Crime

Home Crime

Gabbard Sends Criminal Referrals To DOJ For 2 Officials Linked To Trump Impeachment

1
Tulsi Gabbard via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has referred two former U.S. officials to the Justice Department for potential criminal investigation, escalating efforts to revisit the events that led to President Donald Trump’s first impeachment.

A spokesperson for Gabbard confirmed that the referrals target a whistleblower and former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, both of whom played central roles in the 2019 inquiry. The spokesperson did not specify what crimes were alleged, and any decision to pursue charges rests with federal prosecutors.

The move follows Gabbard’s release of newly declassified testimony and documents that she argues show a “coordinated effort” within the intelligence community to “manufacture a conspiracy” used to justify Trump’s impeachment.

Atkinson’s actions were instrumental in advancing a whistleblower complaint that raised concerns about Trump’s July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In that call, Trump asked Zelenskyy to investigate then–former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

The whistleblower wrote at the time: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.”

Gabbard has sharply disputed the legitimacy of that complaint and Atkinson’s handling of it. Her office said Atkinson relied on “secondhand information” and “politicized, manufactured narratives,” and “did not follow standard IG procedures.”

“In his own words, IC IG Atkinson recognizes that his conclusions were based on a ‘preliminary investigation,’” her office said, quoting testimony in which he acknowledged he had not determined whether the alleged actions “actually took place.”

Under federal law, however, an inspector general’s role at that stage is limited to assessing whether a whistleblower complaint appears credible, not to fully investigate or verify the claims.

In a post on X, Gabbard accused “deep state actors” of constructing “a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people and impeach duly-elected President @realDonaldTrump in 2019.”

Atkinson, who was fired by Trump in 2020, previously defended his conduct, saying he had “faithfully discharged” his duties and served “without regard to partisan favor or political fear.”

Democrats quickly condemned the referrals and the broader effort to revisit the impeachment.

Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the whistleblower “demonstrated courage and principle” in exposing Trump’s “efforts to extort Ukraine and falsely smear his opponent.”

“This apparent criminal referral will amount to nothing because no misconduct occurred,” Himes said. “But what it will do is chill future whistleblowers from coming forward… I suspect that is precisely the point.”

Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, dismissed the declassified materials as “a nothingburger” and “another sad attempt… to get in Donald Trump’s good graces.”

Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives in December 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress tied to the Ukraine matter. He was acquitted by the Senate in early 2020 in a largely party-line vote and has consistently denied wrongdoing, calling his conversation with Zelenskyy “perfect.”

The latest referrals come as part of a broader push by Gabbard and other officials to reexamine controversies from Trump’s first term, including intelligence assessments of Russian election interference. While some figures connected to those investigations have been subpoenaed in ongoing probes, no charges have been filed.

At the same time, the effort unfolds against a backdrop of renewed political and legal scrutiny surrounding Trump. While prior impeachment proceedings ended in acquittal and are widely viewed as politically unlikely to result in removal from office, they continue to shape partisan divisions in Washington. Any new impeachment-related efforts would face long odds in Congress, particularly given the high threshold required for conviction in the Senate.

Still, the renewed focus on the 2019 impeachment underscores how the political battles of Trump’s presidency continue to reverberate, with competing narratives over the Ukraine episode remaining central to broader debates about executive power, accountability, and the role of intelligence agencies in U.S. politics.

Hidden FBI Files On Trump-Russia Probe Discovered In Secret Room, Patel Says

1
I, Aude, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Thousands of documents turned over to…

WASHINGTON — FBI Director Kash Patel has reportedly uncovered a cache of sensitive documents tied to the origins of the now-discredited Trump–Russia investigation, according to sources with direct knowledge of the discovery.

The documents were allegedly found inside a concealed room at FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., stored in multiple “burn bags” — containers typically used for the destruction of classified materials. The material is now under active review, with portions slated for declassification and eventual release to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA). (RELATED: Trump Issues Ultimatum To GOP Leader — Abolish This Rule Or Else)

Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Among the most consequential items is a classified annex to former Special Counsel John Durham’s final report — a document that had previously been withheld from public and congressional view. Sources say the annex contains the raw intelligence Durham reviewed and includes information gathered before the FBI formally launched its “Crossfire Hurricane” probe into alleged ties between Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia.

The annex reportedly outlines internal warnings about efforts within the federal government to elevate unsubstantiated claims of collusion — with some of the intelligence suggesting the narrative was intended to politically benefit the Clinton campaign.

Per Fox News Digital:

A source familiar with the contents of the classified annex told Fox News Digital that while it may not have been exactly clear in the moment what the intelligence collection meant, with the benefit of hindsight, it predicted the FBI’s next move “with alarming specificity.”

“Ultimately, the release of the classified annex will lend more credibility to the assertion that there was a coordinated plan inside the U.S. government to help the Clinton campaign stir up controversy connecting Trump to Russia,” the source, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence matters that have not yet been made public, told Fox News Digital.

Not Stated, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

“Mere days after this intelligence was collected, the FBI launched Crossfire Hurricane,” the source said. “It’s really hard to see how Brennan, Clapper and Comey are going to be able to explain this away.”

Sources told Fox News Digital that Patel and his team discovered a previously undisclosed sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) in the FBI headquarters.

Patel, who previously served as a top national security official during Trump’s presidency, is now overseeing the review of the trove, which reportedly consists of thousands of pages and digital records. Some of the documents are believed to directly relate to early surveillance activities and internal deliberations within the FBI in 2016. (RELATED: [WATCH] FBI’s Latest Target Isn’t Who You’d Expect…)

The declassification process is being coordinated with top national security officials, including CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and NSA Director Gen. William Hartman.

Former FBI Directors James Comey and Christopher Wray have yet to respond to request for comment as of this article’s publication.

Grassley Expected to Lead Congressional Oversight

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Grassley, who has long pressed for transparency surrounding the Durham probe, is expected to spearhead efforts to bring the annex and related documents before Congress.

The development has reignited conservative concerns about politicization within federal agencies and the weaponization of national security tools for partisan purposes.

As the annex moves toward declassification, key questions remain: How did this material remain hidden for so long? Who knew of its existence? And what political or legal consequences could follow its release?

Report: Bannon Told Epstein Trump Should Be Removed Via 25th Amendment

0
Thor Brødreskift / Nordiske Mediedager, CC BY-SA 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

Newly released Epstein files include private messages from 2018 between Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein, revealing previously undisclosed political discussions involving President Donald Trump.

According to reporting based on the documents, Bannon described Trump in late 2018 as “beyond borderline” and referenced the 25th Amendment, the constitutional mechanism for removing a president who is unable to perform the duties of the office.

The remarks were made in private correspondence and were not public at the time. (RELATED: Report: Only Roughly 2% Of Epstein Files Public As DOJ Says ‘All’ Released)

As Mediaite’s Isaac Shorr reports:

Bannon has come under fire from a wide variety of critics — including conservatives — in recent days over his his relationship with Epstein.

Documents released by the Department of Justice revealed that on the very day Epstein was arrested on charges of sex trafficking in July 2019, he was texting with Bannon about the aforementioned documentary.

A few months before that, Bannon advised Epstein: “First we need to push back on the lies ; then crush the pedo/trafficking narrative ; then rebuild your image as a philanthropist.”

Another text exchange between the two men, dated Dec. 31, 2018, is under intense scrutiny.

The conversation reads:

EPSTEIN: Hell of. Year. Next will be biblicl

BANNON: We either own 2019 or it will surely own us

EPSTEIN: Im back in the f and b biz only

BANNON: F and B director

EPSTEIN: No it does not stand for fck and blw

EPSTEIN: Spoke to my dems. This weekend. Boy are emotions running high

BANNON: Going to blow him up right our of the box– WH has zero plan to punch back– Fort Apache with no cavalry enroute

EPSTEIN: And no soldiers in the fort. He really is borderline. Not sure what he may do.

BANNON: I think it’s beyond borderline — 25 amendment

The records show the two men exchanged hundreds of messages about media coverage, legal matters, and political strategy. Some messages indicate Epstein offered advice on messaging and reputation management. (RELATED: New Documents Show Bannon Reached Out To Epstein During Vatican Fight)

The communications also reference handling critical coverage following the Miami Herald’s 2018 investigative series on Epstein, which is widely credited with prompting renewed federal scrutiny and Epstein’s eventual 2019 arrest.

The documents do not allege criminal conduct related to the exchanges.

GOP Congressman Says He Doesn’t Trust Trump’s DOJ

0

A Republican Congressman says he does not trust President Trump’s Justice Department…

CNN chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju joined anchor Boris Sanchez on Tuesday to discuss the state of play surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein case on Capitol Hill when they interviewed GOP Rep. Tim Burchett (Tenn.)

“Yeah, this is through a procedural vote, Democrats moving to force this vote to put Republicans on the record. If this were to succeed, it would have required that all documents related to Epstein be on a publicly accessible database within 30 days. That did not happen,” Raju explained, adding:

This came after the Senate and bipartisan Senate vote did succeed last week calling for the release of those Epstein files. But that separate bill has been stalled in the Senate committee. So it’s unclear exactly whether Congress will assert itself and force this issue. But the Republicans are divided about this. Republican leaders want absolutely nothing to do with this matter.

The speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, told me yesterday that he is going to defer to the White House on this. John Thune, the Senate majority leader, has not taken really any position on this at all. But members on the right flank of the House GOP and Senate GOP are the ones in particular who are raising the most concerns, including Congressman Tim Burchett, who just told me moments ago, he does not believe what the Justice Department is saying.

An amendment demanding that President Donald Trump’s administration release all files related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was shot down by Republicans on the House Rules Committee on Monday.

The amendment, which was introduced by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), was rejected by every Republican present during the vote except Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), who voted with Democrats in favor of demanding that the Trump administration release the Epstein files.

Khanna’s amendment would have required U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to “retain, preserve, and compile any records or evidence related to any investigation, prosecution, or incarceration of Jeffrey Epstein,” and to “release and publish any records or evidence” on a “publicly accessible website” within 30 days.

Raju then played a clip of his exchange with Burchett, beginning with him asking, “Should there be investigation or special counsel investigation?”

“I don’t know. I’m not an attorney. Find them guilty and hang them publicly. I mean, that’s not over the top either. I’m ready. I’m over it. It disgusts me. I’m big on clarity and transparency, and that’s a good reason people don’t trust government, either party,” Burchett replied.

“But you don’t believe what the Justice Department is saying?” pressed Raju.

“I don’t know. No, I don’t. I think I don’t. I don’t trust them,” Burchett concluded.

“And that reference to the Justice Department memo that said that Jeffrey Epstein was indeed murdered and that there was no client list here, or that he was not murdered and that there was no client list, as some of those on the folks on the far right have suggested here. But there’s also no indication, Boris, that there will be an investigation into this on Capitol Hill. The Senate, the House Judiciary Committee Chairman, Jim Jordan, told reporters earlier today that he has confidence in President Trump and his handling of this matter,” concluded Raju.

Watch:

On Tuesday, Rep. Tim Burchett just formally called on Oversight Chair James Comer to allow Ghislaine Maxwell to testify in front of Congress on the Epstein situation.

Epstein Files Threaten Tp Upend Trump Legacy

2
By Ralph Alswang, White House photographer - https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/clinton-epstein-maxwell/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=143417695

Tensions are rising after the Justice Department claimed it had no evidence that notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein had a client list, blackmailed powerful people, or was murdered.

Democrats in Congress say they will introduce measures this week to press for the disclosure of files reported to Epstein, a wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who was found dead at the age of 66 in his New York City jail cell in 2019 after being arrested on sex trafficking charges involving young girls. 

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) is calling on House Republicans to hold a vote demanding the Trump administration release the “FULL Epstein files.”

“Why are the Epstein files still hidden? Who are the rich & powerful being protected?” Khanna said in a post on the social platform X over the weekend.

“On Tuesday, I’m introducing an amendment to force a vote demanding the FULL Epstein files be released to the public,” he continued. “The Speaker must call a vote & put every Congress member on record.”

The Justice Department last week released a memo concluding there was no evidence suggesting the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender kept a “client list” to blackmail high-profile individuals. The memo also found no evidence to suggest foul play in Epstein’s death, which had previously been ruled a suicide.

The memo spurred fierce backlash from many Trump supporters, who had long called on the government to release material on Epstein that they argue would expose wrongdoing at the highest level of elite circles.

Far-right activist Laura Loomer, a staunch ally of President Trump, said Sunday night there should be a special counsel to examine the handling of files related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Loomer, who has bashed Attorney General Pam Bondi for her handling of the Epstein documents, told Politico’s Playbook newsletter that a special counsel should be appointed “so that people can feel like this issue is being investigated, and perhaps take it out of [Bondi’s] hands, because I don’t think that she has been transparent or done a good job handling this issue.”

Much of the frustration from MAGA allies has been directed at Attorney General Pam Bondi, who said earlier this year that files were on her desk but then seemed to suggest they did not exist by releasing the memo last week. Bondi argued she was referring to the case file on Epstein, not a specific “client list.”

Trump has remained adamant in his position and has fiercely defended Bondi against the onslaught of backlash. 

“What’s going on with my ‘boys’ and, in some cases, ‘gals?’ They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening. We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and ‘selfish people’ are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein,” Trump said in the social media post on Saturday.

Dan Bongino, the Deputy Director of the FBI, reportedly threatened to leave the bureau if Attorney General Pam Bondi remains on the job due to her handling of the Epstein files, a source close to Bongino told The Daily Wire.

One source close to Bongino predicted to Axios, “He ain’t coming back.” Trump administration officials, however, are saying that Bongino remains on the job.

President Donald Trump said on Sunday he believes FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino is “in good shape” following a reported clash with Attorney General Pam Bondi.

“I spoke to him today,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews. “Dan Bongino, very good guy. I’ve known him a long time. I’ve done his show many, many times. And he sounded terrific actually. No, I think he’s in good shape.”

Watch:

FBI Director Kash Patel broke his silence on Saturday amid rumors that he might also consider leaving if Bondi stayed, saying in a post to X that the “conspiracy theories” were not true and that he would continue to serve under Trump as long as the president wanted him to be there.

Report: Trump Expected To Fire U.S. Attorney

0
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

President Donald Trump is expected to fire the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia after his office was unable to find incriminating evidence of mortgage fraud against New York Attorney General Letitia James, according to sources. 

Federal prosecutors in Virginia had uncovered no clear evidence to prove that James had knowingly committed mortgage fraud when she purchased a home in the state in 2023, ABC News first reported earlier this week, but Trump officials pushed U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert to nevertheless bring criminal charges against her, according to sources.

Alec Perkins from Hoboken, USA, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The president has reportedly been leaning on federal prosecutors to bring charges against James for alleged mortgage fraud. She has been accused of falsely claiming her house in Virginia as her primary residence despite being legally required to live in New York as an elected official there.

ABC News reported on Wednesday that Siebert, who is the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, was having difficulty finding enough evidence to sustain a conviction against James. On Thursday, the outlet said Trump is expected to fire the prosecutor.

“Administration officials have told Siebert of Trump’s intention to fire him, sources familiar with the matter said,” ABC News stated. “Siebert’s last day on the job is expected to be Friday.”

Trump nominated Siebert for the job in May.

“The decision to fire Siebert could throw into crisis one of the most prominent U.S. attorney’s offices, which handles a bulk of the country’s espionage and terrorism cases, and heighten concerns about Trump’s alleged use of the DOJ to target his political adversaries,” ABC News stated.

In May, the FBI opened an investigation into the notorious prosecutor. James has denied wrongdoing and called the investigation politically motivated, pointing to her office’s civil fraud case against Trump. That case ultimately resulted in a $354 million judgment against the president, which also bars his

During her 2018 campaign for attorney general, James publicly stated she intended to pursue legal action against Trump and investigate his business dealings in New York.

While campaigning, James vowed to shine a “bright light into every corner” of Trump’s “real estate dealings.” Her critics — including Trump himself — would later argue that her civil lawsuit against him was a political witch hunt.

In announcing the probe, US Attorney John A. Sarcone III took a swipe at James’s 2018 campaign rhetoric about investigating President Donald Trump.

The US attorney said James “unethically ran around the state campaigning on getting Donald Trump,” and essentially accused her of finding a criminal target without an alleged crime.

He added:

We stand prepared to act in the capacity that we need to when and if we are informed there’s a charge to be made. Unlike Letitia James, who unethically ran around the state campaigning on getting Donald Trump… my office conducts itself in a manner that is proper and professional.

Suspects Charged In Plot To Kill Top Noem Deputy

Police image via Pixabay free images

Two brothers from Absecon, New Jersey, were arrested Tuesday and charged in connection with alleged online threats targeting Tricia McLaughlin, the Department of Homeland Security’s Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs and a top public-facing spokesperson for Secretary Kristi Noem, authorities said.

Ricardo Antonio Roman-Flores and Emilio Roman-Flores, who are twins, were taken into custody after investigators alleged they posted violent statements on X about McLaughlin and federal immigration officers, including an alleged call to “Shoot ICE on sight,” according to the account of the case shared by law enforcement officials.

Investigators allege one brother responded to McLaughlin with: “[The Second] Amendment is in place for moments like this. Shoot ICE on sight,” followed by: “We Americans should find you, tar you, feather you, and hang you as we did to anyone serving tyrants before the Revolutionary War.” A second, partially redacted post attributed to the other brother reportedly read: “Shoot ICE on sight.”

Prosecutors say the threats went further—allegedly escalating to talk of torturing and killing McLaughlin “in a medieval fashion.” McLaughlin has been front-and-center defending DHS enforcement actions on TV and online, and she’s repeatedly framed threats against officers as downstream of increasingly incendiary politics around immigration.

The charge sheet, as described, splits like this:

  • Emilio: unlawful possession of an assault weapon, possession of prohibited weapons, conspiracy, terroristic threats, criminal coercion and cyber harassment.
  • Ricardo: one count of conspiracy—terroristic threats.

ICE Director Todd Lyons said the arrests came within three days of the alleged posts and warned that threats against federal officials will be prosecuted. “We will find you, we will arrest you, and we will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law. We are not afraid of you,” Lyons told Fox News Digital. He added: “If you threaten our law enforcement or DHS officials, we will hunt you down, and you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

DHS is trying to make a broader point: this isn’t just one ugly thread online—it’s part of a threat environment they say has intensified alongside the administration’s border crackdown. In a DHS release dated Oct. 30, 2025, the department claimed ICE personnel have faced an “8,000% increase in death threats,” citing harassment and threats aimed at officers and their families.

The issue has also surfaced in recent disputes over whether public-facing tools that track immigration enforcement activity endanger federal officers. In a Reuters report published Monday, a developer sued the Trump administration after an app that let users share locations of immigration agents was removed from Apple’s store; the administration cited safety concerns for federal officers, while the developer argued the app relied on public observations.

White House Blames Special Ops Chief For Deadly Caribbean Strike As GOP Splits Over Hegseth

David B. Gleason from Chicago, IL, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

President Trump’s Cabinet is scheduled to meet at 11:30 a.m. today, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth expected to face fresh questions over allegations that he helped direct — or enabled — a follow-up U.S. strike that killed survivors of an earlier attack on an alleged drug-smuggling boat in the Caribbean.

The controversy reignited after The Washington Post reported Friday that Hegseth verbally ordered that a Sept. 2 attack “kill everyone” on board a vessel the administration has described as a narcotics-smuggling threat. The report also said a second strike was carried out to eliminate people who survived the first hit — a claim that has fueled bipartisan demands for oversight and raised the specter of potential war-crimes exposure if investigators conclude the targets no longer posed an imminent threat.

By Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America – Pete Hegseth, CC BY-SA 2.0

White House: strike was lawful — and “in self-defense”

The Pentagon has pushed back on key elements of the reporting. But at the White House briefing Monday, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt did not deny that a follow-up strike occurred. Instead, she framed the Sept. 2 operation as lawful and defensive, saying it was conducted “in self-defense” in international waters and “in accordance with the law of armed conflict.”

Leavitt said: “On September 2nd, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes,” adding: “Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority and the law, directing the engagement to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States of America was eliminated.”

Pressed on whether the admiral ordered a second strike because survivors remained after the first, Leavitt declined to discuss operational specifics — while emphasizing the admiral’s discretion. She also disputed the most incendiary allegation about Hegseth’s initial guidance, saying: “I would reject that the secretary of War ever said that,” before adding: “However, the president has made it quite clear that if narco-terrorists, again, are trafficking illegal drugs toward the United States, he has the authority to kill them.”

Why lawmakers are calling it a possible war-crimes issue

The allegations matter not just politically, but legally. Under the law of armed conflict, the permissibility of using lethal force often turns on whether a person remains a legitimate military target — for example, whether they pose an active threat or are otherwise directly participating in hostilities. If survivors were incapacitated and no longer threatening U.S. forces, critics argue a follow-up strike could violate established protections. That legal question is now central to the pressure campaign Congress is building around Hegseth and the Pentagon’s evidence.

The dispute has also exposed an ongoing split on Capitol Hill. Democrats — and some Republicans — have questioned both the proof that targeted boats were actually carrying drugs and the legal theory supporting repeated strikes without explicit congressional authorization.

Venezuela tensions raise the stakes for the meeting

The Cabinet session comes as U.S.-Venezuela tensions intensify, with the administration accusing President Nicolás Maduro of enabling drug trafficking. Reports indicate the White House is weighing broader options, and the strikes have become part of a larger argument about whether the U.S. is drifting toward a more direct confrontation.

Against that backdrop, today’s meeting is expected to put Hegseth “in the hot seat” internally as well as publicly: Cabinet gatherings are often where presidents and senior advisers test whether a controversy is containable — or whether it’s beginning to endanger other priorities.

The “Signal” scandal: why Hegseth is back under a familiar microscope

This is the most sustained scrutiny Hegseth has faced in months — and it echoes the Signal scandal that shook the Pentagon earlier this year.

In late March and early April 2025, reporting revealed that senior national security officials were discussing impending military operations in a Signal group chat, an encrypted but commercial messaging app not intended for classified coordination. Coverage described officials sharing sensitive operational details tied to strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen, and the episode triggered alarms about both national security risk and records retention.

The controversy escalated when additional reporting described a second Signal chat that allegedly included Hegseth’s wife, brother, and others in his circle — prompting the Pentagon’s watchdog to open a review into his Signal use and related compliance concerns.

Now, with allegations of a second strike and potential violations of the laws of war, critics argue the pattern is the same: discretion and aggressiveness first, oversight and guardrails later.

Trump Posts Pardon Request For Ex-Congressman Hit With Insider Trading Charges

1

President Donald Trump appears to be weighing a pardon for former Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.), a one-time congressman convicted of insider trading, after sharing multiple pardon requests on his Truth Social account.

On Tuesday, Trump posted a letter from former Republican National Committee Chairman Robert James Nicholson urging him to grant Buyer a “full and unconditional pardon.” The letter, dated April 22, 2025, marks the second public appeal Trump has shared in recent days on Buyer’s behalf.

Trump offered no commentary alongside the post, but his decision to amplify the request has fueled speculation that he may be seriously considering clemency for the former lawmaker.

In the letter, Nicholson praised Buyer’s military and congressional service, describing him as “an honorable man and an extraordinary American.” Nicholson argued that Buyer had been targeted by a “politically weaponized federal and state judiciary” and claimed the Justice Department and Securities and Exchange Commission pursued him as an act of political retribution.

Nicholson, who served as Secretary of Veterans Affairs under President George W. Bush, highlighted Buyer’s work as chairman of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee and credited him with helping improve veterans’ healthcare, information technology systems, and treatment programs for wounded service members returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. He also noted that Buyer served on Trump’s 2016 presidential transition team and contributed to policy recommendations that later influenced the VA Mission Act.

The former RNC chairman concluded by asking Trump to issue a pardon and to seek dismissal of an SEC civil case against Buyer, writing that the former congressman “should have never been a political prisoner in America.”

The post follows a similar move by Trump on Sunday, when he shared another letter signed by several Republican officials requesting clemency for Buyer. That letter likewise alleged that Democratic political figures and government officials sought revenge against the former congressman because of his role in high-profile Republican efforts against President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.

Buyer was sentenced in 2023 to 22 months in federal prison after being convicted of insider trading. According to the Department of Justice, prosecutors proved that Buyer participated in two insider-trading schemes in 2018 and 2019, using confidential information obtained through consulting work to make profitable securities trades before the information became public.

Trump’s public promotion of the pardon requests comes as he faces scrutiny over stock trading activity linked to major policy announcements during his presidency, adding another layer of attention to any potential clemency decision involving a lawmaker convicted of financial crimes.

Read the full letter below:

Dear Mr. President,

Without any reservation, I strongly endorse a full and unconditional pardon for Congressman Stephen Buyer, Ret. He served Indiana for 18 years in Congress before announcing his retirement when his wife was diagnosed with an incurable disease. He also served our nation in the US Army during war and peace in both active and reserve components for 30 years before retiring as a Colonel.

Congressman Buyer is an honorable man and an extraordinary American guided by his faith and committed to values and beliefs that I have personally witnessed. Like you, however, he has suffered the consequences of a politically weaponized federal and state judiciary.

Prior to the election of President George W. Bush, I served as the Chairman of the Republican National Committee. During the Administration of President Bush, I had the honor and privilege to represent our country as Ambassador to the Vatican and served as Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs. As a young Army officer, I served in Vietnam.

During my tenure as Secretary of the VA, it was a distinct honor to work with Congressman Buyer when he was in Congress serving as Chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee. As a veteran of the first Gulf War, he took his service to veterans and their needs most seriously. He strived to increase the quality of veteran healthcare and benefits, promote IT security, and bring efficiencies to the VA’s health enterprise.

I worked with Chairman Buyer to centralize the VA IT architecture in line and budget authority to promote security, commonality, efficiency, and savings through strategic sourcing. These accomplishments were inordinately important as our nation began to respond to the increase in wounded servicemembers who experienced traumatic brain injuries from Improvised Explosive Devices during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. As the number of wounded, ill and injured were returning from those wars, we also worked together with the Senate to create and fund for poly-trauma centers in the VA.

Congressman Buyer served on your 2016 Presidential Transition Team, where he assisted in drafting the roadmap for the VA that your administration followed when it created the Mission Act.

Additionally, during his tenure as Chairman he contributed to the initial path for VA leadership to fulfill the goal of a seamless electronic health record between the VA and DOD by seeking a new electronic health record operating system for the VHA.

Congressman Buyer prosecuted President Bill Clinton in his Impeachment trial, sought an indictment against then first lady Hillary Clinton for obstruction of justice for hiding the infamous Rose Law Firm billing records, and defended the military overseas vote that was disenfranchised during the Florida recount of 2000 Presidential Election. The Clinton-Obama-Biden political surrogates never forgot his contributions to our country. The SEC and DOJ were weaponized against Congressman Buyer as political retribution and prosecuted him in criminal and civil courts without any direct evidence by testimony or document.

I am most hopeful Mr. President, you will be able to restore the integrity of the DOJ and SEC into serving the interest of justice in a manner that re-establishes the trust of the American people in our systems of government.

I respectfully request for you to give a full and unconditional pardon to Steve Buyer and to dismiss the

SEC civil suit against him. Steve Buyer should have never been a political prisoner in America. As our leader of the Republican Party and America, please send the message of fairness and justice to our fellow patriotic citizens and the observing world.

Inside The White House Correspondents’ Dinner Suspect’s ‘Manifesto’

The man accused of opening fire outside the White House Correspondents’ Dinner left behind a detailed “manifesto” describing his intent to target members of the Trump administration, “prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest,” according to a copy obtained by CBS News.

Cole Allen, 31, allegedly sent the writing to family members before the attack. In it, he stated that while law enforcement, hotel employees, and guests were not his intended targets, he was willing to harm them if necessary to reach administration officials. “I really hope it doesn’t come to that,” he wrote.

Authorities say Allen charged a security checkpoint outside the Washington Hilton on Saturday night armed with a shotgun, a handgun, and knives. President Donald Trump and other officials were quickly escorted from the event, which was later canceled. A Secret Service agent who was shot during the incident, while wearing a bulletproof vest, has since been released from the hospital.

The suspect’s brother reportedly alerted police in Connecticut after receiving the email, prompting law enforcement to intervene. Investigators later recovered additional writings from Allen’s home in Torrance, California, and his hotel room at the Hilton.

A chilling and ironic tone

Throughout the message, Allen adopted a matter-of-fact tone, at times veering into irony.

“Hello everybody!” he began. “So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today.”

He apologized to his parents “for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for ‘Most Wanted,’” and to colleagues and students for claiming he had a personal emergency. He suggested that by the time the email was read, he might already require medical attention, referring to potential injuries as “self-inflicted status.”

Declared targets — with one exception

Allen wrote that he chose to act because he did not want the administration’s alleged “crimes” to “coat [his] hands.” While he did not explicitly name Trump or the event, he described a plan to target officials in descending order of rank.

He made one notable exception: “not including Mr. Patel,” he wrote, referencing the FBI director, who was also in attendance.

Allen added that he would avoid targeting Secret Service, Capitol Police, or National Guard personnel unless necessary. “I hope they are wearing body armor,” he wrote.

He also detailed tactical decisions, claiming, “In order to minimize casualties, I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls).”

Anticipating criticism

The manifesto included a section addressing hypothetical objections to his actions, along with rebuttals.

“As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this,” he wrote as a potential criticism. “Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack.”

He also referenced his Christian faith, writing that some might argue he should “turn the other cheek.”

“Rebuttal,” he continued, “Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed.”

Allen then described various unnamed individuals experiencing hardship, in some cases attributing their struggles to the administration.

“I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it,” he added.

Criticism of security

In a postscript, Allen sharply criticized security measures at the event.

“PS… what the hell is the Secret Service doing? … No damn security. Not in transport. Not in the hotel. Not in the event,” he wrote.

He claimed that if he had been a foreign agent, he could have brought in heavier weaponry without detection. Officials note that while the Washington Hilton hosted the event, it remained an operational hotel with public access, and only specific areas were secured.

Family warnings and prior behavior

Allen’s sister reportedly told investigators that he frequently used “radical” rhetoric and had previously discussed doing “something” to address what he saw as problems in society and government.

She also revealed her brother was a regular visitor to the shooting range, was a member of a group called “The Wide Awakes” and had previously attended a “No Kings” rally in California. 

Political reaction and unanswered questions

The motive behind the attack remains under investigation.

Former President Barack Obama emphasized the lack of confirmed details while condemning political violence broadly.

“Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night’s shooting… it’s incumbent upon all of us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy,” Obama wrote. He also praised the Secret Service, calling their work “a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice” they show.

During a “60 Minutes” interview, Trump reacted angrily after host Norah O’Donnell read excerpts from the alleged manifesto.

“You read that crap from some sick person? I got associated with all stuff that has nothing to do with me,” Trump said, adding, “You should be ashamed of yourself… You’re a disgrace.”

More than 2,500 people had gathered for the annual dinner, which celebrates the First Amendment. Trump, who has typically declined to attend during his presidency, had made a historic appearance this year and has since said he hopes to reschedule the event within 30 days.

The Full Manifesto

To read Allen’s full 1,052-word manifesto as published by The New York Post, with minor edits to improve profanity, see below:

Hello everybody!

So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today. Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused.

I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for “Most Wanted.”

I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.)

I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near.

I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure.

I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it. Again, my sincere apologies.

On to why I did any of this:

I am a citizen of the United States of America.

What my representatives do reflects on me.

And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.

(Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I’ve had to do something about it.)

While I’m discussing this, I’ll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I’m not military so too bad.)

Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest

Secret Service: they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible (aka, I hope they’re wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who *aren’t*

Hotel Security: not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me)

Capitol Police: same as Hotel Security

National Guard: same as Hotel Security

Hotel Employees: not targets at all

Guests: not targets at all

In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls)

I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people *chose* to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn’t come to that.

Rebuttals to objections:

Objection 1: As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek.

Rebuttal: Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed. I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration.

Turning the other cheek when *someone else* is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.

Objection 2: This is not a convenient time for you to do this.

Rebuttal: I need whoever thinks this way to take a couple minutes and realize that the world isn’t about them. Do you think that when I see someone raped or murdered or abused, I should walk on by because it would be “inconvenient” for people who aren’t the victim?

This was the best timing and chance of success I could come up with.

Objection 3: You didn’t get them all.

Rebuttal: Gotta start somewhere.

Objection 4: As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this.

Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack

Objection 5: Yield unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

Rebuttal: The United States of America are ruled by the law, not by any one or several people. In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered.

I would also like to extend my appreciation to a great many people since I will not be likely to be able to talk with them again (unless the Secret Service is *astoundingly* incompetent.)

Thank you to my family, both personal and church, for your love over these 31 years.

Thank you to my friends, for your companionship over many years.

Thank you to my colleagues over many jobs, for your positivity and professionalism.

Thank you to my students for your enthusiasm and love of learning.

Thank you to the many acquaintances I’ve met, in person and online, for short interactions and long-term relationships, for your perspectives and inspiration.

Thank you all for everything.

Sincerely,

Cole “coldForce” “Friendly Federal Assassin” Allen

PS: Ok now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the Secret Service doing? Sorry, gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone.

Like, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10 feet, metal detectors out the wazoo.

What I got (who knows, maybe they’re pranking me!) is nothing.

No damn security.

Not in transport.

Not in the hotel.

Not in the event.

Like, the one thing that I immediately noticed walking into the hotel is the sense of arrogance.

I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat.

The security at the event is all outside, focused on protestors and current arrivals, because apparently no one thought about what happens if someone checks in the day before.

Like, this level of incompetence is insane, and I very sincerely hope it’s corrected by the time this country gets actually competent leadership again.

Like, if I was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen, I could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed s**t.

Actually insane.

Oh and if anyone is curious is how doing something like feels: it’s awful. I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done.

Can’t really recommend it! Stay in school, kids.