Politics
Trump fires Pam Bondi after tumultuous 14-month term as attorney general
WASHINGTON — President Trump fired Pam Bondi as attorney general on Thursday, ending a tumultuous 14-month tenure marked by mass firings of career prosecutors, a bungled handling of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking investigation and a string of investigations into the president’s political foes, including prominent California Democrats.
Trump announced the ouster of the former Florida attorney general in a Truth Social post, praising her as a “Great American Patriot.” It caps months of controversy surrounding Bondi’s leadership, which critics called an unprecedented assault on the independence of the nation’s top law enforcement agency.
Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal criminal defense attorney, will serve as acting attorney general until a permanent replacement is named. Blanche, like Bondi, has been a loyal backer of Trump while at the Justice Department.
Blanche has denounced past criminal cases against Trump as baseless and politically motivated, even while championing new criminal cases against Trump’s own political opponents. He has also echoed Trump’s sharp criticisms of the federal judiciary, declaring the Justice Department is at “war” with a cadre of “rogue activist judges.”
Bondi’s dismissal quickly drew sharp reactions from California Democrats, including Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) and Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), two lawmakers who put immense legislative pressure on Bondi to release the Epstein files and accused her of overseeing a “cover-up.”
In separate statements, Garcia and Khanna said that Bondi remains legally obligated to appear before the House Oversight Committee and testify under oath about what they called a “botched” handling of the Epstein investigation.
“Even though she was fired, she must still answer to Congress about the remaining documents, why we have no new prosecutions, and why she participated in a cover-up,” Khanna said.
News outlets pointed to multiple reasons for Trump’s decision to fire Bondi.
Some reported that it had to do with Trump’s ire over Bondi’s handling of the Epstein files. After Congress passed a law forcing their release, Bondi presided over that release — amid criticisms she was slow-walking it, withholding certain records and overly redacting others.
Garcia, the ranking Democrat on the committee, wrote on X that Bondi and Trump “may think her firing gets her out of testifying to the Oversight Committee,” which she is meant to do April 14, but they “are wrong — and we look forward to hearing from her under oath.”
However, that was in question.
“Since Pam Bondi is no longer attorney general, Chairman Comer will speak with Republican members and the Department of Justice about the status of the deposition subpoena and confer on next steps,” a committee spokeswoman said Thursday, referring to Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.).
The announcement led some to question whether Bondi’s ouster was in part an effort by the White House to keep her from testifying.
Others reported Trump was peeved at her for tipping off Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) that the Justice Department was considering releasing documents from a years-old investigation into his relationship with a suspected Chinese intelligence operative named Christine Fang, or Fang Fang.
Swalwell, a leading California gubernatorial candidate, was not the target of that investigation and cut ties with Fang in 2015 after U.S. intelligence officials briefed him and other members of Congress about Chinese efforts to infiltrate Congress. Swalwell has denied any wrongdoing in the matter, and a release of records from that investigation now would be unusual.
Still other outlets reported that a key factor in Trump’s decision to fire Bondi was her failure to secure criminal indictments and convictions against various Trump political enemies who he has accused with little evidence of wrongdoing and has publicly pushed Bondi and other Justice Department officials to prosecute.
One of those targets is Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), whom Trump accused of committing mortgage fraud by characterizing multiple homes as his primary residence in years-old mortgage documents.
Schiff has denied any wrongdoing and accused Trump of targeting him for political reasons. Justice Department officials have also declined to bring any criminal charges against Schiff to date.
It’s unclear whether that would change under new leadership. Blanche has reportedly been involved in overseeing the Schiff investigation and butted heads with former Justice official Ed Martin, who had zealously investigated Schiff before being removed.
In an X post on Thursday, Schiff cheered Bondi’s ouster but said that she was “merely a symptom of Donald Trump’s chronic allergy to our nation’s laws,” that her being tossed aside “does not mitigate the need for her to answer for her conduct” as attorney general, and that Blanche “should expect to receive the same scrutiny.”
“Pam Bondi oversaw an unprecedented weaponization of the Justice Department that brought our nation’s rule of law to its knees,” Schiff wrote. “Countless and baseless political investigations, hundreds of career law enforcement professionals purged, a massive cover-up of the Epstein files, and a wholesale effort to turn the department into a criminal law firm representing the person of the president instead of the American people.”
Sen. Alex Padilla, a Los Angeles Democrat, said “good riddance” to Bondi in a post on X.
“Bondi dodged transparency on the Epstein files, tried to go after voter rolls to undermine elections, and weaponized the Justice Department against Trump’s enemies,” Padilla said. “Americans deserve accountability, not cover-ups and corruption.”
It was unclear Thursday how long Trump may leave Blanche in the top post. As deputy attorney general, he had a hand in many of the decisions as to the day-to-day operations of the department under Bondi — including on the handling of the Epstein files.
Blanche personally interviewed Epstein’s imprisoned former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, in a federal prison in Florida, where she was serving a 20-year term for helping Epstein sexually abuse young girls. During that interview, Maxwell said she never witnessed Trump in any “inappropriate setting.”
Blanche’s decision to personally interview Maxwell was highly unusual, given how high ranking he was in the Justice Department.
Within days of the interview, which was perceived in part as a ploy for clemency by Maxwell, she was moved to a minimum-security camp in Texas.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta has enlisted new allies in his legal battle to unravel Nexstar Media Group’s takeover of rival television station group Tegna Inc.
Late Thursday, Bonta announced that five additional states have joined his coalition that is suing to block the $6.2-billion merger. With the additional plaintiffs, the group of top state law enforcement officers has grown to 13 — and the campaign now is a bipartisan effort.
“Antitrust enforcement is not political — it’s about protecting working families and helping ensure the benefits of a vibrant economy are for everyone, not just well-connected corporations,” Bonta said in a statement. “We welcome our sister states into the fray and look forward to fighting alongside them.”
The new states are Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Vermont. They have joined existing the plaintiffs that represent the people of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, North Carolina, Oregon and Virginia.
Nexstar owns KTLA-TV Channel 5 in Los Angeles.
U.S. District Judge Troy Nunley two weeks ago granted a request by the attorneys general to issue a preliminary injunction halting the merger as the legal case proceeds. The proposed merger — which Nexstar rushed to complete despite opposition from the states — would create the nation’s largest broadcast station group with 265 television stations, up from 164 that Nexstar currently controls.
In dozens of markets, including San Diego and Sacramento, Nexstar would own multiple major TV network affiliates. That duplication has raised concerns about staff consolidations and widespread newsroom layoffs.
“State attorneys general nationwide understand just how important robust antitrust enforcement is to American life — and what a rotten deal this is for consumers, for workers, for affordability, and for our local news,” Bonta said.
El Segundo-based DirecTV separately filed a lawsuit to block the deal, saying the Nexstar-Tegna consolidation would harm their business by forcing DirecTV to pay significantly higher fees for the rights to carry their stations as part of its programming lineup.
A Nexstar representative was not immediately available for comment.
Nexstar contends the deal would strengthen TV station economics, allowing stations to bolster their news gathering and expand the number of newscasts. But DirecTV countered that in markets where Nexstar owns two stations, it relies on just one newsroom to program both channels.
Nexstar’s proposed purchase of Tegna would give the Irving, Texas-based Nexstar stations in 44 states covering 80% of the U.S. population.
The federal judge ruled there was sufficient merit in the antitrust arguments brought by Bonta and the others to pause Nexstar’s takeover of Tegna until a trial can be held to decide whether the merger is illegal.
“Nexstar must permit Tegna to continue operating as a separate and distinct, independently managed business unit from Nexstar,” Nunley wrote in his 52-page order on April 17. “And Nexstar must put measures in place to maintain Tegna as an ongoing, economically viable, and active competitor.”
The Justice Department on Thursday accused the Biden administration of pushing policies that were unfair to Christians, releasing a report that amounted to the latest rhetorical broadside by the Trump administration over what it calls the “weaponization” of government.
The 197-page document, released by a task force led by the department, sought to portray what President Trump’s advisers contend was anti-Christian bias among those who worked for President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is Roman Catholic. The report, which refers to decision-making at more than a dozen agencies, comes weeks after Mr. Trump publicly attacked the pope.
“The Biden administration’s policies regularly clashed with a Christian worldview and burdened traditional religious practices,” the report said. “These conflicts frequently arose over abortion, gender ideology, and sexual orientation.”
The document is the Justice Department’s latest effort to argue that it is removing purported political bias from the work of prosecutors. But critics say that the department under Mr. Trump has abandoned its tradition of operating independently from the White House, including by pursuing the president’s rivals, like James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, who was indicted this week for posting a photograph last year of seashells on a beach arranged to say “86 47.” The administration argues that the image was a coded threat to kill the president.
Earlier this month, the Justice Department issued a report accusing Biden-era prosecutors of unfairly pursuing anti-abortion activists through the use of a law that makes it a crime to obstruct or intimidate a person seeking abortion services or participating in a religious service at a house of worship. The Trump administration, in turn, has charged dozens of protesters, as well as the former CNN anchor Don Lemon, with violating the same law during a demonstration inside a church in St. Paul, Minn.
In a statement accompanying the release of Thursday’s report, Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, vowed that the department would “continue to expose bad actors who targeted Christians, and work tirelessly to restore religious liberty for all Americans of faith.”
The report sharply criticized a leaked internal memo from 2023 by the F.B.I.’s field office in Richmond, Va., that said far-right extremists could be attracted to Catholic churches or groups.
For decades, the F.B.I. has worked to develop sources at churches, universities and mosques, but the Richmond memo quickly became a talking point on the right. Republicans argued that it showed the bureau was targeting Catholics.
F.B.I. officials quickly withdrew the memo after it was leaked, and an internal investigation found no evidence of “malicious intent.” But the new report argues otherwise. The memo, the report asserts, stemmed from a “misplaced reliance on baseless allegations from the Southern Poverty Law Center and the religious affiliation of a single law enforcement target who happened to identify himself as a ‘radical traditional Catholic.’”
Earlier this month, the Justice Department charged the S.P.L.C. with fraud, accusing the group of paying informants inside hate groups not to fight racism and extremism, but to promote them. The group has denied the charges and called it a politically motivated prosecution.
The new report also criticized a memo issued in 2021 by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland in response to concerns raised by the National School Boards Association about purported threats to local education officials, as parents and teachers grappled with restrictions enacted during the coronavirus pandemic.
Mr. Garland’s memo ordered the creation of a task force of Justice Department prosecutors and F.B.I. investigators to use their “authority and resources to discourage these threats.”
That directive, however, raised significant internal concerns at the F.B.I. and Justice Department. One senior prosecutor warned that “the vast, vast majority of the behavior cited” by the National School Boards Association did not violate federal law.
“Almost all of the language being used is protected by the First Amendment,” the Justice Department lawyer warned shortly before the Garland memo was issued.
While the Trump administration report cites the Garland memo as an example of anti-Christian bias, the document leaves unclear how school board fights over masks, remote learning and safety in public schools constitute a religious issue.
Politics
House Republicans splinter over pesticide provision in farm bill as MAHA movement flexes its muscle
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A bipartisan group of House lawmakers moved Thursday to strip out a controversial pesticide provision from legislation setting U.S. farm and nutrition policy after Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., threatened to “slaughter” the legislation if her measure did not receive a floor vote.
Lawmakers voted 280 to 142 to approve Luna’s amendment, which removed language from the farm bill shielding pesticide manufacturers from legal liability.
The successful vote could be a sign of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement’s growing influence over congressional Republicans, who splintered over the issue. Leading MAHA advocates applied public pressure on Republicans to back the amendment, arguing that failing to do so would be a betrayal of the MAHA movement.
Seventy-three Republicans backed Luna’s measure, while 142 GOP lawmakers rejected it.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, a Republican from Florida, speaks to members of the media outside a House Republican Conference meeting at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 3, 2025. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg)
HOUSE CONSERVATIVES THREATEN EXTENDED SHUTDOWN OVER ELECTION INTEGRITY MEASURE
The provision that lawmakers struck would block lawsuits against pesticide companies for failing to disclose potential health risks as long as they are in compliance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations on labeling. States and localities would be barred from issuing pesticide labeling guidance that diverges from the EPA.
“I have a little boy, and the amount of articles I have seen on pesticides and herbicides popping up in children’s products (to include organic) is very bad,” Luna, a MAHA-aligned Republican, wrote on social media earlier this week. “On behalf of all the moms and dads that aren’t in office, I am not going to be bullied into supporting a bill that is providing protections and immunity to corporations that are responsible for giving children and adults cancer.”
Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, policy chair of the House Freedom Caucus, also endorsed Luna’s amendment, arguing it would “protect Americans from dangerous pesticides.”
Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, speaks to reporters after a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 20, 2025, during a government shutdown. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
‘LONG OVERDUE’: SENATE REPUBLICANS RAM THROUGH TRUMP’S CLAWBACK PACKAGE WITH CUTS TO FOREIGN AID, NPR
Republican critics, however, contended that Luna’s amendment would raise costs for consumers if the pesticide provision was stripped from the farm bill.
“If the EPA says the label is good, I don’t see why every state municipality should have to have another label that would simply raise the price for the American consumer,” Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., said in opposition to Luna’s measure.
“We’re not talking about the pesticide in the jug as has been misrepresented to the American citizens and especially the MAHA movement,” Scott continued. “We’re talking about just the label on the jug. There is no liability shield for the pesticide in the jug.
A farmworker wearing protective gear sprays pesticide in a field. (Andrew Holbrooke/Corbis via Getty Images)
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., also sharply criticized Luna’s measure.
“The arguments on the other side are pretty shallow, and they’re emotional,” Thompson said on the House floor. “They’re not science-based.”
Democrats also widely backed the effort to remove the pesticide provision from the bill.
“Put simply, this language puts chemical company profits over the health of Americans,” Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-Maine, said during debate on the House floor.
A woman holds a bottle of the weedkiller Roundup containing glyphosate in her garden in a staged scene. (Wolf von Dewitz/Picture Alliance)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The floor battle over the pesticide provision also comes as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week about whether pesticide manufacturers like Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, should be given legal preemption from failing to warn consumers that its weedkiller product Roundup could cause cancer.
The Trump administration sparked controversy among MAHA advocates earlier this year when it declared domestic production of glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup, a national security priority. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an influential MAHA voice, publicly defended the move despite railing against glyphosate for years.
Bayer has repeatedly maintained that its product is safe to use and has not been found to cause cancer.
-
Sports5 minutes agoFever star Caitlin Clark avoids serious injury after scary fall leads to early exit in preseason game
-
Technology11 minutes agoAre insurance apps watching you?
-
Business17 minutes agoCommentary: Resurrecting a discredited theory on COVID’s origin, DOJ indicts an ex-Fauci aide over old emails
-
Entertainment23 minutes agoJudge to Taylor Frankie Paul and Dakota Mortensen: ‘You two need to stay away from each other’
-
Lifestyle29 minutes agoMove over, Elsa. The hottest entertainers at L.A. kid parties are ‘KPop Demon Hunters’
-
Politics35 minutes ago
Legal battle to halt Nexstar-Tegna TV station merger expands with five new states
-
Science41 minutes agoKiara Brokenbrough went viral for her $500 wedding. She died the day her son was born
-
Sports47 minutes agoPrep sports roundup: Zion Phelps of Loyola proves he’s fastest in the Mission League