海角大神

On Day 1 of his second term, President Donald Trump signed an executive order called 鈥淓nding the Weaponization of the Federal Government.鈥�

Among its provisions, the order instructed both the U.S. attorney general and director of national intelligence to review the activities of their agencies and recommend 鈥渁ppropriate remedial actions.鈥�

Ever since, President Trump has used the vast power at his disposal to go after people and institutions he says have done him wrong. Not since Richard Nixon鈥檚 infamous 鈥渆nemies list鈥� more than a half-century ago has a U.S. chief executive so aggressively pursued a campaign of retribution.

Thursday鈥檚 indictment of John Bolton, Mr. Trump鈥檚 former national security adviser, along with the recent indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and current New York Attorney General Letitia James are just the start, the president himself has made clear.

Mr. Trump has taken unprecedented steps to weaponize the federal government in the name of addressing what was, in his and many Republicans鈥� view, the weaponization of the justice system against him during the last two Democratic administrations. That includes the end of the Obama presidency, when Mr. Trump burst onto the political scene and the FBI investigated potential ties between his campaign and the Russian government.

Whether the Democrats in fact engaged in 鈥渨eaponization鈥� is very much open to interpretation. The president鈥檚 supporters say federal and state investigations into Mr. Trump鈥檚 actions were overdone and persecutory. Mr. Trump was criminally indicted four times 鈥� twice federally and twice at the state level 鈥� and convicted once. He also faced civil suits.

Democrats and many legal experts maintain that the Justice Department under both the Obama and Biden administrations operated independently from the White House, unlike now. (Indeed, the Biden DOJ investigated and prosecuted the president鈥檚 own son.) They say investigations like the Trump-Russia probe represented necessary due diligence in the name of protecting national security or even democracy itself 鈥� and had the government not pursued them, it would have been a miscarriage of justice.

The legal cases against Mr. Trump all involved evidence, to different degrees, suggesting potential crimes. Mr. Trump鈥檚 phone call to Georgia鈥檚 secretary of state aimed at overturning the outcome of the 2020 election is a case in point. The current administration鈥檚 cases against Mr. Trump鈥檚 avowed enemies have mostly been framed by the president himself as consequences for what he labels politically motivated prosecutions.

Still, wittingly or not, by aggressively investigating Mr. Trump 鈥� be it the 2022 raid on Mar-a-Lago in search of classified documents or alleged Trump-Russia ties during the 2016 campaign or the Trump-inspired riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 鈥� Democrats did incentivize Mr. Trump and his team to pursue retribution, some analysts say.

鈥淭he Democrats absolutely opened a door very wide that you cannot close when you leave office,鈥� says Ron Chapman, a federal criminal defense attorney.

The federal indictment of Attorney General James, a Democrat, over alleged mortgage fraud, is a prime example. In 2022, Ms. James filed a civil lawsuit against Mr. Trump and business associates, alleging fraud in exaggerating the value of Trump properties. They were found guilty, and ordered to pay a penalty of more than $360 million. An appeals court later vacated the penalty; Mr. Trump and company are appealing the guilty verdict.

Ms. James鈥� long-stated goal had been to prosecute Mr. Trump. During her 2018 campaign for New York attorney general, she pledged to investigate his real estate dealings and 鈥渉old those in power accountable.鈥� Now under indictment herself, Ms. James is not backing down. Campaigning with New York Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani on Monday, she went after Mr. Trump, though not by name.

鈥淧owerful voices,鈥� Ms. James said, are trying to 鈥渨eaponize justice for political gain.鈥�

Trump making public calls for prosecutions

The lawfare in recent weeks has been intense. Last month, Mr. Trump expressed frustration with U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi in a social media post 鈥� addressed to 鈥淧am鈥� and reportedly posted publicly by mistake 鈥� over delayed action against Mr. Comey, Ms. James, and California Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff.

Other former and current top officials under investigation, if not potential indictment, include former CIA Director John Brennan; former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper; former special counsel Jack Smith; and Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

On Wednesday, Mr. Trump named additional legal targets during an Oval Office media availability 鈥� saying that Andrew Weissmann (former general counsel at the FBI) and Lisa Monaco (former deputy attorney general) should be investigated along with Mr. Smith, whom he called 鈥渄eranged鈥� and a 鈥渃riminal.鈥� The president was flanked by Ms. Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel.

鈥淚鈥檓 the one that had to suffer through [investigations] and ultimately win,鈥� Mr. Trump said. 鈥淏ut what they did was criminal.鈥�

Mr. Bolton was indicted on Thursday on 18 counts involving mishandling of classified information.聽In the indictment, he was accused of sending 鈥渄iary鈥� notes by email on his activities as national security adviser, with some of the information he sent labeled top secret. The emails were later hacked by someone with an Iranian government connection, according to the indictment.

Mr. Trump and Mr. Bolton had a tense relationship during the latter鈥檚 17 months as national security adviser during Mr. Trump鈥檚 first term. Mr. Bolton鈥檚 memoir, 鈥淭he Room Where It Happened,鈥� and his public criticism of the president haven鈥檛 helped. FBI agents raided Mr. Bolton鈥檚 home and office in August in search of classified documents.

The raid on Mr. Bolton鈥檚 properties echoed the one on Mr. Trump鈥檚 Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago. It also contrasted with the fact that former President Joe Biden was never charged for keeping classified documents in his residence near Wilmington, Delaware, dating from his time as vice president and, before that, a senator. A key difference is that Mr. Biden allowed federal agents to search his property, while Mr. Trump resisted such efforts before the predawn raid.

Mr. Comey was indicted on Sept. 25 on two charges 鈥� making a false statement and obstructing a congressional proceeding. Those charges stem from a 2020 Senate hearing on FBI investigations into two matters: Russian interference in the 2016 election and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton鈥檚 use of a private email server.

At Mr. Comey鈥檚 arraignment on Oct. 8, his lawyer called the prosecution 鈥渧indictive鈥� and 鈥渟elective,鈥� and said he would move to dismiss the case.

When the previous U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Erik Siebert 鈥� a Trump appointee 鈥� refused to seek a Comey indictment, Mr. Trump pressured him to resign. The interim U.S. attorney, Lindsey Halligan, a former personal lawyer of Mr. Trump鈥檚 who had no previous experience as a prosecutor, obliged in bringing the case over the objections of other prosecutors.

Experts on the federal judiciary see a major breach in the norms of how government is supposed to work.

鈥淲e鈥檝e just crossed a Rubicon here,鈥� says Mary McCord, executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University.

Ever since the Nixon Watergate scandal of the early 1970s, 鈥渋t has been a priority of both the Department of Justice and the White House to preserve independence鈥� between the two, says Ms. McCord, former chief of the criminal division in the U.S. Attorney鈥檚 Office for the District of Columbia.

The purpose of that separation, she says, was to prevent a perception by the American people of the Justice Department as 鈥渏ust simply being a tool for the president鈥檚 personal political use.鈥�

Now, that separation appears to be gone.

David Sklansky, a law professor at Stanford University, argues that to describe what the Justice Department is doing as 鈥渇ighting weaponization鈥� is 鈥淥rwellian in its misuse of language.鈥�

鈥淵ou can鈥檛 say, 鈥業鈥檓 all about fighting weaponization鈥� and in the same breath say, 鈥業 insist on retribution, I insist that the Department of Justice go after my enemies,鈥� which is what Trump has done.鈥�

鈥淣orms are not good enough anymore鈥�

Republicans have been gearing up for this fight since long before Mr. Trump retook the White House. In the previous Congress, a House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government spent two years investigating 鈥渢he Biden-Harris administration鈥檚 weaponized federal government鈥� and in December, issued a 17,019-page report on its findings. A focus was alleged government efforts to censor speech by 鈥淏ig Tech.鈥�

On Inauguration Day, in addition to signing the 鈥渁nti-weaponization鈥� order, Mr. Trump also issued a blanket pardon for the nearly 1,600 people convicted or awaiting trial or sentencing for their participation in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol in support of Mr. Trump鈥檚 false claim that the 2020 election was stolen.

Revelations about the Jan. 6 investigations continue to drive GOP ire. Last week, Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, shared a document showing the cellphone data (but not the content) of nine congressional Republicans around the time of the riot. Senator Grassley says that the analysis violated the lawmakers鈥� privacy rights.

The phone data was gathered in 2023 as part of the FBI鈥檚 鈥淎rctic Frost鈥� investigation, which informed the criminal case against Mr. Trump over his role on Jan. 6 handled by Mr. Smith 鈥� the former special counsel who now faces potential indictment himself. (Mr. Smith also handled the case involving Mr. Trump鈥檚 possession of classified documents after leaving office.) The Justice Department is investigating Mr. Smith for possible violations of a law forbidding federal employees from engaging in political activities.

In a recent interview at a forum in London, Mr. Smith dismissed allegations of politicization in the two cases.

鈥淭he idea that politics would play a role in big cases like this, it鈥檚 absolutely ludicrous and it鈥檚 totally contrary to my experience as a prosecutor,鈥� Mr. Smith said in a discussion with Mr. Weissmann, the former FBI counsel whom Mr. Trump also called to prosecute. Mr. Weissmann was a lead investigator in special counsel Robert Mueller鈥檚 investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election and allegations of Trump-Russia collusion. The Mueller report, which Mr. Weissmann helped author, found no evidence of collusion.

Historian Barbara Perry notes that after the Watergate-era 鈥淪aturday Night Massacre鈥� 鈥� the resignation of senior government officials after Nixon fired special prosecutor Archibald Cox 鈥� Congress passed legislation aimed at insulating the Justice Department from politics: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Ethics in Government Act, and the Inspector General Act.

Professor Perry, co-director of the Presidential Oral History Program at the University of Virginia鈥檚 Miller Center, also cites the words of Mr. Cox himself: The attorney general 鈥渨ill likely be a political ally of the president, but he is not a servant,鈥� Mr. Cox said in 1973. 鈥淲hat distinguishes between the two is the ethical obligation to apply the law in a fair, even-handed, and disinterested way.鈥�

Today, Ms. Perry says, 鈥渁ll of that is blown away. Norms are not good enough anymore.鈥�