Hegseth restricts military officials from talking to Congress without prior approval
Alex Wong/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is mandating that personnel can no longer engage lawmakers or their staff about most major issues confronting the U.S. military without prior approval — a list that includes recent military strikes in the Caribbean, how the Pentagon buys weapons, and the construction of a U.S. missile shield.
It’s a major shift on how the military interacts with Congress. Congressional staff say they are concerned that Hegseth’s clampdown will hamstring lawmakers’ ability to get even routine information as it oversees the Pentagon’s $1 trillion budget and cobbles together an annual defense policy bill .
Under Hegseth’s new mandate, staff from the various military services and agencies were told they must coordinate first with Hegseth’s central legislative office. Staffers say they worry the result will be that information needed by Congress will wind up bottlenecked, waiting for aides to Hegseth to approve.
The list of restricted topics, reviewed by ABC News, includes acquisition reform, spectrum, critical munitions, budget and reconciliation spending plans, critical minerals, foreign military sales, attempted lethal force on military installations and the national defense strategy. CNN first reported the list on Sunday.
In a post on X, Nebraska Republican Rep. Don Bacon called it an “amateur move.”
“I was a five-time commander & our leadership WANTED us to engage members of Congress,” he said. “We wanted to share what our great airmen were doing. We were proud of our service. The new rules have put a large barrier between the military & Congress. Pentagon says the change is very small. But I already see the impact with military members being afraid to communicate. This is another amateur move.”
The Pentagon did not immediately respond to an ABC News request for comment.
Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell told CNN, “the Department intends to improve accuracy and responsiveness in communicating with the Congress to facilitate increased transparency. This review is for processes internal to the Department and does not change how or from whom Congress receives information.”
(WASHINGTON) — The Justice Department investigation into Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is drawing backlash from former Federal Reserve and Treasury officials as well as current members of Congress, including those in President Donald Trump’s own party.
A bipartisan group of top economic officials released a blistering statement on Monday calling the probe an “unprecedented attempt to use prosecutorial attacks to undermine” the central bank’s independence.
“This is how monetary policy is made in emerging markets with weak institutions, with highly negative consequences for inflation and the functioning of their economies more broadly. It has no place in the United States whose greatest strength is the rule of law, which is at the foundation of our economic success,” read the statement from Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Janet Yellen, Tim Geithner, Jacob Lew, Hank Paulson and others.
The investigation, announced by Powell in a rare video message on Sunday, is related to Powell’s testimony last June about the multi-year renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings in Washington. But Trump has made Powell a frequent target of his attacks and push to cut interest rates.
White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, who is on Trump’s short list to be the next Federal Reserve chair, said time will tell if the probe is a pretext for firing Powell over interest rates.
“Well, in the fullness of time, we’ll find out whether it looks like a pretext,” Hassett, who denied involvement in the probe, told CNBC in an appearance on Monday. “But right now, we’ve got a building that’s got, like, dramatic cost overruns and, you know, plans for the buildings that look inconsistent with the testimony. But, you know, again, I’m not a Justice Department person. I hope everything turns out OK.”
Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, who serves on the Senate Banking Committee, said he will oppose the confirmation of any Trump nominee to the Federal Reserve until legal matters concerning Powell are resolved, which could make it difficult for a nominee to advance out of committee.
“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump Administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none. It is now the independence and credibility of the Department of Justice that are in question,” Tillis said in a statement on Sunday night.
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, in a post on X on Monday, said Tillis is “right in blocking any Federal Reserve nominees.”
“After speaking with Chair Powell this morning, it’s clear the administration’s investigation is nothing more than an attempt at coercion. If the Department of Justice believes an investigation into Chair Powell is warranted based on project cost overruns — which are not unusual — then Congress needs to investigate the Department of Justice. The stakes are too high to look the other way: if the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer,” Murkowski posted on X.
House Financial Services Chairman Rep. French Hill, a Republican, said pursuing criminal charges against Powell is “an unnecessary distraction.” Sen. Kevin Cramer, another Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, said that he does not believe Powell is a criminal and that he hopes the criminal matter will soon be put to rest.
House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Monday that “if the investigation is warranted, then they’ll have to play that out.” When pressed if he believed the probe is warranted, Johnson said, “I have not reviewed his testimony, so I am not sure, but that’s not really my lane.”
A spokesperson for Attorney General Pam Bondi said Bondi “has instructed her U.S. Attorneys to prioritize investigating any abuse of taxpayer dollars.” Powell said in his statement the probe was fueled by Trump’s monthslong pressure campaign on him to lower interest rates.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, slammed Trump as a “wannabe dictator” over his campaign against Powell.
“Acting like the wannabe dictator he is, Trump is trying to push out the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board and complete his corrupt takeover of America’s central bank so that it serves his interests, along with his billionaire friends,” Warren said in a speech about the future of the Democratic Party ahead of 2028 at the National Press Club.
President Trump denied any involvement in the criminal probe during a brief interview with NBC News on Sunday night but continued his criticism of Powell’s leadership.
ABC News’ Lauren Peller contributed to this report.
James Comey speaks, May 30, 2023 in New York City. (Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge has dismissed the criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James on the grounds that the appointment of the U.S. attorney who brought the indictments was invalid.
The judge dismissed the charges without prejudice, meaning the cases could potentially be refiled by an appropriately appointed U.S. attorney.
U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie concluded that the appointment of Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan was unconstitutional and that her actions bringing the case were “unlawful” and “ineffective.”
“Because Ms. Halligan had no lawful authority to present the indictment, I will grant Mr. Comey’s motion and dismiss the indictment without prejudice,” she wrote.
Halligan, President Donald Trump’s handpicked U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, sought the indictment of Comey and James over the objections of career prosecutors after Trump forced out previous U.S. attorney Erik Siebert who sources said had resisted bringing the cases.
Halligan, who had no experience as a prosecutor, sought the indictment after Trump, in a social media post, called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to act “NOW!!!” to prosecute Comey, James and Rep. Adam Schiff.
Comey pleaded not guilty in October to one count of false statements and one count of obstruction of a congressional proceeding related to his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020, amid what critics call Trump’s campaign of retribution against his perceived political foes.
Vice President JD Vance has said any such prosecutions are “driven by law and not by politics.”
James, who successfully brought a civil fraud case against Trump last year and leads multiple lawsuits challenging his administration’s policies, pleaded not guilty in October to charges that she committed mortgage fraud related to a home she purchased in 2020.
Prosecutors said she falsely described a property she purchased in Norfolk, Virginia, as a second home instead of an investment property in order to obtain a lower mortgage rate. James said she purchased the property for her great-niece and allowed her and her children to live in the house rent-free.”I am heartened by today’s victory and grateful for the prayers and support I have received from around the country,” James said in a statement following Friday’s ruling. “I remain fearless in the face of these baseless charges as I continue fighting for New Yorkers every single day.”
With the statute of limitations for Comey’s case set to expire, it is unclear whether the case could be refiled in time. Lawyers for Comey have argued that the statute of limitations has already run out.
Unlike the case against Comey, the allegations against James appear to be well within the statute of limitations should the Department of Justice try to pursue the case again.
Under federal law, the attorney general has the authority to appoint an interim U.S. Attorney for 120 days before the appointment power shifts to the judges in that federal district. When U.S. Attorney Jessica Aber, who was President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the office, resigned on Jan. 20, Siebert was appointed as interim U.S. attorney.
After 120 days, the power to appoint an interim U.S. attorney shifted from the attorney general to the judges in the Eastern District of Virginia, who used their authority to allow Siebert to continue serving in his role.
“When that clock expired on May 21, 2025, so too did the Attorney General’s appointment authority,” Judge Currie wrote in her decision.
Siebert continued to serve lawfully in his position until September, when he resigned following a pressure campaign from the president. Within 48 hours of Trump’s social media post calling for the prosecution of his political foes, Bondi cited the same federal law that allows a 120-day interim appointment to authorize Halligan as the interim U.S. attorney.
After both Comey and James were indicted, Bondi attempted to ratify Haligan’s appointment, but Judge Currie rejected that attempt to fix the issue after the fact.
“The implications of a contrary conclusion are extraordinary. It would mean the Government could send any private citizen off the street — attorney or not — into the grand jury room to secure an indictment so long as the Attorney General gives her approval after the fact. That cannot be the law,” she wrote.
According to Currie, the decision about who leads the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Eastern Virginia is now in the hands of the judges in that district, until Trump nominates and the Senate confirms a permanent U.S. attorney to take over.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi delivers remarks on an arrest connected to the 2012 U.S. Embassy attack in Benghazi, at the Department of Justice on February 6, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Lawmakers grilled a combative Attorney General Pam Bondi as she testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday amid multiple controversies, including her handling of the files on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and the Justice Department’s targeting of President Donald Trump’s political foes.
In a fiery exchange at the beginning of the hearing, Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal pushed Bondi to turn around and apologize to a group of Epstein survivors who attended the hearing.
Bondi, who didn’t turn around, told Jayapal she wouldn’t “get in the gutter for her theatrics.”
In her opening statement, Bondi expressed support for the victims.
“I have spent my entire career fighting for victims, and I will continue to do so. I am deeply sorry for what any victim — any victim — has been through, especially as a result of that monster,” Bondi said to the Epstein survivors.
Bondi said several Democrats were engaging in “theatrics” throughout the hearing, and when Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the committee, pushed her to answer questions instead of engaging in heated interactions, Bondi called Raskin a “washed up loser lawyer.”
Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have been sharply critical of the Justice Department’s incomplete release of the Epstein files and extensive DOJ redactions after some viewed unredacted files at the agency beginning Monday.
Raskin, said he was outraged by Bondi’s handling of the Epstein files.
“You redacted the names of abusers, enablers, accomplices and co-conspirators, apparently to spare them embarrassment and disgrace, which is the exact opposite of what the law ordered you to do. Even worse, you shockingly failed to redact many of the victims’ names, which is what you were ordered to do by Congress,” he said.
“Some of the victims had come forward publicly, but many had not. Many had kept their torment private, even from family and friends. But you published their names, their identity, their images on thousands of pages for the world to see. So you ignored the law,” he added.
Earlier this month, the Justice Department — in response to concerns raised by victims’ and their lawyers — removed from its website “several thousand” documents and media that may have “inadvertently included victim-identifying information.”
Tensions were high as a group of Epstein survivors were seated behind Bondi. The group spoke out about the federal investigation into the convicted sex offender earlier Wednesday and have been critical of the federal government for not doing enough to prosecute Epstein over the years or look into the people who allegedly enabled him.
Several victims and their families said they feel the federal government has not done enough outreach to them.
“Pam, I have a clear and simple message for you. The way this administration and you specifically have handled survivors has been nothing short of a failure,” Sky Roberts, the brother of Virginia Giuffre, Epstein’s most high-profile accuser said prior to the hearing.
Sky Roberts’ wife, Amanda Roberts, said Bondi’s treatment of the Epstein survivors has been disappointing.
“To Ms. Bondi, we are deeply disappointed by the way you and your leadership in this department have treated survivors. And today, while you’re being questioned, we ask you to look in the eyes of every single one of us and remember Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who paid the ultimate sacrifice for the trauma that she had endured,“ Amanda Roberts said.
Raskin also blasted Bondi in his opening statement, calling her handling of investigations a “vendetta factory.”
“You’ve turned the people’s Department of Justice into Trump’s instrument of revenge,” Raskin said. “Trump orders up prosecutions like pizza, and you deliver every time.”
In her opening statement, Bondi highlighted the cooperation between Democratic mayors to drive down crime in Memphis and Washington, D.C.
In the same opening statement, Bondi said that the clashes between federal agents have been avoidable and were so due to the “reckless rhetoric” by certain politicians.
Bondi also went after judges who rule against the administration, and called it “judicial activism.”
“We fought through a nonstop flood of bad faith, temporary restraining orders from liberal activist judges across this country. America has never seen this level of coordinated judicial opposition towards a presidential administration. It is not only an unlawful attack on the executive branches authority, but a serious attack on the democratic process,” she said.
She will likely be grilled about her efforts to revive cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York’s Democratic Attorney General Letitia James after indictments against them were tossed.
Bondi is also expected to be questioned about the raid to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro — something administration officials have said was a law enforcement operation.
Given that, questions have been raised about why the attorney general was not present to discuss the matter at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago news conference announcing the raid.
The attorney general has testified on Capitol Hill only a handful of times.
In her most recent testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, she appeared to use prepared lines of attack against Democratic lawmakers who demanded she answer their tough questions.
