Pam Bondi Reverses Media Protections to Cover Up Her Complicity in Unlawful Renditions

There’s a great deal that is wrong not just with Pam Bondi’s reversal of Merrick Garland’s media policy, but the memo reversing it itself.

Bondi was in such a rush to splutter out unbridled sycophancy, she didn’t bother to spell check the document.

The very premise — that all leaking of “sensitive” information undermines law enforcement, the claim that leaking “sensitive” information is illegal — is wrong.

Safeguarding classified, privileged, and other sensitive information is essential to effective governance and law enforcement. Federal government employees intentionally leaking sensitive information to the media undermines the ability of the Department of Justice to uphold the rule of law, protect civil rights, and keep America safe.

Bondi ridiculously quotes Trump’s attack on Chris Krebs out of context and claims something that happened under Donald Trump instead happened under Biden.

However, under the Biden Administration, “elitist leaders in Government . . . weaponized their undeserved influence to silence perceived political opponents and advance their preferred, and often erroneous, narrative about significant matters of public debate.”2

2 Presidential Memorandum, Addressing Risks from Chris Krebs and Government Censorship, __ Fed. Reg. __ (Apr. 9, 2025), https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidentialactions/2025/04/addressing-risks-from-chris-krebs-and-government-censorship.

Worse still, Bondi parrots Trump’s attacks on Miles Taylor, including Trump’s legally erroneous claim that criticizing Trump anonymously is “treasonous.”

This Justice Department will not tolerate unauthorized disclosures that undermine President Trump’s policies, victimize government agencies, and cause harm to the American people. “Where a Government employee improperly discloses sensitive information for the purposes of personal enrichment and undermining our foreign policy, national security, and Government effectiveness—all ultimately designed to sow chaos and distrust in Government—this conduct could properly be characterized as treasonous.”8

8 Presidential Memorandum, Addressing Risks Associated with an Egregious Leaker and Disseminator of Falsehoods, __ Fed. Reg. __ (Apr. 9, 2025), https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/addressing-risks-associated-with-anegregious-leaker-and-disseminator-of-falsehoods.

Both Krebs and Taylor, I think, have cause to demand Bondi’s recusal from any matters affecting them.

Bondi not only falsely describes the scope of the gag order that Tanya Chutkan imposed on Donald Trump,  and defies the DC Circuit’s decision upholding it, but in so doing sanctions vicious attacks on witnesses in criminal cases (the scope of the Chutkan gag upheld by the DC Circuit) and slanderous attacks against the FBI (the intended scope of the Florida gag).

This weaponization included prosecutors trying to muzzle protected First Amendment speech criticizing the Biden Administration, including through gag orders targeting not only President Trump3

3 See ECF No. 105, United States v. Trump, No. 23-Cr.-257 (D.D.C.) (gag order); ECF No. 592, United States v. Trump, No. 23-Cr.-80101 (S.D. Fla.) (motion for gag order).

Every bit of this memo is an abuse of her position as Attorney General.

But I find the specific example of a purportedly classified leak she invokes even more problematic.

The leaks have not abated since President Trump’s second inauguration,6 including leaks of classified information.7

7 See, e.g., John Hudson & Warren P. Strobel, U.S. intelligence contradicts Trump’s justification for mass deportations, Washington Post (Apr. 17, 2025), https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/04/17/us-intelligence-tren-de-araguadeportations-trump; Charlie Savage & Julian Barnes, Intelligence Assessment Said to Contradict Trump on Venezuelan Gang, New York Times (Mar. 22, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/20/us/politics/intelligence-trump-venezuelan-gang-alienenemies.html.

These are the WaPo story reporting that 17 of 18 agencies dispute the claims at the heart of Trump’s Alien Enemies Act invovcation and the earlier NYT report first debunking Trump’s claims.

Given Tulsi Gabbard’s boisterous referral, I don’t doubt that these are the alleged leaks under investigation and these will be the first journalists to be targeted by DOJ (while I have no hopes in Bezos’ rag, I hope NYT, especially, preempts this with a challenge to the terms of this order).

But that is the single example of purportedly classified information in the entire memo. Bondi is saying she has to start targeting journalists to protect Trump’s policies, but the single allegedly unlawful leaks she points to are leaks that prove DOJ is defending renditions based on an Executive Order that Trump’s own Intelligence Community knows to be false.

This is not about protecting classified information. This is about covering up her own complicity in unlawful renditions.