Bondi Botches It
Her selective production of Mar-a-Lago files violated the law and implicated her boss. Plus, announcing a contest and a winner.
Lighter Fare
Happy Friday, Fed Heads. We like to lighten things up on Fridays, just a little. Today, we have a contest to kick off and a winner to crown before we delve into a piece on the bombshell Mar-a-Lago memo, which is exclusive for paid subscribers because it’s the third essay published this week.
I was joined by a fantastic trio—Natasha Korecki, Ali Vitali, and Jacob Weisberg—for last week’s roundtable. On discussion was another grinding week of war with Iran. Domestically, Trump officials started to feel the heat in D.C., as Attorney General Pam Bondi was subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee for her bungled management of the Epstein files. Another embattled administration official, Greg Bovino—the Border Patrol agent who was the face of the federal surge in Minnesota—is retiring at the end of the month. What’s his next move? You can hear our guests’ spirited answers at 58:00. Submit your own five-word-or-fewer entry here for a chance to win a coveted Talking Feds mug.
Our latest winner of said coveted mug is Ken, with their sparkling answer of “who the puck knows?” to the question, “What kind of security expertise did Patel provide to the men’s hockey team?” after FBI Director Kash Patel spent time partying with the US men’s hockey team in Italy. Kudos to Ken! A member of our team will be in touch to send you your mug.
Bondi Botches It
Pam Bondi played the game by her own, illegal rules; and she still managed to completely bungle it.
Last Friday, DOJ shipped to the House Judiciary Committee some documents about the Mar-a-Lago prosecution against Donald Trump led by Special Counsel Jack Smith. Recall that the case was more straightforward than the January 6 prosecution, and by most prosecutors’ assessment, it likely would have resulted in conviction of Trump, but for the 2024 election and the repeated pro-Trump ministrations of Judge Aileen Cannon.
Wait a second. Hasn’t the same Judge Cannon ordered documents from the case to remain sealed and barred from disclosure? And didn’t the DOJ threaten Smith it would prosecute him criminally if he revealed anything about the case in congressional testimony, while refusing to explain what the boundaries of disclosure would be?
Yes. And to be clear, Cannon’s order extends not just to Volume II of the Smith report but also to “any materials that would reveal the substance of Volume II.”
Since the report is an account for the Attorney General of the investigation, a January 13, 2023 memo to the AG laying out the state of the evidence is nothing if not a reveal of part of the substance of that report.
But as part of its campaign to rewrite the history of Trump’s crimes—and in the process discredit Jack Smith, whom Trump continues to smear as “a deranged lunatic” and “political hack”—DOJ made selective disclosures to the House Judiciary Committee of documents, including that January 13 memo. Somebody at 950 Pennsylvania Avenue concluded it would dirty Smith up. That may illustrate the paucity of documents reflecting poorly on the prosecution, which professional prosecutors on both sides of the aisle averred was basically open and shut.
In fact, the memo is replete with demonstrations of Trump’s guilt and Smith’s probity.
