The FBI raided former national security adviser John Bolton‘s house on Friday. The associated investigation is believed to center on Bolton’s possible mishandling of classified information in relation to his 2020 book The Room Where It Happened, which is highly critical of President Donald Trump‘s first term conduct. Friday’s raid coincided with coordinated social media comments by FBI Director Kash Patel, FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino, and Attorney General Pam Bondi defending the raid as an act of prudent justice.
Perhaps that’s true, perhaps not.
Bolton served as Trump’s national security adviser between 2018 and 2019. He has subsequently become an insistent critic of the president (disclosure: Bolton is an occasional contributor to the Washington Examiner). To be clear, there was concern in the national security community and by some close foreign allies that Bolton’s 2020 book includes classified information. An FBI investigation into Bolton’s possible mishandling of classified information was opened shortly before Trump left office, then later suspended by the Biden administration.
Today’s raid would have been authorized by a federal judge’s signature on a search warrant. But we now need more information on why the investigation was dropped by the Biden administration. Was it as a political favor to Bolton over his criticism of Trump? Or was it because Justice Department attorneys in the national security division believed there was insufficient evidence to bring charges? If it is the latter possibility, then we must ask what changed between then and now. And the one thing we know for certain is that Trump is back in the Oval Office.
We also know that the Trump administration has shown a rampant interest in aggressively pursuing its political opponents since Trump reentered office. This has included acts of retribution not simply against those who are deemed to have engaged in lawfare against the president, but also against those who have engaged in public criticism of the president. This joins to broader Trump administration actions to restrict and deter administration-disfavored free speech. It is plainly incompatible with the American tradition. Indeed, this activity renders utterly hypocritical Trump’s inaugural address pledge to “bring back free speech to America.”
Bondi’s comments on Friday that “justice will always be pursued” are also prima facie absurd. After all, consider that the Bondi DOJ has repeatedly dropped criminal investigations or charges against Trump allies suspected of serious public corruption. These include illegal campaign donation charges against former congressman Jeff Fortenberry, a campaign finance investigation against Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN), and corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. While Adams is a Democrat, he is a Trump ally on immigration enforcement. But only this week was one of Adams’s top aides caught in another apparently corrupt activity when she attempted to bribe a reporter.
The fear, or should-be-fear, is that Trump is weaponizing the DOJ against his political enemies.
Moreover, there’s ample evidence that this vindictive agenda extends beyond DOJ activity. Consider that numerous former officials from the former Trump administration, whom Trump perceives as too critical of him, had their government security details withdrawn shortly after Trump reentered office. That included Bolton, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley. As first reported by the Washington Examiner, these security details were assigned in response to credible and continuing assassination efforts by Iran to retaliate for Trump’s January 2020 killing of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
Finally, it should not be forgotten that Trump withheld classified materials, some very highly classified, in unsecured locations at his Florida Mar-a-Lago residence after leaving office. He did so after repeated government efforts to return the materials to proper custody. Yes, Americans used their democratic authority to essentially displace the charges against Trump for mishandling classified information. And yes, former President Joe Biden also engaged in similar but less serious activity. Still, the relevance to Bolton’s situation deserves attention.
The key point is simple: If there is a new cause or information suggesting that Bolton did indeed mishandle classified information and was given undue political cover from the Biden administration, this FBI activity would appear legitimate.
But it is absurd for senior Trump law enforcement and DOJ officials to insist that they are always applying the rule of law without any partisan considerations.