10 U.S. citizens and permanent residents who had been held by Venezuela.
But the lawsuit over the deportations and the administration’s response to Boasberg’s order remains in his court.
WASHINGTON — Eric Hildenbrand has noticed prices continue to rise this year with President Trump in the White House.
The San Diego resident doesn’t blame Trump, however, his choice for president in 2024, but says Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democrats who control the state are at fault.
“You can’t compare California with the rest of the country,” said Hildenbrand, 76. “I don’t know what’s going on in the rest of the country. It seems like prices are dropping. Things are getting better, but I don’t necessarily see it here.”
Voters like Hildenbrand, whose support of the Republican president is unwavering, help explain Trump’s polling numbers and how they have differed from other presidents’ polling trajectory in significant ways. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in March found that 42% of U.S. adults approved of Trump’s job performance. That is a lower rating than those of other recent presidents at the beginning of their second terms, including Democrat Barack Obama and Republican George W. Bush.
The most recent AP-NORC poll, from July, puts Trump at 40% approval. While that is not a meaningful change from March, there is some evidence that Trump’s support may be softening, at least on the margins. The July poll showed a slight decrease in approval of his handling of immigration since earlier in the year. Some other pollsters, such as Gallup, show a downward slide in overall approval since slightly earlier in his term, in January.
But even those shifts are within a relatively narrow range, which is typical for Trump. The new AP-NORC polling tracker shows that Trump’s favorability rating has remained largely steady since the end of his first term, with between 33% and 43% of U.S. adults saying they viewed him favorably across more than five years.
Those long-term trends underscore that Trump has many steadfast opponents. But loyal supporters also help explain why views of the president are hard to change even as he pursues policies that most Americans do not support, using an approach that many find abrasive.
Persistently low approval numbers
Trump has not had a traditional honeymoon period in his second term. He did not in his first, either.
An AP-NORC poll conducted in March 2017, two months into his first term, showed that 42% of Americans “somewhat” or “strongly” approved of his performance. That is largely where his approval rating stayed over the course of the next four years.
The recent slippage on immigration is particularly significant because that issue was a major strength for Trump in the 2024 election. Earlier in his second term, it was also one of the few areas where he was outperforming his overall approval. In March, about half of U.S. adults approved of his handling of immigration. But the July AP-NORC poll found his approval on immigration at 43%, in line with his overall approval rating.
Other recent polls show growing discontent with Trump’s approach on immigration. A CNN/SSRS poll found that 55% of U.S. adults say the president has gone too far when it comes to deporting immigrants who are living in the United States illegally, an increase of 10 percentage points since February.
“I understand wanting to get rid of illegal immigrants, but the way that’s being done is very aggressive,” said Donovan Baldwin, 18, of Asheboro, N.C., who did not vote in the 2024 election. “And that’s why people are protesting, because it comes off as aggression. It’s not right.”
Ratings of Trump’s handling of the economy, which were more positive during his first term, have been persistently negative in his second term. The July poll found that few Americans think Trump’s policies have benefited them so far.
Even if he is not a fan of everything Trump has done so far, Brian Nichols, 58, of Albuquerque is giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Nichols, who voted for Trump in 2024, likes what he is seeing from the president overall, though he has his concerns both on style and substance, particularly Trump’s social media presence and his on-again, off-again tariffs. Nichols also does not like the push to eliminate federal agencies such as the Education Department.
Despite his occasional disagreements with Trump, though, Nichols said he wants to give the president space to do his job, and he trusts the House and Senate, now run by Republicans, to act as a safeguard.
“We put him into office for a reason, and we should be trusting that he’s doing the job for the best of America,” Nichols said.
Overall views are steady
Trump has spent the last six months pushing far-reaching and often unpopular policies. Earlier this year, Americans were bracing themselves for higher prices as a result of his approach to tariffs. The July poll found that most people think Trump’s tax and spending bill will benefit the wealthy, while few think it will pay dividends for the middle class or people like them.
Discomfort with individual policies may not translate into wholesale changes in views of Trump, though. Those have largely been constant through years of turmoil, with his favorability rating staying within a 10-percentage point range through his widely panned handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, a felony conviction and an attempted assassination.
To some of his supporters, the benefits of his presidency far outweigh the costs.
Kim Schultz, 62, of Springhill, Fla., said she is thrilled with just about everything Trump is doing as president, particularly his aggressive moves to deport anyone living in the country illegally.
Even if Trump’s tariffs eventually take effect and push prices up, she said she will not be alarmed.
“I’ve always had the opinion that if the tariffs are going to cost me a little bit more here and there, I don’t have a problem with that,” she said.
Across the country, Hildenbrand dislikes Trump’s personality and his penchant for insults, including those directed at foreign leaders. But he thinks Trump is making things happen.
“More or less, to me, he’s showing that he’s on the right track,” he said. “I’m not in favor of Trump’s personality, but I am in favor of what he’s getting done.”
Thomson-Deveaux and Cooper write for the Associated Press and reported from Washington and Phoenix, respectively.
NEW YORK — President Trump is lashing out at his own supporters as he tries to clamp down on criticism over his administration’s handling of much-hyped records in the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation, which Trump now calls a “Hoax.”
“Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this “bull——,” hook, line, and sinker,” Trump wrote Wednesday on his Truth Social site, using an expletive in his post. “They haven’t learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years.”
“Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats work, don’t even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don’t want their support anymore! Thank you for your attention to this matter,” he went on.
The rhetoric marks a dramatic escalation for the Republican president, who has broken with some of his most loyal backers in the past, but never with such fervor.
The schism centers on his administration’s handling of the Epstein, who was found dead in his New York jail cell in August 2019, weeks after his arrest on sex trafficking charges. Last week, the Justice Department and the FBI acknowledged that Epstein did not maintain a “client list” to whom underage girls were trafficked, and they said no more files related to the investigation would be made public, despite past promises from Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi that had raised the expectations of conservative influencers and conspiracy theorists.
Bondi had suggested in February such a document was sitting on her desk waiting for review. Last week, however, she said she had been referring generally to the Epstein case file, not a client list.
“It’s a new administration and everything is going to come out to the public,” she had said at one point.
Trump has since defended Bondi and chided a reporter for asking about the documents.
“I don’t understand what the interest or what the fascination is,” he said Tuesday.
The blowup comes after Trump and many figures in his administration, including FBI Director Kash Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, have spent years stoking dark and disproved conspiracy theories, including embracing QAnon-tinged propaganda that casts Trump as a savior sent to demolish the “deep state.”
Trump’s comments so far have not been enough to quell those who are still demanding answers.
“For this to go away, you’re going to lose 10%” of the “Make America Great Again” movement, former adviser and Steve Bannon said during a gathering of young conservatives recently.
Far-right commentator Jack Posobiec has said he will not rest “until we go full Jan. 6 committee on the Jeffrey Epstein files.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., also appeared to break with Trump, calling for the Justice Department to “put everything out there and let the people decide.”
“The White House and the White House team are privy to facts that I don’t know. This isn’t my lane. I haven’t been involved in that, but I agree with the sentiment to put it out there,” Johnson told conservative podcaster Benny Johnson.
Wendy McMahon is stepping down as from her role as president of CBS News and Stations, indicating her disagreement with the parent company’s handling of President Trump’s lawsuit against “60 Minutes.”
“It’s become clear that the company and I do not agree on the path forward,” McMahon said in a note sent to CBS News staff Monday. “It’s time for me to move on and for this organization to move forward with new leadership.”
McMahon has been firm in her position that CBS News parent Paramount Global should not settle the $20-billion suit from Trump, which claims an October interview with his 2024 opponent Vice President Kamala Harris was deceptively edited to help her presidential campaign.
The lawsuit is an obstacle to Paramount Global’s proposed $8-billion sale to Skydance Media. The case has gone to a mediator.
McMahon’s departure is a sign that a settlement may be close.
With McMahon’s exit, CBS News President Tom Cibrowski and CBS Stations President Jennifer Mitchell will each report directly to CBS Chief Executive George Cheeks.
McMahon joined CBS in 2021. She oversaw the company’s syndication division and TV stations as well as CBS News.
Cheeks brought McMahon to the company from Walt Disney Co., where she led the ABC station group. At the time, Cheeks was trying to clean up its stations division, which was plagued by management issues and the firing of its former head, Peter Dunn.
Since then, McMahon rose to be one of Cheeks’ most trusted lieutenants, taking over CBS News. But she irked Paramount’s controlling shareholder, Shari Redstone, over CBS News coverage of the Israel-Hamas war.
Times staff writer Meg James contributed to this report.
