Category: Attack Law Enforcement

FBI Agent Fired for Defying Trump’s Perp Walk Order of Comey

An FBI agent has been relieved of duty for refusing to participate in a planned “perp walk” of former FBI Director James Comey, who was federally charged with false statements and obstruction. This action underscores President Donald Trump’s ongoing campaign against those he perceives as political enemies, and marks a notable escalation in his administration’s tactics.

Comey, who has consistently denied any wrongdoing, is set to appear in court in Alexandria, Virginia, after being charged on September 25. The preparations for a public display of his custody were reportedly orchestrated by senior FBI officials, although it’s unclear how or when they intended to execute the plan.

Trump’s vendetta against Comey began when he was fired in 2017, and since then, the former president has relentlessly attacked Comey’s integrity regarding the FBI’s Russia investigation into links between Trump’s campaign and Russian interference in the 2016 election. The indictment of Comey represents a significant move by Trump’s Justice Department, as it targets a prominent figure who has been a vocal opposition to the president’s methods.

The motivation behind this indictment and the push for a perp walk can be seen as part of Trump’s broader strategy of using the justice system to intimidate and undermine his adversaries, a tactic he has hinted at since his presidential campaign launched in 2015. This incident not only highlights Trump’s ongoing political retribution methods but also illustrates the lengths to which he will go to silence his critics.

An attorney for Comey has declined to comment on the case, leaving the motivations and implications of these charges open to interpretation. As Trump’s administration continues to seek retribution against critics like Comey, the dangers to democratic processes and standards of legal accountability are laid bare, revealing a troubling commitment to authoritarian tactics aimed at consolidating power.

DOJ Subpoenas Records from Fani Willis Following Trump Indictment

The Department of Justice has initiated an investigation into Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who was responsible for the election crimes case resulting in Donald Trump’s notable mugshot. This development arises in the wake of the recent indictment of former FBI Director James Comey, highlighting a potential targeting of Trump’s opponents by the DOJ under his administration. The DOJ has issued a subpoena for records related to Willis’s travel history during the fall of 2024, coinciding with last year’s election.

Despite allegations of Trump attempting to exert influence over the Attorney General to pursue a list of adversaries, his spokesperson has denied any intent to retaliate against investigators. The true motives behind the DOJ’s scrutiny of Willis remain ambiguous, particularly regarding whether she herself is a target of the investigation.

The grand jury proceedings, which are typically shrouded in secrecy, add another layer of complexity to this unfolding scenario. A federal grand jury has requested information that could reflect either the legality of Willis’s actions or possibly undermine her ongoing work in prosecuting Trump, who remains entangled in numerous legal challenges.

Meanwhile, Trump’s defense against the broader allegations is faltering, further complicated by internal conflicts within the DOJ where some prosecutors have questioned the validity of the charges against Comey. This interplay of legal maneuvers illustrates the contentious atmosphere surrounding Trump’s ongoing battles with law enforcement and government officials.

As these events progress, the relationship between Trump and the judiciary continues to be strained, raising serious questions about the integrity of prosecutorial decisions and the extent of political influence in legal matters. The scrutiny on Willis represents an alarming trend where the rule of law comes into question, particularly as it pertains to those opposing Trump’s agenda.

Trump’s Malicious Rant Against Comey Amid Forcing His DOJ To Prosecute Enemies

Amid a series of online tirades, President Donald Trump has escalated his attacks on former FBI Director James Comey following Comey’s recent indictment. Trump’s relentless criticism, deemed by many as self-defeating, could inadvertently arm Comey’s defense against what is perceived as political persecution. Observers note that Trump’s aggressive strategies may backfire, strengthening Comey’s argument of malicious prosecution.

In a display of inherent authoritarianism, Trump has pressured Attorney General Pam Bondi to pursue legal charges against his political enemies, including Comey. Following the indictment announcement, Trump expressed gratitude to the FBI for their “brilliant work” and labeled Comey as a “total SLIMEBALL,” reinforcing his narrative while simultaneously raising eyebrows about the propriety of such attacks.

Trump’s ongoing animosity toward Comey, framed as a corrupt actor in Trump’s worldview, reflects a broader strategy aimed at undermining his political rivals. By casting Comey in a negative light, Trump appears to be pursuing a vendetta rooted deeply in past grievances, particularly related to the investigations surrounding Trump’s own campaign.

Additionally, Trump’s vitriol has extended to other perceived adversaries, with calls for the dismissal of officials like Lisa Monaco, whom he accuses of participating in a “Deep State” conspiracy. This rhetoric exemplifies a dangerous trend of painting law enforcement and legal apparatus as weapons for attacking dissenting voices and political foes.

Despite the backlash, Trump remains undeterred, continuing to wield social media as a platform for his incendiary remarks. He maintains that his actions and statements represent a fight against a corrupt political system, thereby entrenching the narrative of a battle between him and what he deem “enemies” of the state.

FBI Fires 20 Agents for Kneeling at George Floyd Protest

The FBI has dismissed up to 20 agents for participating in a protest in Washington, D.C., following George Floyd’s death in 2020. The agents, primarily from the FBI’s Washington Field Office, were reportedly photographed kneeling at the protest, a symbolic act of solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement.

Despite the Bureau’s refusal to comment on the specific details of the firings, sources indicate that this decision marks a significant disciplinary action against members of the FBI who engaged in a form of peaceful protest. This event highlights the ongoing tensions within law enforcement regarding issues of race and civil rights.

The recent firings also come amidst a broader context where trust in federal institutions is being actively undermined by figures like Donald Trump, who continuously attacks the FBI and promotes a narrative of corruption within it. Trump’s emphasis on loyalty to partisan interests further complicates the environment in which federal agents operate.

The tumultuous political landscape has fostered an atmosphere where expressions of solidarity or concern for civil rights within law enforcement are met with severe repercussions, reflecting an authoritarian tendency in response to widespread protests against systemic racism.

This incident serves as a troubling reminder of the current administration’s priorities, where acknowledgment of societal issues is deemed unacceptable, contrasting sharply with the needs of the communities these agents serve.

James Comey Indicted in Trump’s Ongoing Legal Vendetta

Former FBI Director James Comey has been indicted by a federal grand jury, marking a drastic move in President Donald Trump’s contentious campaign against his political adversaries. This indictment, possibly spurred by Trump’s relentless vendetta, specifically accuses Comey of providing false statements and obstructing congressional proceedings during investigations tied to Trump’s initial presidential campaign and its alleged collusion with Russia.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, facing pressure from Trump to pursue criminal charges against his foes, released a public statement asserting that “no one is above the law.” This rhetoric, however, is seen as an attempt to leverage the Justice Department for personal vendettas, a tactic consistent with Trump’s efforts to portray his opponents as corrupt while shielding himself from criticism concerning his actions.

Information about the case suggests internal hesitations among prosecutors regarding the legitimacy and strength of the charges against Comey. Notably, Trump has expressed dissatisfaction with the legal system’s handling of his past investigations, demanding that rapid actions be taken against those he deems guilty. “I just want people to act,” Trump stated, indicating his belief that swift justice should be meted out against opponents regardless of detailed legal considerations.

Some observers inside the White House believe the prosecution of Comey may stem from a toxic blend of personal animosity and political ambition, underpinned by Trump’s strategy of retaliating against those who oppose him. Stephen Miller, a prominent Trump aide, has even gone so far as to label Comey as “corrupt” and part of a larger conspiracy against Trump, further fueling the narrative of political weaponization within the Justice Department.

As this indictment unfolds, it exemplifies the increasing polarization of American politics and raises significant concerns about the erosion of judicial independence in favor of partisan objectives. Trump’s method of utilizing legal mechanisms as instruments against opponents signals an alarming trend in undermining democratic institutions in pursuit of personal and political power.

Trump Administration Slashes DOJ’s Corruption Team from 36 to 2 Lawyers

The Trump administration’s assault on accountability has dramatically slashed the number of attorneys dedicated to combating public corruption at the Justice Department from 36 to a mere two. This striking reduction highlights a disturbing trend that prioritizes political interests over the integrity of American democratic institutions.

During his tenure, Trump systematically dismantled the Public Integrity Section, which has a storied history of investigating corrupt officials. With the majority of its staff now reassigned or having quit under pressure, this unit can no longer effectively advise U.S. attorneys on important corruption cases, raising alarm over the potential for political misuse of legal resources.

Critics within the Justice Department have raised concerns that Trump’s administration is paving the way for targeted prosecutions against political adversaries, particularly Democrats. Recent policy changes that eliminate the protocols ensuring oversight in federal elections signal a clear shift towards allowing partisan motivations to influence legal actions.

Former members of the Public Integrity Section emphasize that this diminishment represents more than just staffing cuts; without adequate resources, meaningful oversight and guidance have become gravely reduced, essentially rendering these requirements a mere formality. The result is a justice system increasingly vulnerable to corruption and political manipulation.

The implications of this dismantling extend beyond mere logistics; they signify a broader campaign against ethical governance that threatens to undermine public trust and institutional integrity. This rollback of Nixon-era reforms establishes a dangerous precedent that could normalize corruption under the guise of restoring order, creating a chilling effect on accountability within federal law enforcement.

Trump Fires Prosecutor in Political Vendetta, Undermining Justice and Ethics

The White House has dismissed Adam Schleifer, a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, following pressure from attorneys representing Andrew Wiederhorn, the former CEO of Fatburger. Sources reveal that Schleifer was informed of his firing through an email that stated the decision was made “on behalf of President Donald J. Trump.” This incident raises serious ethical concerns about political interference in judicial processes, showcasing the Trump administration’s penchant for silencing legal professionals who pursue justice against politically connected figures.

Wiederhorn was indicted by a grand jury on charges of concealing taxable income through improper “shareholder loans” from his company. Allegations claim he misused company funds for personal luxuries, including expensive travel and automobiles. Citing a lack of victims or losses, Wiederhorn’s lawyers aggressively sought to have the case dismissed, accusing Schleifer of bias. The pattern of this case illustrates how the Trump presidency has prioritized political loyalty over legal accountability.

Following the notification of his termination, Schleifer’s professional electronics were wiped remotely, and he was escorted out, highlighting a lack of respect typically afforded to career professionals in federal service. This serves as a chilling example of the punitive tactics employed by the Trump administration to instill fear among federal prosecutors, demonstrating their commitment to removing those perceived as political adversaries.

Schleifer, a Democrat who has previously criticized Trump’s policies, notably posted that the Trump administration is eroding constitutional integrity with “every lie and every act of heedless, narcissistic corruption.” This political firing not only violates ethical standards but also undermines the credibility and operations of the Department of Justice, creating an environment where prosecutors feel pressured to tailor their conduct based on political affiliations rather than the rule of law.

Ultimately, this incident reflects a broader trend under Trump, where the integrity of legal institutions has been compromised for political gain. The administration’s actions serve as a clear message to current and future federal prosecutors that political alignment is paramount, further entrenching corruption in institutions designed to uphold justice and equality.

Trump’s Executive Order Targets Perkins Coie, Threatens Legal Independence

Donald Trump has signed an executive order targeting Perkins Coie, a law firm that has historically provided legal representation for Democrats. The order directs the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to begin revoking security clearances held by Perkins Coie employees. Trump claims this move is necessary due to the firm’s involvement in the 2016 election, which he labels as detrimental to his political interests.

In the Oval Office, during the signing of the order, Trump described it as an “absolute honor,” asserting that the actions of Perkins Coie represented “weaponization” against a political opponent. This rhetoric underscores Trump’s authoritarian approach to governance, where opposing legal entities are punished for their involvement in dissenting political narratives.

Perkins Coie notably represented Hillary Clinton’s campaign and had connections to the controversial Steele dossier, which contained serious allegations about Trump and his ties to Russia. By targeting the firm, Trump is aiming to intimidate legal advisors and dissenters, an act that threatens the independence of the legal profession and undermines democratic norms.

The firm has responded by stating they will challenge the legality of Trump’s order, deeming it “patently unlawful.” This incident highlights a broader pattern within the Trump administration to retaliate against legal entities that provide services to political opponents—a clear signal of his administration’s authoritarian tendencies.

This executive action follows another recent instance where Trump suspended security clearances at the law firm Covington & Burling, which had provided legal services to former special counsel Jack Smith. Trump’s relentless attacks on legal institutions that oppose him reinforce the dangers of his administration’s obsession with silencing dissent and eroding the foundations of American democracy.

(h/t: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5181477-trump-executive-order-perkins-coie/)

Trump Administration Sues New York Over Immigration Policies

The Trump administration has launched a lawsuit against New York, accusing the state of favoring “illegal aliens over American citizens.” This politically charged legal action underscores the ongoing feud between federal authorities and states that pursue more humane immigration policies. Attorney General Pam Bondi articulated this stance during her inaugural press conference, explicitly targeting New York’s “green light” law, which allows residents, regardless of their immigration status, to obtain a driver’s license.

Bondi, flanked by federal agents, declared an end to what she described as New York’s unlawful practices. According to the lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in Albany, New York’s policy is purportedly the most egregious example, as it mandates state officials to alert unauthorized immigrants about inquiries made by federal immigration agencies. This requirement has been characterized as a “frontal assault” on federal immigration laws.

In response, New York Governor Kathy Hochul’s office affirmed its commitment to deporting violent offenders but made it clear that it opposes targeting law-abiding immigrants. This statement reflects a growing divide between state policies focused on inclusivity and the Trump administration’s hardline approach to immigration enforcement.

The lawsuit serves to further politicize the issue of immigration, with Trump and his administration leveraging it to galvanize their base. The allegations against New York blatantly mischaracterize the state’s intent, which is to ensure that all residents have access to essential services without discrimination based on immigration status.

This legal maneuver not only illustrates the lengths to which the Trump administration will go in order to wage a culture war but also highlights the ongoing battle over the direction of U.S. immigration policy. Such actions are emblematic of the broader authoritarian tendencies manifested in the Trump era, undermining both legal norms and the rights of immigrant communities.

(h/t: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/12/us/politics/bondi-new-york-immigration-lawsuit.html)

Trump Revokes Security Clearances in Retaliatory Move

In a politically charged move, Donald Trump has revoked the security clearances of prominent Democrats, including former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. This decision aligns with Trump’s ongoing strategy to silence his critics and reinforce his authoritarian control over adversaries who have publicly challenged him.

The revocation of these clearances, described by some as largely symbolic, holds significant implications for those affected. The targeted officials may face barriers in performing their official duties, as restricted access to federal buildings, including courthouses and law enforcement facilities, would severely hamper their operational capabilities.

Immediately following Trump’s action against these officials, he also revoked President Joe Biden’s security clearance, arguing there is no justification for Biden to access classified information. This retaliatory tactic is a thinly veiled attempt to undermine Trump’s opponents, while attempting to deflect attention from his own questionable behavior as president.

Trump has a history of vindictiveness towards individuals like Letitia James, who has pursued legal action against him, and Alvin Bragg, who is prosecuting Trump in a high-profile criminal case. By stripping their security clearances, Trump not only retaliates against them for their opposition but also sends a chilling message to others within the political sphere.

This latest action reveals Trump’s blatant disregard for the principles of democracy and governance, emphasizing his preference for authoritarian tactics over collaborative political discourse. By continuing to target those who have opposed him, Trump’s actions further illustrate a dangerous trend within the Republican Party that prioritizes personal vendettas over public service and accountability.

(h/t: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14376597/Trump-strips-security-clearances-Anthony-Blinken-Letitia-James-Alvin-Bragg-including-humiliating-ban-entering-federal-buildings.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ito=1490&ns_campaign=1490)

1 2 3 … 20