More stories

  • in

    LeShon Johnson, Ex-N.F.L. Running Back, Ran Major Dogfighting Kennel, U.S. Says

    Federal investigators say that they seized 190 pit-bull-type dogs from the former player, who previously pleaded guilty to state dogfighting charges in 2004.The federal authorities said this week that they had broken up a major dogfighting kennel in Oklahoma led by the former National Football League running back LeShon Johnson, seizing 190 pit-bull-type dogs in what they described as the most ever taken from a single person in a federal case.In a news release, the Justice Department said on Tuesday that a 21-count indictment against Mr. Johnson, 54, had recently been unsealed in federal court in Muskogee, Okla. He was arrested on March 20 and arraigned the same day before being released, according to court documents.Mr. Johnson, who played for the Green Bay Packers, the Arizona Cardinals and the New York Giants in the 1990s, is facing felony charges of possessing and trafficking dogs for use in an animal fighting venture. If convicted, he could face up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine for each count.He previously pleaded guilty to state dogfighting charges in 2004 and received a five-year deferred sentence.“The F.B.I. will not tolerate criminals that harm innocent animals for their twisted form of entertainment,” Kash Patel, the F.B.I. director, said in a statement. “The F.B.I. views animal cruelty investigations as a precursor to larger, organized crime efforts, similar to trafficking and homicides.”Courtney R. Jordan, a lawyer for Mr. Johnson, declined to comment on Wednesday.Investigators say that Mr. Johnson “selectively bred ‘champion’ and ‘grand champion’ fighting dogs — dogs that have respectively won three or five fights” as part of his criminal enterprise, which was known as Mal Kant Kennels and was based in Broken Arrow, Okla., and Haskell, Okla.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ‘Epstein Files’ Release, Hyped by Pam Bondi, Falls Short of Expectations

    The release of flight logs and Jeffrey Epstein’s contact list by the attorney general was met with criticism from those who had expected the documents to reveal new information.For days, Attorney General Pam Bondi had talked about releasing the “Epstein files,” supposedly secret documents the federal government has on some of the powerful men who were in the orbit of the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.But the roughly 200 pages of documents that Ms. Bondi released on Thursday contained little new information pointing to wrongdoing by anyone other than Mr. Epstein, a registered sex offender who died in jail. The document dump largely consisted of flight logs for Mr. Epstein’s planes — long ago made public — and contact information for hundreds of associates, along with brief descriptions of items found at his residences.The release was billed as a gesture ushering in a new era of transparency at the Justice Department. But the hyped first release of documents (which Ms. Bondi teased as “breaking news” in a Fox News appearance on Wednesday night) appeared to be mostly political theater. Its confusing daylong rollout even spun off a few new conspiracy theories among some Trump supporters, who view the Epstein investigation as a fountainhead for other conspiracies.On Thursday afternoon, Ms. Bondi and Kash Patel, the director of the F.B.I., offered a sneak preview of the documents to several conservative influencers, some of whom emerged from the West Wing waving chunky white binders with the label “The Epstein Files: Phase I.” One of them later called it an “interesting souvenir.”But by midafternoon, the Justice Department had not posted the contents. And Ms. Bondi was drawing criticism on social media from those who had taken her at her word the night before. The conservative personality Glenn Beck posted on X: “The Epstein files are a total joke,” and asked, “Who is subverting POTUS?”Ms. Bondi responded by promising more documents to come. Later, she said that a “source” in the F.B.I. field office in New York City had told her the bureau withheld “thousands” of previously unknown pages of Epstein-related documents and that she was determined to get them, according to a letter her spokesman provided to reporters.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump’s New Deputy F.B.I. Director Has It Out for the ‘Scumbag Commie Libs’

    When a New York jury found Donald Trump guilty on 34 felony counts last year, the conservative podcaster Dan Bongino made a veiled threat on social media. “The irony about this for the scumbag commie libs, is that the cold civil war they’re pushing for will end really badly for them,” he wrote. Liberals, said Bongino, had been playing at revolution, and would now get a taste of the real thing. “They’re not ready for what comes next.”I suppose he was right about one thing: We’re not ready. On Sunday, Trump announced that Bongino, a former Secret Service agent turned far-right pundit, would be deputy director of the F.B.I. A man who once claimed that his sole focus was “owning the libs” will now be second-in-command at the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency, a position that doesn’t require Senate confirmation. Last year on his streaming show, Bongino cackled about the idea that America has a system of checks and balances, saying, with wild, angry eyes, “Power. That is all that matters.” He’s about to have an ungodly amount of it.Bongino’s boss, of course, will be Kash Patel, the Trumpworld enforcer whom the supine Senate confirmed as F.B.I. director last week. During his confirmation hearings, Patel insisted that, despite publishing an actual enemies list of people he considered deep state villains, he had no intention of turning the F.B.I. into an instrument of retribution. It seemed obvious at the time that he was lying; making Bongino his deputy simply rubs it in our faces. If you wanted to turn the F.B.I. into a Trumpist Praetorian Guard, Bongino is exactly the kind of guy you’d hire.The new deputy director of the F.B.I. cut his teeth as a talking head with frequent appearances on the Alex Jones show. He then had a show on NRATV, the National Rifle Association’s now-defunct streaming service. Eventually, Bongino became a near-constant presence on Fox News, thrilling a first-term Trump with his apoplectic denunciations of Trump’s foes and, later, his stolen election conspiracy theories.Bongino and Fox parted ways in 2023 — he says over a contract dispute. He continued to build influence on the right-wing video platform Rumble, a company he owns a lucrative piece of, which also hosts Steve Bannon, the self-described misogynist influencer Andrew Tate, and the white nationalist Nick Fuentes. Angelo Carusone, president of the watchdog group Media Matters for America, told me that even among the right-wing broadcasters with whom Trump has staffed his nascent administration, Bongino stands out as a conduit between the fever swamps and the president. Now Bongino is in a place to turn wild notions from the right-wing internet into pretexts for federal investigations. Before Trump’s inauguration, for example, Bongino said the F.B.I. was “hiding a massive fake assassination plot to shut down the questioning of the 2020 election.” It is hardly far-fetched to think he’d use this phantasm as an excuse to harass Democrats.In writing about our country’s rapid self-immolation, I try to ration Hannah Arendt references, lest every column be about the ways “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” published in 1951, foreshadows the waking nightmare that is this government. But contemplating Bongino’s ascension, it’s hard to avoid the famous Arendt quote, “Totalitarianism in power invariably replaces all first-rate talents, regardless of their sympathies, with those crackpots and fools whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty.” Trump could have found a smoother and more sophisticated ideologue to help him transform the F.B.I. into a tool of his will, perhaps someone from the Claremont Institute ready to put an erudite spin on authoritarianism. He wanted the jacked-up hothead.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump, Again, Chooses Loyalty Over Leadership

    In an era that demands stable, experienced leadership, President Trump’s decision Friday to remove Gen. Charles Q. Brown as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — alongside other military firings and a series of contentious cabinet appointments — underscored once again an alarming preference for loyalty over expertise. This shift doesn’t just undermine the future of policy and governance; it destabilizes the very foundation of the institutions that have long safeguarded America’s democracy and substitutes politics for professionalism.The ousting of General Brown, a leader celebrated for his strategic acumen, deep experience and steady guidance, in favor of a less-tested and seemingly more compliant figure raises urgent questions: Will the new Joint Chiefs chairman dare to give Mr. Trump honest advice that he doesn’t want to hear? How will the president try to exert power over the Joint Chiefs, who have historically been essential sources of expertise and seasoned counsel? How would a politicized change in Joint Chiefs leadership affect complex discussions about geopolitical priorities, from tensions in Eastern Europe and the Middle East to the South China Sea?Friday’s purge at the Pentagon isn’t an isolated maneuver — it’s indicative of an administration intent on reshaping itself around the president’s personal network. Consider what we now know of who will serve as Mr. Trump’s cabinet. These selections follow a perilous trend where qualifications take a back seat to fealty, and where the echo of agreement becomes more valuable than evidence-based expertise.Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s most notable qualification for his job was his tenure as a Fox News political commentator, a credential that has frequently eclipsed any engagement with the complex realities of defense strategy for the president. Mr. Hegseth’s confirmation hearing raised serious concerns about excessive drinking and how he treats women. To date, his leadership suggests a Pentagon more attuned to the president’s political playbook than the sobering calculus of global military engagement. His recent remarks on retreating from Ukraine, for instance, sent allies in Europe reeling, and the administration scrambling to walk them back.Then there’s Robert F. Kennedy Jr., named to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. Mr. Kennedy has been a vocal skeptic of vaccines, promoting misinformation that undermines public health. His appointment to H.H.S. doesn’t just defy logic; it represents an affront to the foundational principles of the department he now oversees, which is already shelving some campaigns for flu shots and other vaccines. In this context, science is sidelined in favor of fringe theories, jeopardizing the nation’s ability to effectively manage current and future health challenges.Similarly, Tulsi Gabbard’s appointment as the country’s top intelligence officer raises multiple red flags. Beyond her military background and support of Mr. Trump’s agenda, what are Ms. Gabbard’s qualifications to oversee the president’s intel briefings and to coordinate the various branches of the intelligence community? Her foreign policy views frequently conflict with established U.S. approaches, and she has demonstrated sympathy for and defended authoritarian figures such as Bashar al-Assad, the former Syrian dictator, and President Vladimir Putin of Russia.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Senator Accuses Kash Patel of Covertly Directing F.B.I. Dismissals

    The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday accused Kash Patel, President Trump’s nominee for F.B.I. director, of improperly directing a wave of firings at the bureau before being confirmed.In a letter to the Justice Department’s inspector general, Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois cited “highly credible information from multiple sources” that suggested Mr. Patel had been personally involved in covertly orchestrating a purge of career officials at the F.B.I.“This alleged misconduct is beyond the pale and must be investigated immediately,” Mr. Durbin wrote to the independent inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz.The accusation comes as the committee prepares to vote Thursday on whether to send Mr. Patel’s nomination to the Senate floor. Mr. Durbin said that if the allegations were true, then the acting No. 2 at the Justice Department, Emil Bove, fired career civil servants “solely at the behest of a private citizen,” and also that Mr. Patel “may have perjured himself” at his confirmation hearing last month.Representatives for the Justice Department, the White House and Mr. Patel did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Mr. Durbin sent the letter, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, on Tuesday. He is expected to deliver a speech on the Senate floor about the matter.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Why Christopher Wray’s Resignation May Signal a Shift in FBI Tradition

    Mr. Wray’s voluntary departure could usher in a new era at the nation’s premier law enforcement agency, one in which the job of director changes with the administration.Christopher A. Wray had considered resigning as F.B.I. director before. More than once, confronted with angry demands from President Donald J. Trump and his allies, he contemplated calling it quits.When Mr. Wray on Wednesday announced his intent to do so, it was because he believed staying on the job into a second Trump term risked significant disruptions to the work force and its mission.Mr. Trump had already declared his plan to replace him with Kash Patel, a tough-talking loyalist who has vowed to force out bureau leaders and empty its Washington headquarters.In conceding to the reality of raw power, Mr. Wray’s voluntary departure could usher in a new era at the nation’s premier law enforcement agency, one in which the job of director is more of a political post that changes with the administration. For decades, F.B.I. directors have been appointed to 10-year terms to insulate them from the shifting winds of politics. Few F.B.I. directors stay a full decade, and the circumstances of Mr. Wray’s departure after seven years suggest that insulation has worn thin.“We are now in a position in which no F.B.I. director may be expected to serve for 10 years, and every time a new president comes in, that new president is likely to signal that the director will be replaced,” said John C. Richter, a Republican and a former U.S. attorney who served in the Justice Department with Mr. Wray.By several measures — agent recruitment and retention, arrests, and disrupted plots — the F.B.I. has been successful during Mr. Wray’s tenure, even as its politically charged cases consumed most of the public attention.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Want a Job in the Trump Administration? Be Prepared for the Loyalty Test.

    Applicants for government posts, including inside the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies, say they have been asked about their thoughts on Jan. 6 and who they believe won the 2020 election.At the Trump transition offices in West Palm Beach, Fla., prospective occupants of high posts inside the Pentagon and the intelligence agencies typically run through a gamut of three to four interviews, conducted in recent weeks by a mix of Silicon Valley investors and innovators and a team of the MAGA faithful.The applicants report that they have been asked about how to overhaul the Pentagon, or what technologies could make the intelligence agencies more effective, or how they feel about the use of the military to enforce immigration policy. But before they leave, some of them have been asked a final set of questions that seemed designed to assess their loyalty to President-elect Donald J. Trump.The questions went further than just affirming allegiance to the incoming administration. The interviewers asked which candidate the applicants had supported in the three most recent elections, what they thought about the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and whether they believed the 2020 election was stolen. The sense they got was that there was only one right answer to each question.This account is based on interviews with nine people who either interviewed for jobs in the administration or were directly involved in the process. Among those were applicants who said they gave what they intuited to be the wrong answer — either decrying the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 or saying that President Biden won in 2020. Their answers were met with silence and the taking of notes. They didn’t get the jobs.Three of the people interviewed are close to the transition team and confirmed that loyalty questions were part of some interviews across multiple agencies, and that the Trump team researched what candidates had said about Mr. Trump on the day of the Capitol riot and in the days following. Candidates are also rated on a scale of one to four in more than a half-dozen categories, including competence.Karoline Leavitt, the incoming White House press secretary, declined to address specific questions about the topics being raised in job interviews. Instead, she said: “President Trump will continue to appoint highly qualified men and women who have the talent, experience, and necessary skill sets to make America great again.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Kash Patel Would Bring Bravado and Baggage to F.B.I. Role

    President-elect Donald J. Trump’s choice to run the F.B.I. has a record in and out of government that is likely to raise questions during his Senate confirmation hearings.Few people tapped for any top federal post, much less a job as vital as F.B.I. director, have come with quite so much bravado, bombast or baggage as Kash Patel.On Saturday, Mr. Patel, 44, a Long Island-born provocateur and right-wing operative, was named by President-elect Donald J. Trump to lead the F.B.I., an agency he has accused of leading a “deep state” witch hunt against Mr. Trump. The announcement amounted to a de facto dismissal of the current director, Christopher A. Wray, who was appointed to the job by Mr. Trump and still has almost three years left on his 10-year term.Mr. Patel’s maximum-volume threats to exact far-reaching revenge on Mr. Trump’s behalf have endeared him to his boss and Trump allies who say the bureau needs a disrupter to weed out bias and reshape its culture.But his record as a public official and his incendiary public comments are likely to provoke intense questioning when the Senate weighs his nomination — and determines whether he should run an agency charged with protecting Americans from terrorism, street crime, cartels and political corruption, along with the threat posed by China, which Mr. Wray has described as existential.Here are some of the things Mr. Patel has said and done that could complicate his confirmation.He was accused of nearly botching a high-stakes hostage rescue.In October 2020, Mr. Patel, then a senior national intelligence official in the Trump administration, inserted himself into a secret effort by members of SEAL Team Six to rescue Philip Walton, an American who was 27 at the time and had been kidnapped by gunmen in Niger and taken to Nigeria.Mr. Patel, whose involvement broke with protocol, assured the State and Defense Departments that the Nigerian government had been told of the operation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More