New Attorney General Pam Bondi Lays Down the Law for DOJ Attorneys

In a series of new orders, newly sworn-in Attorney General Pam Bondi has advised DOJ attorneys what it will take for them to keep their jobs. She made it clear that DOJ lawyers who refuse to follow lawful instructions will be fired.

“The responsibilities of Department of Justice attorneys include not only aggressively enforcing criminal and civil laws enacted by Congress, but also vigorously defending presidential policies and actions against legal challenges on behalf of the United States. The discretion afforded Department attorneys entrusted with those responsibilities does not include latitude to substitute personal political views or judgments for those that prevailed in the election.”

“When Department of Justice attorneys, for example, refuse to advance good-faith arguments by declining to appear in court or sign briefs, it undermines the constitutional order and deprives the President of the benefit of his lawyers.”

“It is therefore the policy of the Department of Justice that any attorney who because of their personal political views or judgments declines to sign a brief or appear in court, refuses to advance good-faith arguments on behalf of the Administration, or otherwise delays or impedes the Department’s mission will be subject to discipline and potentially termination, consistent with applicable law.”

Read AG Bondi’s Memorandum: “General Policy Regarding Zealous Advocacy“

Bondi also issued an order establishing a “Weaponization Working Group” which will investigate US DOJ attorneys who were involved in the cases against President Donald Trump or who prosecuted Jan. 6th protestors. The WWG will also look into Special Counsel Jack Smith and his staff, federal cooperation with state prosecutors such as Alvin Bragg and Letitia James, and several others listed below. She made clear that with respect to federal attorneys who had worked against Mr. Trump or against the participants at the January 6th protest, the investigation would be focused on those who used improper investigative tactics and those who pursued unethical prosecutions. The WWG will look at efforts that were “designed to achieve political objectives or other improper aims rather than pursuing justice or legitimate governmental objectives.” She made clear that those whose conduct constituted only good-faith actions, who simply followed orders from superiors, without engaging in partisanship, policitization, improper tactics, or unethical prosecutions, would not be disciplined.

“The Weaponization Working Group will conduct a review the activities of all departments and agencies exercising civil or criminal enforcement authority of the United States over the last four years, in consultation with the heads of such departments and agencies and consistent with applicable law, to identify instances where a department’s or agency’s conduct appears to have been designed to achieve political objectives or other improper aims rather than pursuing justice or legitimate governmental objectives.”

The Weaponization Working Group will look into the legality of actions relating to:

• Weaponization by Special Counsel Jack Smith and his staff, who spent more than
$50 million targeting President Trump, and the prosecutors and law enforcement personnel
who participated in the unprecedented raid on President Trump’s home.

• Federal cooperation with the weaponization by the Manhattan District Attorney
Alvin Bragg, New York Attorney General Letitia James, their respective staffs, and other
New York officials to target President Trump, his family, and his businesses.

• The pursuit of improper investigative tactics and unethical prosecutions relating to
events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021-as distinct from good-
faith actions by federal employees simply following orders from superiors-which
diverted resources from combating violent and serious crime and thus, were pursued at the
expense of the safety of residents of the District of Columbia.

• The January 23, 2023, memorandum in which the Federal Bureau of investigation
suggested that certain Catholic religious practices were affiliated with violent extremism
and criminal activity.

• Prior Justice Department guidance, policy memoranda, and practices concerning
the investigation of parents of school children who expressed sincere, good-faith concerns
at local government meetings, including the October 4, 2021 memorandum of former
Attorney General Merrick Garland regarding these issues.

• Criminal prosecutions under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act for
non-violent protest activity.

• The retaliatory targeting, and in some instances criminal prosecution, of legitimate
whistle blowers.

Read AG Bondi’s Memorandum: “Restoring the Integrity and Credibility of the DOJ“

Prior to Ms. Bondi’s confirmation, Acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove accused the FBI’s leadership of “insubordination” for their refusal “to identify the core team in Washington, D.C. responsible for the investigation relating to events on January 6, 2021.”

Mr. Bove made clear, however, that FBI agents involved in investigations of the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol will not face discipline if they were only following proper orders and had acted ethically:

“Let me be clear: No FBI employee who simply followed orders and carried out their duties in an ethical ‘manner with respect to January 6 investigations is at risk of termination or other penalties. The only individuals who should be concerned about the process initiated by my January 31, 2025 memo are those who acted with corrupt or partisan intent, who blatantly defied orders from Department leadership, or who exercised discretion in weaponizing the FBI.”

Read Acting Dep. AG Bove’s Memorandum.

In another significant but unrelated move, AG Bondi issued and directive advising “sanctuary cities” that they were being cut-off from all DOJ funding.

“Unlawful border crossings and illegal migration into the United States have reached record levels, resulting in a substantial and unacceptable threat to our national security and public safety. To protect the American people from the effects of unlawful mass migration, President Trump has prioritized securing our Nation’s borders and enforcing federal immigration laws. In furtherance of that objective, the Department of Justice will ensure that, consistent with law, “sanctuary jurisdictions” do not receive access to Federal funds from the Department. Consistent with applicable statutes, regulations, court orders, and terms, the Department of Justice shall pause the distribution of all funds until a review has been completed, terminate any agreements that are in violation of law or are the source of waste, fraud, or abuse, and initiate clawback or recoupment procedures, where appropriate.”

Meanwhile, a group of dissident FBI “agents and/or employees” has anonymously filed a lawsuit against the government, fearful that they will be fired for their participation in the lawfare prosecutions. It is interesting to note that these persons — if they were involved in the warfare activities as it would appear — are hugely concerned about their own hides, but had no concern for those lives they ruined and destroyed with their unethical and contrived prosecutions.

Read the anonymously filed “Class Action Complaint“

Their partisanship becomes evident in the second sentence of their Complaint when they declare that they investigated “criminal activity related to the January 6, 2021, attack on the United States Capitol building” that was undertaken “at the behest of Donald Trump.” They claim that upon reassuring the Presidency, “Mr. Trump has ordered the DOJ to conduct a review and purge of FBI personnel involved in these investigations and prosecutions. This directive is unlawful and retaliatory.” They apparently do not understand the difference between “retaliatory” actions by Mr Trump and being properly investigated to determine if they should be held accountable for their own unlawful conduct. As FBI Agents and/or employees they had no trouble initiating criminal investigations against others — and the issue here is whether those investigation were warranted or whether they constituted partisan, unethical conduct — but when it comes their turn to face investigation for their own alleged criminal conduct, they vociferously object. Evidentially, they do not believe that “bad” FBI Agents should be prosecuted, or alternatively it is not they who are bad, but it is Donald J. Trump who is bad. Just read these allegations from their Complaint:

• “Information obtained during the investigation of the Jan. 6 attack also established that Mr. Trump was an active participant in the planning of the attack on the Capitol.”
• “Plaintiffs assert that the ultimate goal of both the Jan. 6 attack and the efforts in Congress by allies of Donald Trump was to block the peaceful transition of power to the winner of the 2020 Presidential Election, Joe Biden.”
• “Donald Trump has made repeated public pronouncements of his intent to exact revenge upon persons he perceives to be disloyal to him by simply executing their duties in investigating acts incited by him and persons loyal to him.”

We don’t usually comment about the quality of lawyering, but these FBI Agents and/or Employees have just admitted to their serious partisanship. The words quoted above, though written by their lawyers, assuredly were reviewed by the Agents and/or employees, and those words are damning as to any claim of an even-handed prosecutorial function.

One final observation about their Complaint: They seem to think that the fact that Special Counsel Jack Smith — whom they fail to even mention was determined by a Federal Judge to be acting without authority under color of law — was able to obtain indictments against President Trump demonstrates with clarity the righteousness of their investigation, but somehow they don’t think that it would appropriate for any assertions against them to be put before a Grand Jury.

Surely, these FBI Agents and/or Employees, all hiding behind anonymity, are acting like we would expect the guilty to act.

So just how many FBI employees were involved in the January 6th investigations and prosecutions? The figures that have emerged are staggering. Over 5,000 FBI employees were involved, which equates to more than 13% of all FBI personnel. Obviously the FBI allowed a lot of other criminal matters to go uninvestigated as it obsessed over Jan. 6th. How many crimes were overlooked?, how many criminals went free?, how many people were victimized without justice coming to their aid, while the FBI devoted a hugely unwarranted percentage of its crime-fighting personnel to arresting people like the 72-year old “J6 Praying Grandma” from Colorado, who did no more than walk into the Capitol for ten minutes on January 6 2021. Sentencing her in 2024, the Magistrate Judge described her conduct as a “grave offense,” and while her six-month sentence was one of home confinement (many other J6 defendants spent years in jail), the judge saw fit to fine her $103,000. So at this point, as these FBI Agents are exposed for their wrong-doing, and as prosecutors are being fired, it may be time to assess as well the conduct of judges who participated in this abuse of power.