But there's no guarantee her successor will have any better success at placating the president.

Over the last year, Bondi's Justice Department has encountered resistance from judges, grand jurors and its own workforce in trying to establish criminal conduct by one Trump foe after another. A new attorney general will confront not only Trump's demand for political prosecutions — a constant dating back to his first term in the White House — but also the same skeptical court system, and factual and legal hurdles, that have impeded efforts to deliver the sought-after results.

“At the end of the day, it’s not like there were some magic steps that Pam Bondi could have taken to make bad cases look good to grand juries or judges,” Peter Keisler, a former acting attorney general in President George W. Bush's administration, said in an email. "The problem is that the president is demanding that prosecutions be brought when there’s no evidence and no valid legal theory. A new Attorney General won’t change that.”

Bondi was just the latest Trump attorney general pressed to meet the president's demands of loyalty and desire for retribution. Trump in his first term called for Jeff Sessions to investigate Democrat Hillary Clinton and ultimately pushed him out over his recusal from the Russia election interference investigation. He berated another attorney general, William Barr, over Barr's refusal to back his false claims of election fraud in the 2020 contest. Barr resigned soon after.

Bondi arrived at the Justice Department 14 months ago seemingly determined to remain in Trump's good graces unlike her predecessors, heaping praise on him, offering unflinching support and embarking on investigations into Democrats and the president's adversaries — even amid concerns from career prosecutors about the sufficiency of evidence.

Days after Trump implored Bondi via social media last September to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, the Justice Department did just that, securing indictments in Virginia.

But the win was short-lived: A judge weeks later dismissed the cases after finding that the prosecutor who filed them, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed. Grand juries have since refused to bring new mortgage fraud charges against James and the Comey case is mired in a thorny evidentiary dispute and statute of limitations concerns. Both Comey and James have vigorously denied any wrongdoing and called the cases against them politically motivated.

Since then, a federal grand jury in Washington refused to return an indictment against Democratic lawmakers in connection with a video in which they urged U.S. military members to resist “illegal orders." And a federal judge has quashed Justice Department subpoenas issued to the Federal Reserve as part of an investigation into testimony last June by Chair Jerome Powell about a $2.5 billion building renovation.

The judge, James Boasberg, said that the government has “produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime” and called its justifications for the subpoenas a “thin and unsubstantiated” pretext to force Powell to cut interest rates. A prosecutor on the case subsequently conceded in court that the investigation had not found evidence of a crime.

An additional investigation into a Trump enemy remains underway with prosecutors in Florida scrutinizing former CIA Director John Brennan over testimony to Congress related to Russian interference in the 2016 election. That investigation has been open for months, but has not produced charges and it's not clear that it will. Brennan's lawyers have similarly called the investigation baseless.

One high-profile Trump critic who could face trial in the years ahead is his former national security adviser, John Bolton, though the investigation that produced that indictment and examined Bolton’s handling of classified documents began before Trump took office.

For now, the Justice Department will be led by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who has a longstanding relationship with Trump after having served as one of his personal lawyers. Several people familiar with the matter told The Associated Press on Thursday that Lee Zeldin, a Trump loyalist and head of the Environmental Protection Agency, has been privately mentioned by Trump as a possible pick.

Whoever holds the job in the long term will almost certainly be expected to carry out Trump's retribution campaign with more success, said Jimmy Gurulé, a former Justice Department official and law professor at Notre Dame. Blanche appeared to acknowledge as much in a Thursday evening interview with Fox News, saying, “I think the president is frustrated, everybody is frustrated ” and “what we saw happen for the past four years is unforgivable and can never happen again.”

“If she was fired because Trump did not think that she was moving quickly enough in bringing criminal cases against his political enemies, then you would expect that the person that would replace her would probably agree to escalate those efforts,” Gurulé said.

It is China's latest push for a more prominent role in global affairs, though it may prove to be more rhetorical than substantive, with the U.S. appearing uninterested in Beijing's efforts.

“The war with Iran is the priority of all countries in and outside the region,” said Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center, a Washington-based think tank. “It is an opportunity China will not miss to demonstrate its leadership and diplomatic initiative.”

Danny Russel, a former senior U.S. diplomat, described China’s diplomacy as “performative” and compared the five-point proposal for ending the Iran war with its 12-point plan for Ukraine in 2023, which was “filled with platitudes but never acted on.”

“Its narrative is that while Washington is reckless, aggressive and heedless of the cost to others, China is a principled and responsible champion of peace,” said Russel, a distinguished fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute. “What we are seeing from China is messaging, not mediation.”

China has been working “tirelessly for peace” since the outbreak of the war, said Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington.

How the US views China's diplomacy

The Trump administration appears to have little enthusiasm for the prospect of China's mediation, according to U.S. officials.

The U.S. has soured on third-party mediation efforts, and it has little interest in boosting China’s international stature or giving it an opening to claim success in the Middle East, said three U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss potential diplomatic options.

One of the officials described the administration’s position on the Chinese-Pakistani effort as “agnostic,” neither endorsement nor rejection, but all three stressed that could change if President Donald Trump weighs in before his planned summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

For Beijing, there could be an incentive to see the war subside before Trump travels to China in mid-May. Citing demands of the war, Trump postponed the trip initially set for the end of March.

“There is no guarantee that Trump may not delay the trip to China again if the war rages on,” Sun said.

The war saw a major escalation Friday when Iran shot down two U.S. military aircraft, a first since the war began five weeks ago. Trump told NBC News that it would not impact negotiations with Iran, just days after declaring in a national address that the U.S. has “beaten and completely decimated Iran.”

Beijing is calculating the pain from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz

For now, China is more insulated from the disruption in the Strait of Hormuz than other countries after diversifying its energy sources and reducing dependence on fossil fuels.

China relies on Iran for only about 13% of its oil imports, and Beijing is working with Tehran to allow the passage of Chinese-flagged vessels through the critical waterway, where Iran’s stranglehold has sent energy prices soaring. China also maintains a large strategic petroleum reserve.

While China has positioned itself to cushion short-term shocks, analysts say Beijing is worried about a protracted war and has an interest in trying to bring it to an end.

“An escalation of the conflict will start to harm Chinese interests,” Russel said. “Because China’s growth model is so export-heavy, prolonged energy shocks and shipping disruption will mean costlier inputs and weaker global demand that damage its vulnerable economy.”

Besides not wanting to see a long war, China “welcomes the opportunity to suggest that it is helping mitigate a crisis of America’s making, especially as the Trump administration’s lack of a considered strategy for containing the fallout becomes more apparent,” said Ali Wyne, a senior research and advocacy adviser on U.S.-China relations at the International Crisis Group.

China has undertaken a flurry of diplomacy

After the war began, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi spoke with counterparts from Russia, Oman, Iran, France, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. He told Iran that China cherished its friendship, urged Israel to cease military actions and expressed that China would be willing to play a role in seeking peace.

This past week, Wang hosted his Pakistani counterpart in Beijing to hash out their five-point proposal, calling for an end to hostilities and the reopening of the strait.

He has held more than 20 phone calls with regional foreign ministers, and a special envoy has visited several countries in the region, aiming to promote peace and deescalate tensions, Liu said.

Wang sought support for China's plan from the European Union’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, telling her it represented “broad, international consensus,” the Chinese foreign ministry said. Wang told Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan that halting the fighting was the most urgent matter.

Wang also spoke this week with Bahrain's foreign minister, Abdullatif bin Rashid Al Zayani, to explain why China opposed Bahrain’s U.N. proposal to allow military force to open the Strait of Hormuz. Wang said actions by the U.N. Security Council should help ease tensions “rather than endorse illegal acts of war, still less add fuel to the fire.”

China and Russia argued that the U.S. or other countries could exploit a U.N.-backed mechanism to escalate the deadly war, according to a U.N. diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss diplomatic conversations.

Both countries appear to have less immediate need to see the strait fully open. While China has been able to pay to get some of its ships through, Russia is benefiting from the high price of oil, its main export.

Hoping to avoid a veto, Bahrain significantly watered down its proposal to authorize defensive — but not offensive — action to ensure vessels can safely transit the strait. A vote was pushed back until next week.

To solve the problem of the strait, China says a ceasefire is needed. But its plan with Pakistan has been met with mostly silence from the U.S.

One of the U.S. officials said the plan is difficult to assess because it is less of a roadmap to peace than a vague appeal for respect for international law and the importance of diplomacy and the U.N.'s role.

___

Amiri reported from the United Nations.

The threat of cutting funding to cash-starved schools that don’t comply is real, even if the stricter rules that come out of the executive order he signed Friday could take a while to figure out.

In the order signed hours before the women’s Final Four tipped off one of the biggest weekends in college sports, Trump went after eligibility rules, transfers and the spiraling costs associated with an industry that now pays its players millions of dollars per year.

He called on federal agencies to ensure schools are following the rules and threatened to choke off federal grants and funding — a similar approach his administration has taken to force universities around the country to alter policies involving diversity, equity and inclusion, transgender rights and even the kinds of classes they offer.

In some ways, forcing those changes might seem like child’s play once college sports figures this out. The NCAA, the newly created College Sports Commission, the four power conferences, dozens more smaller ones and hundreds of educational institutions all have a say here: It’s a big reason Congress, which Trump instructed to act quickly, has been stuck for more than a year on this.

“I'm glad to know the President wants Congress to pass something,” said Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., a key member of the Senate committee looking into changes, who mentioned ongoing bipartisan negotiations.

Trump’s order was his second since last July and it included a laundry list of proposed fixes, many of which lawmakers and college leaders have been pushing for since the approval of a $2.8 billion settlement changed the face of games that were once played by pure amateurs.

He called for “clear, consistent and fair eligibility limits, including a five-year participation window," and wants to limit athletes to one transfer with one more available once they get a four-year degree.

“I'm extremely supportive of the President's order,” said Cody Campbell, the Texas Tech regent and billionaire who is helping shape policy. “I'm very excited that we're making progress and look forward to continued work in the (Congress) to permanently preserve a system that's done so much for America.”

At a college sports roundtable he hosted last month, Trump said he anticipated any order he signed would trigger litigation. Athletes have largely won the freedom to transfer almost at will via the portal along with the ability to be paid by schools that are now doling out more than $20 million a year to their athletes.

Some have also been suing the NCAA about eligibility limits, and their right to do that has been a major sticking point in the Congressional deliberations.

As much as the changes he directs, Trump’s call for the Education Department, the Federal Trade Commission and the attorney general’s office to evaluate “whether violations of such rules render a university unfit for Federal grants and contracts” stands out as a way to force change.

Several universities across the country have made policy changes to comply with federal orders and avoid funding-related showdowns with the government. Yet big-named schools like Penn State and Florida State are facing huge debts.

“I haven’t read it, obviously, but I certainly appreciate his interest in the issue," NCAA President Charlie Baker said at the women's Final Four in Phoenix. "And from what I saw, some of the social media traffic, it’s pretty clear that he made clear that we need Congressional action to sort of seal the deal on a number of these things, which is good, because we do.”

Commissioners at the Atlantic Coast and Southeastern Conference released statements thanking Trump for weighing in, with the ACC's Jim Phillips saying “there continues to be significant momentum to preserve the athletic and academic opportunities for the next generation of student-athletes and we appreciate the ongoing efforts.”

Attorney Mit Winter, who follows college sports law, said the order is likely to set up a situation where the NCAA and schools have to decide whether to follow a federal court order or an executive order.

“Either way, we’re likely going to see litigation challenging the EO by athletes and third parties,” Winter said.

University of Nebraska president Jeffrey Gold said he didn't want to try to predict what the courts would do.

“But it is critical to what we must do to keep college athletics in line with what we do," Gold said. “The roundtable a few weeks ago showed there is a profound sense of urgency around this.”

___

AP Sports Writers Maura Carey, David Brandt and Eric Olson contributed to this report.

___

Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here. AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

The lawmakers' failure to offer a solution after months of debate raises uncertainty about how Georgians will vote in November and leaves confusion that could end in the courts or a special legislative session.

“They’ve abdicated their responsibility,” Democratic state Rep. Saira Draper said of inaction by Republicans who control the legislature.

Currently, voters make their choices on Dominion Voting machines, which then print ballots with a QR code that scanners read to tally votes. Those machines have been repeatedly targeted by President Donald Trump following his 2020 election loss, and Trump’s Georgia supporters responded by enacting a law in 2024 that bans using barcodes to count votes.

But state law still requires counties to use the machines. No money has been allocated to reprogram them, and lawmakers failed to agree on a replacement.

“We’ll have an unresolvable statutory conflict come July 1,” said House Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Victor Anderson, a Cornelia Republican who backed a proposal to keep using the machines in 2026 that Senate Republicans declined to consider.

Republican House Speaker Jon Burns said he would meet with Gov. Brian Kemp and “take his temperature” on the possibility of a special session.

Kemp spokesperson Carter Chapman said he Republican governor will examine the situation.

“We’ll analyze all bills, as well as the consequence of those that did not pass,” Chapman said Friday.

House Republicans and Democrats backed Anderson's plan, which would have required that Georgia choose a voting process that didn't use QR codes by 2028. Election officials preferred that solution.

“The Senate has shown that they’re not responsible actors,” Draper said. She added that Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, a Trump-endorsed Republican running for governor, seemed more interested in keeping Trump's backing than “doing right by Georgia voters.”

Jones said in a statement the Senate has proven its commitment to secure elections by passing legislation that includes banning barcodes on ballots.

“Like President Trump, I have been a staunch defender of safe and secure elections and my record speaks for itself," Jones said.

A spokesperson for Jones didn't immediately respond to a request for comment early Friday.

Joseph Kirk, Bartow County election supervisor and president of the Georgia Association of Voter Registration and Election Officials, said he’ll look to the secretary of state for guidance and assumes a judge will rule to instruct election officials how to proceed.

“This is uncharted territory,” he said.

Robert Sinners, a spokesperson for Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who is also running for governor, said officials are “ready to follow the law and follow the Constitution.”

Burns told reporters that his chamber was seeking to minimize changes this year.

“You can’t change horses in the middle of the stream,” Burns said.

Anderson said without action, the state could be required to use hand-marked and hand-counted paper ballots in November.

Election officials say switching to a new system within just a few months, as advocated by some Republicans, would be nearly impossible.

“They made no way for this to happen except putting a deadline on it," Cherokee County elections director Anne Dover said of the switch away from barcodes. Dover said one problem under some plans is that a very large number of ballots would have to be printed.

Lawmakers seemed more concerned about scoring political points than making practical plans, Paulding County Election Supervisor Deidre Holden said.

“If anyone is resilient and can get the job done, it’s all of us election officials, but the legislators need to work with us, and they need to understand what we do before they go making laws that are basically unachievable for us,” Holden said.

Supporters of hand-marked paper ballots say voters are more likely to trust in an accurate count if they can see what gets read by the scanner.

Right-wing election activists lobbied lawmakers for an immediate switch to hand-marked paper ballots, but the House turned away from a Senate proposal to do so.

Anderson said he wasn’t sure if a special session could escape those political crosswinds, but said Georgia lawmakers must fix the problem.

“This is a legislative problem,” Anderson said. “It’s a legislative solution that has to happen.”

The sizable increase for the Pentagon, some 44%, had been telegraphed by the Republican president even before the U.S.-led war against Iran. The president's plan would also reduce spending on non-defense programs by 10%.

“President Trump promised to reinvest in America’s national security infrastructure, to make sure our nation is safe in a dangerous world,” wrote Budget Director Russell Vought.

The president’s annual budget is considered a reflection of the administration’s values and does not carry the force of law. The massive document typically highlights an administration’s priorities, but Congress, which handles federal spending issues, is free to reject it and often does.

This year’s White House document is intended to provide a road map from the president to Congress as lawmakers build their own budgets and annual appropriations bills to keep the government funded. Vought spoke to House GOP lawmakers on a private call Thursday.

Trump, speaking ahead of an address to the nation this week about the Iran war, signaled the military is his priority, setting up a clash ahead in Congress.

“We’re fighting wars. We can’t take care of day care,” Trump said at a private White House event Wednesday.

“It’s not possible for us to take care of day care, Medicaid, Medicare — all these individual things,” he said. “They can do it on a state basis. You can’t do it on a federal.”

Money for immigration enforcement, air traffic controllers and national parks

Among the priorities the White House called for:

—Supporting the Trump administration's immigration enforcement and deportation operations by eliminating aspects of a refugee resettlement aid program, maintaining Immigration and Customs Enforcement funds at current year levels and drawing on last's year's increases for the Department of Homeland Security funds to continue opening detention facilities, including 100,000 beds for adults and 30,000 for families.

-- A 13% increase in funding for the Department of Justice to focus on violent criminals and the president's promise to stop what the White House calls migrant crime.

-- A $10 billion fund within the National Park Service for "construction and beautification” projects in Washington, D.C.

-- A $481 million increase in funding to enhance aviation safety and support an air traffic controller hiring surge.

Cuts to green energy, housing and health programs

— Cancels more than $15 billion from the Biden-era bipartisan infrastructure law, including funds for renewable energy projects and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, grants.

— A 19% cut in the Department of Agriculture, ending certain university grants, a 13% cut for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and about a 12% decrease to the Health and Human Services department, including cuts to a low-income heating assistance program.

The White House is touting cuts of what it calls “woke programs” that often direct federal investments toward low-income communities. The budget used the word “woke” 34 times

For example, the administration is looking to cut Community Services Block Grants, which funds activities such as financial and job counseling and helping people obtain adequate housing. The administration says its cuts would target grants “hijacked by radicals" to promote equity-building and green energy initiatives.

The president also seeks to cut $106 million in funding from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which it says has “pushed radical gender ideology onto children.”

Supporters and detractors

The Republican chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services committees applauded Trump’s request for defense spending, saying the money would ensure the country’s military remains the most advanced in the world while confronting growing threats from China, Russia, Iran and others.

“America is facing the most dangerous global environment since World War II,” said Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala.

The top Democrat on House Budget Committee, Rep. Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania, said the president was demanding a massive increase in defense while cutting billions from health care, housing and more.

“This budget represents ‘America Last,’” Boyle said.

Debt, deficits and tough choices ahead

With the nation running nearly $2 trillion annual deficits and the debt swelling past $39 trillion, the federal balance sheets have long been operating in the red.

About two-thirds of the nation's estimated $7 trillion in annual spending covers the Medicare and Medicaid health care programs, as well as Social Security income, which are essentially growing — along with an aging population — on autopilot.

It's the rest of the annual budget where much of the debate in Congress takes place, as Democrats over the years have insisted that changes in the level of spending for defense and non-defense need to be equitable.

The GOP's big tax breaks bill that Trump signed into law last year boosted his priorities beyond the budget process — with at least $150 billion for the Pentagon over the next several years, and $170 billion for Trump’s immigration and deportation operations at the Department of Homeland Security.

The administration is counting on its allies in the Republican-led Congress to push part of president’s beefed up defense spending through its own budget process, as it was able to do last year.

It suggests $1.1 trillion for defense would come through the regular appropriations process, which typically requires support from both parties for approval, while $350 billion would go in the budget reconciliation process that Republicans can accomplish on their own, through party-line majority votes.

Congress still fighting over 2026 spending

The president's budget arrives as the House and Senate remain tangled over current-year spending and stalemated over DHS funding, with Democrats demanding changes to Trump’s immigration enforcement regime that Republicans are unwilling to accept.

Trump announced Thursday he would sign an executive order to pay all DHS workers who have gone without paychecks during the record-long partial government shutdown that has reached 49 days.

Last year, in the president's first budget since returning to the White House, Trump sought to fulfill his promise to vastly reduce the size and scope of the federal government, reflecting the efforts of billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency.

However, while Trump had sought a roughly one-fifth decrease in non-defense spending, Congress kept such spending relatively flat.

Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, called Trump's new budget “morally bankrupt.”

“Trump wants to build a ballroom," Murray said, referring to the White House renovation. "I want to build more affordable housing, and only one of us sits on the Appropriations Committee.”

___

Associated Press reporter Bill Barrow in Atlanta contributed to this report.

__

An earlier version of this story misstated what NOAA stands for. It is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The new Marine Minerals Administration will bring together the functions of the current Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said. Doing so will enable a “streamlined approach” that will maintain existing regulatory protections and rigorous safety standards, he said.

The combined agency will “deliver clearer coordination, better service to the public and stronger, more integrated oversight of offshore energy development,” Burgum said in a statement.

The new name is reminiscent of the old Minerals Management Service, which for decades was the federal agency responsible for overseeing offshore drilling. In April 2010, a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 people and discharging nearly 5 million barrels of crude oil into the sea over the next three months in the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

Lawmakers from both parties and outside critics accused the agency of lax oversight of drilling and cozy ties with industry. A 2008 report by the Interior Department’s inspector general said employees accepted gifts, steered contracts to favored clients and engaged in drug use and sex with employees of the energy firms they regulated.

The head of the agency resigned in May 2010 — less than a year into her tenure — under public pressure as the Obama administration moved to impose stricter control over drilling in the wake of the spill.

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement replaced the disbanded Minerals Management Service in 2011. The former agency’s revenue management function was also separated into a new office. The Obama administration said the reorganization was designed to remove the complex and sometimes conflicting missions of the former agency.

BOEM oversees development of oil and gas, as well as renewable energy and mining on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, while BSEE enforces safety and environmental regulations.

Environmental groups slammed the reorganization as a replay of the agency's troubled past.

The MMS was intentionally split up after the Gulf spill because regulators were too cozy with industry and “we couldn’t trust the integrity of their work,” said Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director at the Center for Biological Diversity.

The new set-up "sounds like yet another handout to the oil industry that will fast-track risky projects. It sure won’t make the people or wildlife on our coasts any safer,” she wrote in an e-mail Friday.

The National Ocean Industries Association, which represents offshore developers, said that two separate — yet overlapping — government agencies responsible for administering the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act can understandably result in inconsistencies and delays.

“Bringing them back together should result in closer coordination and a more efficiently functioning government, for the benefit of American citizens who rely upon the energy produced from the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf to fuel our economy and lift society,” Association President Erik Milito said in a statement.

___

McDermott reported from Providence, Rhode Island.

___

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

A year and a half after winning the White House by promising to lower costs and end wars, Donald Trump is a wartime president overseeing surging energy costs and an escalating overseas conflict.

The war in Iran was largely unpopular even before an American fighter jet was shot down in Iran, a development that dominated headlines on Friday and contradicted Trump’s claim that Tehran's military capabilities have been all but destroyed. One crew member has been rescued.

Earlier in the week, the Republican president offered little clarity to a nation eager for answers during a prime-time address from the White House, his first since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran more than a month ago, simultaneously suggesting that the war was ending and expanding.

“Thanks to the progress we’ve made, I can say tonight that we are on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly, very shortly,” Trump said. “We’re going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks.”

Trump's comments come roughly six months before voters across the nation begin to cast ballots in elections that will decide control of Congress and key governorships for Trump’s final two years in office. For now, Republicans, who control all branches of government in Washington, are bracing for a painful political backlash.

“You’re looking at an ugly November,” warned veteran Republican pollster Neil Newhouse. “At a point in time when we need every break possible to hold the House and Senate, our edge is being chipped away.”

Republicans confront evolving political landscape

It’s hard to overstate how dramatically the political landscape has shifted.

At this time last year, many Republican leaders believed there was a path to preserve their narrow House majority and easily hold the Senate. Now they privately concede that the House is all but lost and Democrats have a realistic shot at taking the Senate.

Republicans are also struggling to coalesce around a clear midterm message on Iran.

The Republican National Committee has largely avoided the war in talking points issued to surrogates over the last month. The leaders of the party's campaign committees responsible for the House and Senate declined interview requests. Many vulnerable Republican candidates sidestep the issue, unwilling to defend or challenge Trump publicly.

The president remains deeply popular with Republican voters, and he has vocal supporters like Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

“That was the best speech I could’ve hoped for,” he wrote on social media after Trump's address on Wednesday evening. Graham said Trump “gave the American people a clear and coherent pathway forward.”

Trump made little effort to sell the conflict to Americans before the initial attack. Five weeks later, at least 13 U.S. service members have been killed and hundreds more injured. Thousands more troops have converged on the region, and the Pentagon requested $200 billion in new funding.

The Strait of Hormuz, a key passage for a fifth of the world’s oil, remains closed. The average price for a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. was $4.08 on Thursday, according to AAA, almost a full dollar higher than on President Joe Biden's last day in office.

On Wednesday, Trump insisted that gas prices would fall quickly once the war concluded but offered no solution for reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Instead, he invited skeptical U.S. allies to do it themselves.

He insisted that the war would be worth it.

“This is a true investment in your grandchildren and your grandchildren’s future,” Trump said. “When it’s all over, the United States will be safer, stronger, more prosperous and greater than it has ever been before.”

Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican who was once among Trump's most vocal allies in Congress, lashed out against his Iran policy.

“I wanted so much for President Trump to put America First. That’s what I believed he would do. All I heard from his speech tonight was WAR WAR WAR,” she wrote on social media. “Nothing to lower the cost of living for Americans.”

Time is not on Trump's side

About 6 in 10 U.S. adults say the U.S. military action in Iran has “gone too far,” according to AP-NORC polling from March. Roughly a third approve of how he’s handling Iran overall.

The possibility of sending U.S. forces into Iran also appears politically unpalatable.

About 6 in 10 adults are “strongly” or “somewhat” opposed to deploying U.S. troops on the ground to fight Iran. That includes about half of Republicans. Only about 1 in 10 favor deploying troops.

At the same time, Trump’s approval ratings have remained consistently weak. About 4 in 10 Americans approve of how he’s handling the presidency, roughly in line with how it’s been throughout his second term.

Republican strategist Ari Fleischer, a senior aide in former President George W. Bush’s administration, acknowledged that Trump has not received the polling bump in this war that Bush got after invading Iraq.

Bush, of course, worked to build public backing for the Iraq War before going in. Immediately after the 2003 invasion, Bush's popularity soared, as did the stock market.

Public sentiment and the economy soured only after the conflict stretched on. It ultimately spanned more than eight years, spawning a generation of anti-war Republicans — and sowing the seeds of Trump's “America First” foreign policy.

“My hope is that the Trump experience is the exact opposite of the Bush experience,” Fleischer said.

He said Trump must win the war decisively and quickly to avoid a further backlash, saying there could be a “very significant political upside if things end well, oil comes down and markets rally.”

Fleischer added that Trump's actions will matter much more than his words.

“Ultimately, he is not going to get judged on his persuasion or his explanations or his assertions, he’s going to get judged on results,” he said.

___

Associated Press writer Linley Sanders in Washington contributed to this report.

The president is reportedly unhappy with the performance of Lori Chavez-DeRemer, the labor secretary, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. An unnamed administration official said, “He’s very angry and he’s going to be moving people.” The president also apparently polled advisers about replacing Tulsi Gabbard as intelligence chief.

News4JAX political analyst and head of the Jacksonville University Haskell Public Policy Institute Rick Mullaney joined us to discuss President Trump firing the attorney general, who was a Trump loyalist, and what the future may hold.

Alito's illness did not require an overnight hospital stay and he was back on the bench the following Monday, spokeswoman Patricia McCabe said in a statement.

Alito was an active questioner during arguments that day in an important case about mailed ballots and participated in all the court's hearings over the ensuing two weeks.

Alito, who turned 76 on Wednesday, is the second-oldest member of the court, after 77-year-old Justice Clarence Thomas.

The episode was first reported by CNN, which also said the treatment was administered at a Philadelphia hospital. The court did not say where Alito had been taken.

The incident is the latest example of the justices' reticence to discuss their health, at least until the news somehow leaks.

In 2020, the court confirmed that Chief Justice John Roberts had spent a night in the hospital after a fall that required stitches in his forehead, only after the Washington Post reported it first.

Alito was driven by his security detail from Washington to what CNN said was a dinner following a Federalist Society panel that looked at his 20 years on the court.

When he didn't feel well in the evening, “he agreed with his security detail’s recommendation to see a physician before the three-hour drive home” to northern Virginia, McCabe said. He was given fluids for dehydration, she said.

While the justice has not said anything about retirement, speculation has swirled that Alito might soon step down, which would give President Donald Trump the chance to appoint a fourth justice, after the three who were confirmed during his first term.

While Alito is young by Supreme Court standards, he might not want to stay around and gamble on the possibility of Democrats flipping the Senate in the November elections and seeing a Democrat capture the White House two years later.

Retiring in the summer would allow Trump to name a similarly conservative but much younger replacement who would almost certainly win confirmation from the Republican-led Senate.

The couple has a child with nonverbal autism and epilepsy who requires up to three hospital visits a week. And Creighton's critical access hospital has been a lifeline for Jane: not only is she employed there, but three years ago, doctors saved her life when she contracted bacterial pneumonia. If she had waited another day for care, doctors said, her organs would have begun to shut down.

“And if we had had to drive the hour to the Yankton (South Dakota) hospital," Rick Saint John said, his voice breaking with emotion, "it could have cost her her life.”

So the Saint Johns were shocked to hear that Avera Creighton Hospital faces financial peril. A $50 billion government fund meant to transform rural health care will do little to help. It's a problem that millions of Americans in rural areas are awakening to as they realize there's no windfall coming for the vulnerable hospitals near their homes.

Hundreds of rural hospitals across the country are facing closures after years of funding problems. The issue was compounded last summer by the Trump administration's massive cuts to Medicaid, the government's safety net for low-income Americans, whose reimbursements have long helped hospitals meet their bottom lines.

Outcry over the funding cuts prompted Republican lawmakers to create $50 billion in new rural health grants, but critics say that funding is intended for innovative health care delivery solutions — not propping up hospitals buckling under current pressures.

“It won’t pay to keep the lights on. And it won’t turn the lights back on once they’ve been turned off,” said Dr. Ben Young, an infectious disease specialist and policy expert with public health advocacy group Wellness Equity Alliance.

Rural Americans’ health care worries reflect broader national concerns about access and rising prices of care as the cost of living spikes — anxieties that could prove pivotal in this year’s midterm elections.

Rural health fund billed as a cure falls short

The $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Program included in President Donald Trump's tax-and-spending law last year was billed by Republicans as a way to help hospitals in rural areas. Last summer, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. touted it as the “biggest infusion in history” for rural hospitals and pledged it will “restore and revitalize these communities.”

Hospitals and health industry experts have warned that while the fund — $10 billion per year allocated across all states for five years — offers some support to struggling rural hospitals, it won’t save them. One reason is that the sum doesn't come close to offsetting the $137 billion that rural hospitals expect to lose over the next decade, according to health research nonprofit KFF. Millions of people are expected to lose Medicaid benefits as a result of new Medicaid work requirements going into effect in 2027 — changes the Trump administration has maintained will crack down on fraudsters rather than cut off eligible enrollees.

Administrators say the new $50 billion fund is not meant to shore up ailing rural hospitals or maintain the status quo, but to transform rural health care through tech, workforce and other innovations. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz in a December video said it “gives states the tools to design solutions that last, not Band-Aids that fail.”

The White House echoed that Wednesday, saying the fund is intended to fund “big ideas” to improve rural health care access long-term.

“Decades of mismanagement by career politicians in Washington have left rural communities with limited care options," White House spokesman Kush Desai said.

State applications show a wide range of proposals. Some pitches sought to improve emergency medical services and modernize rural facilities, while others looked to make school lunches healthier, expand physical fitness programs, beef up telehealth and expand AI-driven technologies to help monitor patients.

Nebraska will spend much of its grant on innovation

Avera Creighton Hospital CEO Theresa Guenther argues her hospital is not in danger of closing. but conceded that Medicaid cuts will be painful — a sentiment shared by most rural hospitals, she said.

“Medicaid cuts will have an impact to us, and we — as well as many others — will have to figure out what that looks like moving forward,” she said. Her hospital hopes to get a piece of the $50 billion fund to help manage patients' chronic diseases — like diabetes — and to help cover workforce costs.

Nebraska, which received $218 million for the rural health grants' first installment, plans to spend some $90 million on healthier food options at schools, recruiting more health care workers and mobile sensors to remotely monitor chronically ill patients in rural areas, among other things. But for rural critical access hospitals at risk of closing, it offers $10 million to “right size” them by getting rid of inpatient care, where bed occupancy is typically low.

Republican state Sen. Barry DeKay said hospitals like Creighton's are vital, despite it's low occupancy rate. The hospital is in his district; even his mother received life-extending care there following a hip replacement. He's worried that the Medicaid cuts could hurt all the state's rural hospitals.

“I'll try to be working as hard as I can to get as much money to rural hospitals — whether it's in my district or any other rural district in the state,” he said.

Rick Saint John acknowledged he knows little about how Nebraska will use the federal funds, but he thinks it should go to helping hospitals like Creighton’s remain intact.

“The hospital is very important to this community, and for more than just medical care,” he said, citing job losses if the hospital loses services or closes.

Hospital groups push back on fund

The fund has seen pushback from hospital groups over an issue that's shaping up as important for 2026 voters.

The Colorado Hospital Association sent a letter in December to state lawmakers accusing them of ignoring input from rural hospitals during the application process.

The Nebraska Hospital Association, which endorsed Republican U.S. Sen. Deb Fischer’s 2024 reelection bid based on her advocacy for rural health care, has criticized both the cuts and the $50 billion fund. Fischer voted last summer for the Medicaid cuts.

That and other efforts by the state to limit Medicaid spending sends a message “that access to health care is not a priority," the group said.

Some Republican state lawmakers across the country have expressed unease with parts of the fund and have sought ways to use it to help struggling rural hospitals.

States hard-pressed to help

Under pressure, some rural states are making their own moves to help.

Wyoming enacted a law allowing rural hospitals to file Chapter 9 bankruptcy, normally reserved for financially stressed cities to reorganize debts and repay creditors while protecting them from legal action.

In North Dakota, during a special session to allocate the state’s federal rural health funds, the Republican-led Legislature passed an unrelated bill that aims to rescue a rural hospital with a low-interest loan of up to $5 million administered through the state-owned bank.

It's hoped the plan will keep the hospital open in a vast rural area where it employs 5% of the surrounding county's residents, hospital board member Matt Hager said.

Young, the expert with Wellness Equity Alliance, sees dark days ahead for rural hospitals.

“I am not optimistic in the short term,” he said. “Because these hospitals are facing immediate financial shortfalls, are barely financially operating currently, and they need operating support now.”

___

Swenson reported from New York. Associated Press writer Jack Dura contributed to this report from Bismarck, North Dakota.

So did Jess Michaels, one of the legions of women who have said they were sexually assaulted by the late financier and convicted sex offender with a roster of powerful friends in business, politics and beyond.

“I thought, ‘Well, maybe a woman stepping into this role will finally, finally get the truth,’” Michaels recalled Thursday, after President Donald Trump announced Bondi was out of the nation's top law enforcement job.

“She had this opportunity to be a hero and to really do right by survivors of sexual violence and trafficking,” Michaels said, "and she chose not to.”

The furor over the “Epstein files,” as the trove of investigative records came to be known, wasn't the only controversy of Bondi's tenure. But the arc — first raising expectations for a big reveal, then declaring there was nothing to see, and ultimately a forced, flawed document dump — was a stubbornly problematic storyline that ran through her time as attorney general.

Bondi rejected criticism of her handling of the matter, and Trump on Thursday praised her as “a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend.”

Michaels and other Epstein victims watched it all with shaken trust that Bondi's departure alone won't likely rebuild.

“This is not about a single person,” accuser Annie Farmer said Thursday. “It is about a government and judicial system that has repeatedly failed Epstein survivors.”

Here's a glance at Bondi's part in the Epstein saga:

February 2025: The binders

Freshly confirmed as attorney general for a president who had suggested on the campaign trail that he'd open more government documents on Epstein, Bondi whetted appetites by declaring on Fox News that “you’re going to see some Epstein information released.” And when a host asked about "releasing “the list of Jeffrey Epstein’s clients” — a long-rumored, never-seen sex trafficking roster — she replied that it was “sitting on my desk right now.”

A day later, conservative commentators and content creators were brought to the White House to get DOJ binders emblazoned with “The Epstein Files: Phase 1” and “Declassified.”

The attempt to showcase transparency soon backfired, once it emerged that the contents largely were already public. Bondi demanded that the FBI give her “the full and complete Epstein files,” and she later said that she'd unearthed a "truckload” of previously withheld material and that “everything is going to come out to the public.”

July 2025: The walkback

After months of anticipation, the Justice Department said it wouldn't release any more Epstein material. A court had sealed much of it to protect victims, and “only a fraction” would have come out if Epstein had gone to trial, the agency said in an unsigned memo. It added that authorities hadn't found evidence that merited new charges or investigations and that “perpetuating unfounded theories about Epstein” wouldn't help victims get justice.

And, it said, there was no “client list.” As for Bondi's prior comment that it was on her desk, officials said she had meant the overall case file.

Conservative influencers, among others, blasted the turnabout and questioned Bondi’s capability. But Trump stood by her, scolding a journalist for attempting to ask her a question about Epstein at a White House Cabinet meeting.

Trump had himself raised questions for some years after Epstein's 2019 death in jail as the financier faced federal sex trafficking charges. After the Justice Department memo, however, the president suggested there was nothing more to say about Epstein and the country, including his own supporters, should simply move on.

November 2025: The legislation

Amid a drumbeat of disclosures that begin to exact consequences for some powerful people — particularly Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, Britain's former Prince Andrew — Congress passed legislation to force the Justice Department to disclose its investigative files on Epstein. Trump signed it into law, casting the quest for Epstein information as a Democratic-led distraction from the Republican agenda.

Meanwhile, at his urging, Bondi announced that the U.S. attorney in Manhattan would investigate Epstein’s ties to some of the Republican president’s political foes, including Democratic former President Bill Clinton. None has been accused of misconduct by Epstein’s accusers; nor has Trump, another former Epstein friend. Both Clinton and Trump have said they knew nothing about Epstein's misconduct and cut ties with him many years ago.

December 2025: The first batch

At the statutory deadline for making the Epstein files public, the Justice Department released only some of them. While the records included some material the public hadn't previously seen, including some candid photos of Clinton, the documents didn't break major ground and included little about Trump.

The department said it was continuing to review other Epstein records to make sure that victims were protected.

But Democrats cried cover-up, bill sponsor Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., accused the Justice Department of breaking the law by missing the deadline and redacting too much, and some Epstein accusers also questioned the extensive redactions.

January 2026: The big release

The Justice Department began releasing a huge cache of additional Epstein documents, videos and photos, though others remained under wraps.

The records pulled back a curtain on favor-trading and frank communications in a chummy elite that looked past Epstein's 2008 guilty plea to solicitating prostitution from an underage girl in Florida. Some high-flying Epstein friends resigned or lost jobs in corporate America, academia, big law firms, the British, Slovakian and Norwegian governments and beyond.

But the documents disclosed highly personal information about some victims while redacting the names of Epstein correspondents in, for example, emails that appeared to refer to the sexual abuse of underage girls.

Gloria Allred, an attorney for numerous Epstein victims, said Thursday that Bondi betrayed them by failing to protect personal information in the files.

“She has destroyed the trust in the DOJ that victims had a right to expect, and her termination may be the only type of justice that survivors will receive from the DOJ,” Allred said by email.

February 2026: The hearing

At a congressional hearing, a combative Bondi tried to quell the Epstein files controversy. She defended how the Justice Department dealt with it, lobbed personal insults at Democrats and lauded Trump over, among other things, the performance of the stock market.

Bondi said she was deeply sorry for what Epstein victims suffered. But she declined a request from Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., to face and apologize to them for the Justice Department's actions, and Bondi dismissed Massie’s critiques of the release of victims’ personal information.

March 2026: The subpoena

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform subpoenaed Bondi to answer questions on April 14 about the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein investigation and file release. With five Republicans joining Democrats to support the subpoena, it reflected widespread discontent, including in the GOP base, over Bondi’s management of the matter.

The future

For now, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche will be the acting attorney general.

Michaels, who traveled to the Capitol last year to press for the files’ release, wanted Bondi gone. But will Blanche do better?

"We can only hope. But given that they worked together, I don’t have great expectations,” she said.

The Associated Press generally does not identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Michaels has done.

Robert Glassman, an attorney for a woman who testified as “Jane” in the 2021 criminal trial of Epstein confidante Ghislaine Maxwell, noted that agency leaders come and go.

“For victims of sexual abuse, what matters is whether the institutions meant to protect them actually do their job,” he said.

The 12-member National Capital Planning Commission, the agency tasked with approving construction on federal property in the Washington region, took the vote because U.S. District Judge Richard Leon’s ruling — which came two days earlier — affects construction activities but not the planning process, said the commission's Trump-appointed chair, Will Scharf.

A vote of 8-1, with two commissioners voting present and one absent, allowed the plan to move forward.

Despite the agency’s approval, the judge’s ruling and a legal fight over the ballroom could stall progress on a legacy project that Trump is racing to see completed before the end of his term in early 2029. It’s among a series of changes the Republican president is planning for the nation’s capital to leave his lasting imprint while he’s still in office.

Before the vote, Scharf, a top White House aide, noted that Leon's order has been stayed for two weeks as the administration seeks an appeal. He said, as he understood the decision, it “really does not impact our action here today.”

Reading from notes, Scharf also delivered an impassioned defense of the project that reviewed the full history of changes and additions to the White House that were criticized when they were made but have become beloved with the passage of time. He spoke about the addition of the north and south porticos and the balcony added by President Harry Truman.

Scharf suggested that Trump’s proposed ballroom will similarly come to be viewed as a wise addition — despite drawing contemporary opposition from some members of the public and government officials.

“I believe that in time this ballroom will be considered every bit as much of a national treasure as the other key components of the White House,” Scharf said.

Scharf also said the project has been viewed negatively because of opposition to Trump, instead of the merits, saying, “I feel that we’ve been unfairly slighted in the press and otherwise for the way we’ve gone about reviewing this particular project.”

The vote by the commission, which includes three members Trump gets to appoint, had initially been scheduled for March but was postponed to Thursday because so many people signed up to comment at the commission’s meeting last month. The comments were overwhelmingly in opposition to the ballroom.

The lone “no” vote was cast by Phil Mendelson, a Democrat who chairs the Council of the District of Columbia. Linda Argo and Arrington Dixon, the two commissioners appointed by Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, voted present.

Mendelson criticized the design of the ballroom addition and how fast it was approved.

“It’s just too large,” he said.

Criticism also came from Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization. One of its attorneys, Jon Golinger, said the commission had discounted opposition from city officials and thousands of people who commented against the project, and ignored the judge's ruling. Several commissioners, including Scharf, had said they took the public feedback seriously.

“This approval is illegitimate and this vote is a joke," Golinger said.

Trump, in a statement after the vote, thanked the commissioners and said he was honored.

“When completed, it will be the Greatest and Most Beautiful Ballroom of its kind anywhere in the World, and a fabulous complement to our Beautiful and Storied White House!” the president said on social media.

Trump tweaks the ballroom design

Before voting, the commission considered design changes to the 90,000-square-foot (8,400-square-meter) ballroom addition that the president announced aboard Air Force One on Sunday, as he flew back to Washington from a weekend at his Florida home.

He removed a large staircase on the south side of the building and added an uncovered porch to the southwest side. Architects and other critics of the project had panned the staircase as too large and basically useless since there was no way to enter the ballroom at the top.

A White House official said the president had considered comments from the National Capital Planning Commission and another oversight entity, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, which approved the project earlier this year, as well as members of the public.

The official, who was not authorized to publicly discuss the ballroom design and spoke on the condition of anonymity, said additional “refinements” had been made to the exterior.

The ballroom, now estimated to cost $400 million, has expanded in scope and price tag since Trump first announced the project last summer, citing a need for space other than a tent on the lawn to host important guests. Trump demolished the East Wing in October with little warning, and site preparation and underground work have been underway since then.

Two other Trump-appointed commissioners, Stuart Levenbach and James Blair, voted for the project.

Levenbach, who serves as vice chairman and is the federal government’s chief statistician, said the White House is currently “not suited” to accommodate large numbers of guests and the addition will improve the “utility” of the compound.

He said tunnels and other structures underground at the White House made it impossible to place many features of the ballroom there, too, as some have suggested might be possible. Levenbach said the addition is a “multipurpose facility,” noting that, in addition to a ballroom, it will also have offices for the first lady, kitchen space and a theater.

“This is not an expansion for its own sake,” Levenbach said.

Blair, a deputy to White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, said visitors and guests of the president deserve a “better experience."

Scharf and Blair also said Trump will get “very limited use” of the ballroom before his term ends.

Judge says Trump isn't the owner of the White House

Trump went ahead with the project before seeking input from the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts, which he reconstituted with allies and supporters.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a private nonprofit organization, sued after Trump demolished the East Wing last fall to build the ballroom addition — a space nearly twice as big as the mansion itself.

Trump says it will be paid for with donations from wealthy people and corporations, including him, though public dollars are paying for underground bunkers and security upgrades.

The trust sought a temporary halt to construction until Trump presented the project to both commissions and Congress for approval. Leon agreed but said that his order would take effect in two weeks and that construction related to security would be allowed.

Blanche, whom Trump elevated Thursday from deputy attorney general to acting U.S. attorney general, rose to prominence representing the president in criminal cases that consumed the four years between his first and second terms.

Blanche, a former federal prosecutor and law firm partner, led Trump's criminal defense team, representing the Republican in matters including his New York hush money case, which ended in his conviction on 34 felony counts, and a pair of federal cases brought by special counsel Jack Smith, both of which have been abandoned.

In a social media post, Trump called Blanche “a very talented and respected Legal Mind.”

As deputy attorney general, Blanche was the Justice Department’s second-in-command.

Working under Attorney General Pam Bondi, he managed the department’s day-to-day operations and became one of its most vocal defenders and visible public faces. He oversaw the release of government files on Jeffrey Epstein and appeared frequently on TV news programs.

Here's a look at Blanche's career and his rise to running the Justice Department:

Paralegal by day, law school student by night

Blanche, 51, attended Brooklyn Law School at night while working as a paralegal at the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan, and graduated cum laude. Originally from the Denver suburbs, he completed his undergraduate studies at American University in Washington, D.C.

Blanche served as a law clerk for federal judges Denny Chin and Joseph Bianco, both now members of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and was a federal prosecutor for eight years in the same U.S. attorney’s office where he had started as a paralegal.

He spent two years as co-chief of the office’s violent crimes unit, overseeing about two dozen prosecutors and cases involving killings, kidnappings, and other violent crimes.

Entering private practice and Trump's inner circle

Blanche left the U.S. attorney's office in 2014, taking a job in the Manhattan office of the law firm WilmerHale. In September 2017, he moved to Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, where he was a partner in the White Collar Defense and Investigations practice.

In a prelude to his work defending Trump, Blanche represented the president's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, and in 2019 succeeded in getting a mortgage fraud case against him dismissed in the same New York court where Trump was convicted.

Blanche argued that the case, brought by the Manhattan district attorney’s office that later prosecuted Trump, was too similar to one that landed Manafort in federal prison and therefore amounted to double jeopardy.

‘An opportunity I should not pass up’

Blanche left Cadwalader in 2023, telling colleagues he was resigning to represent Trump. He joined the president's defense team just prior to his arraignment in the hush money case.

In an email announcing his departure, he wrote: “I have been asked to represent Trump in the recently charged DA case, and after much thought/consideration, I have decided it is the best thing for me to do and an opportunity I should not pass up.”

Despite his conviction, Trump came away from the hush money case impressed with Blanche’s tenacity, his willingness to spar with witnesses and judges, and the poise he showed in speaking in front of TV cameras.

Trump rewarded Blanche and another of his defense lawyers, Emil Bove, with prominent roles in his new administration's Justice Department, and last summer nominated Bove to be a judge on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Defending Trump in a slew of criminal cases

In addition to the hush money matter, Blanche represented Trump in the two cases brought by the special counsel, his 2020 election interference case in Washington and the Florida case accusing the former president of hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

In both cases, Trump's Blanche-led defense team successfully mounted a legal strategy focused heavily on delaying the cases until after the 2024 presidential election. When Trump won, Smith moved to abandon the cases, acknowledging a longstanding Justice Department policy that says sitting presidents cannot be indicted or prosecuted while in office.

Ten days before Trump returned to office, Blanche sat alongside him at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, appearing by video together as a Manhattan judge sentenced the president-elect to no punishment in the hush-money case.

“The majority of the American people also agree that this case should not have been brought,” Blanche told the judge, citing the election results as a verdict of its own.

“The American voters got a chance to see and decide for themselves whether this was the kind of case that should’ve been brought," Blanche said. "And they decided.”

Gen. Randy George “will be retiring from his position as the 41st Chief of Staff of the Army effective immediately,” said Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s top spokesman. George has held the post of Army chief of staff, which typically runs for four years, since August 2023 under the Biden administration.

The ouster, reported earlier by CBS News, is just the latest of more than a dozen firings of top generals and admirals by Hegseth since he took office last year. Like many of those other firings, Pentagon officials are not offering a reason for George's departure, which comes nearly five weeks into U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran and with no clear timeline from President Donald Trump on when the war may end.

Hegseth also has ousted Army Gen. David Hodne and Army Maj. Gen. William Green, according to a Pentagon official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive leadership changes. A reason for their departures also was not given.

General who rose rapidly under Hegseth will fill in

Gen. Christopher LaNeve will be stepping in as acting Army chief of staff, the Pentagon official said. LaNeve was serving as Hegseth’s top military aide when Trump suddenly nominated him to be the Army's vice chief of staff last October. It is a meteoric rise for an officer who was only a two-star general two years ago.

He would take over for George, who is a graduate of West Point Military Academy and an infantry officer who served in the first Gulf War as well as Iraq and Afghanistan. He also served as Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s top military aide from 2021 to 2022 during the Biden administration before taking on top leadership roles in the Army.

George made it through the initial round of firings under the Trump administration in February 2025, when Hegseth removed top military leaders, including Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the Navy’s top uniformed officer, and Gen. Jim Slife, the No. 2 leader at the Air Force. Trump also fired Gen. Charles “CQ” Brown Jr. as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Since then, more than a dozen other top military generals and admirals have either retired early or been removed from their posts.

Among those departures was George’s deputy, Gen. James Mingus, who was vice chief of staff of the Army for less than two years. LaNeve was nominated to that post after earlier being plucked from commanding the Eighth Army in South Korea after less than a year in the job to be Hegseth’s top military aide.

A spokesman for George could not be reached for comment.

Two other Army generals are fired

Of the other generals who were fired, Hodne had been head of the Army Transformation and Training Command, a unit that was only stood up in December as part of George’s effort to modernize the Army and amid Hegseth’s push to reduce the number of general officers in the military.

Green had been the Army’s chief of chaplains. Hegseth announced two major reforms to the military’s chaplain corps a little over a week ago.

In a video message last week, Hegseth said he wanted chaplains to focus more on God and less on therapeutic “self-help and self-care.” In recent years, the military has become increasingly dependent on chaplains to help address the growing numbers of troops in mental health distress. Hegseth also said chaplains would no longer wear their rank on their uniform but instead would be identified by religious insignia.

The changes come as Iran war grinds on

The leadership shakeup comes as Army paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne division are heading to the Middle East along with thousands of Marines and other assets. The Trump administration has avoided questions about whether or not the U.S. military will deploy ground troops against Iran.

In a prime-time address Wednesday about the war, Trump offered no end date for the conflict and few details on his strategy going forward but did forecast more military action.

“We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks,” Trump said of Iran, before adding that “we’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages where they belong.”

Hegseth echoed that sentiment after the speech, with a post on social media that simply read, “Back to the Stone Age.”

Iran’s mission to the United Nations said on X that Trump’s comment “reflects ignorance, not strength,” noting that Iran’s civilization spans over 7,000 years.

___

This story has been corrected to show that Gen. Jim Slife’s name was misspelled Silfe.

In a video posted to X, Hegseth said he is signing a memo that will direct base commanders to allow requests for troops to carry privately owned firearms “with the presumption that it is necessary for personal protection.”

He said any denial of a service member's request must be explained in detail and in writing.

“Effectively, our bases across the country were gun-free zones,” Hegseth said. “Unless you're training or unless you are a military policeman, you couldn't carry, you couldn't bring your own firearm for your own personal protection onto post.”

Questions about why service members lacked access to weapons have often emerged following shootings on the nation's military bases. Such shootings have ranged from isolated events between service members to mass casualty events, such as the shootings by an Army psychiatrist at Texas’ Ford Hood in 2009 that left 13 people dead.

Hegseth cited some of the events in his video, including a shooting that injured five soldiers at Fort Stewart in Georgia last year. Officials said the shooter, an Army sergeant who worked at the base, used his personal handgun before he was tackled by fellow soldiers and arrested.

“In these instances, minutes are a lifetime,” Hegseth said. “And our service members have the courage and training to make those precious, short minutes count.”

Defense Department policy has prohibited military personnel from carrying personal weapons on base without permission from a senior commander, with strict protocol for how the firearms must be stored.

Typically, military personnel must officially check their guns out of secure storage to go to on-base hunting areas or shooting ranges, then check all firearms back in promptly after their sanctioned use. Military police are often the only armed personnel on base, outside of shooting ranges, hunting areas or in training, where soldiers can wield their service weapons without ammunition.

Tanya Schardt, senior counsel at the Brady gun violence prevention organization, said in a statement that Defense Department leaders and the military’s top brass have opposed relaxing the current policy, which was originally enacted under President George H.W. Bush.

Schardt noted that most active duty service members who die by suicide do so with a weapon they own personally, not one military-issued, and argued that there will “undoubtedly be an increase in gun suicide and other gun violence.”

While fewer American service members died by suicide in 2024, the suicide rates among active duty troops overall still have gradually increased between 2011 and 2024, according to a Pentagon report released Tuesday.

“Our military installations are among the most guarded, protected properties in the world, and they’ve never been ‘gun-free zones,’” Schardt said. “If there is a problem with violent crime on these installations, then the Secretary of Defense has an obligation to alert the American people and describe how he’s working to prevent that crime.”

Companies that have signed a “most favored nation” pricing deal and are actively building facilities in the U.S. to onshore production of patented pharmaceuticals and their ingredients will have a 0% tariff. For those that don’t have a pricing deal but are building such projects in the U.S., a 20% tariff will apply but will increase to 100% in four years.

A senior administration official told reporters on a press call that companies still have months to negotiate before the 100% tariffs kick in — 120 days for bigger companies, and 180 days for everyone else. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity to preview the executive order before it was issued, did not identify any companies or drugs that were in jeopardy of getting hit with the increased tariffs but noted the administration had already reached 17 pricing deals with major drugmakers, 13 of which have signed.

In the order, Trump wrote that he deemed such actions necessary “to address the threatened impairment of the national security posed by imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients.” It arrived on the first anniversary of Trump’s so-called Liberation Day, when the president unveiled sweeping new import taxes on nearly every country in the world that sent the stock market reeling. Those “Liberation Day” tariffs were among the duties the Supreme Court overturned in February.

Some warned of consequences of the coming tariffs announced Thursday. Stephen J. Ubl, CEO of pharmaceutical company trade group PhRMA, said taxes “on cutting-edge medicines will increase costs and could jeopardize billions in U.S. investments." He pointed to America's already large footprint in biopharmaceutical manufacturing and noted medicines sourced from other countries “overwhelmingly come from reliable U.S. allies.”

Trump has launched a barrage of new import taxes on America’s trading partners since the start of his second term and repeatedly pledged that sky-high levies on foreign-made drugs were on the way. But the administration has also used the threat of new levies to strike deals with major companies — like Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Bristol Myers Squibb — over the last year, with promises of lower prices for new drugs.

Beyond company-specific rates, a handful of countries have reached trade frameworks with the U.S. to further cap tariffs on drugs sent to the U.S. The EU, Japan, Korea and Switzerland will see a 15% U.S. tariff on patented pharmaceuticals, matching previously agreed rates for most goods, and the U.K. will get 10% — which Thursday’s order noted would “then reduce to zero” under future trade agreements. The U.K. previously said it secured a 0% tariff rate for all British medicines exported to the U.S. for at least three years.

Trump also unveils update to metal tariffs

In addition Thursday, Trump rolled out an update on his 50% tariffs on imported steel, aluminum and copper. Starting Monday, tariff rates on those metals will be calculated based on the “full customs value” of what U.S. customers pay when buying foreign metal under the latest order, which the administration officials claimed will keep importers from other countries from escaping higher payments.

Products fully made of steel, aluminum and copper will continued to be tariffed at 50% for most countries. But the administration is also shifting how tariffs are calculated for derivative metals — or finished goods that contain some of these metals, but are not made entirely of them.

For a product with metal that amounts to less than 15% of its entire weight (like the cap on a perfume bottle) only country-specific tariffs will now apply, officials told reporters Thursday. But for products with more metal, such as a largely steel washing machine, they said a 25% tariff will apply to the whole value.

More sectoral taxes are piling up

Thursday’s orders reflect the latest example of Trump tapping into sectoral duties. The president used Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act to impose the levies, the same authority he cited to slap import taxes on cars, lumber and even kitchen cabinets. And many expect to see more product-specific import taxes down the road.

That’s because a ruling from the Supreme Court struck down tariffs Trump imposed using another law — the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act — to immediately slap tariffs on any country, at nearly any level.

While the Feb. 20 court decision marked a significant blow to Trump’s economic agenda, the president still has plenty of options to keep taxing imports aggressively. Beyond sectoral levies, Trump also imposed a 10% tariff on all imports under a separate legal power mere hours after the Supreme Court’s ruling, but that duty can only last for 150 days. Some two dozen states already challenged the new tariffs.

Trump has argued his steep new import taxes are necessary to bring back wealth that was “stolen” from the U.S. He says they will narrow America’s decades-old trade deficit and bring manufacturing back to the country. But Trump has also turned to tariffs amid personal grudges, or in response to political critics. And upending the global supply chain has proven costly for businesses and households that are already strained by rising prices.

China denies the allegations. Panama has been caught in a broader rivalry between the United States and China after U.S. President Donald Trump accused Beijing last year of running the Panama Canal. The Trump administration sees the critical maritime trade route as strategically important, both commercially and militarily, and Trump has talked about retaking the Panama Canal since his campaign.

“China’s decision to detain or otherwise impede Panama-flagged vessels engaged in lawful trade destabilizes supply chains, raises costs, and erodes confidence in the global trading system,” Rubio said on social media. “The United States stands with Panama against any retaliatory actions against its sovereignty and will always support our partners in the face of bullying.”

Of the 124 ships detained in Chinese ports for inspection in March, 92 — or nearly 75% — were Panama-flagged, according to public data from Tokyo MOU, a regional port state control organization comprising 22 member authorities in the Asia-Pacific region. The Panama-flagged ships were typically detained for a few days — as short as one day or as long as 10 days — before being released.

That is up drastically from the previous two months, when 19 out of 45 ships — or more than 40% — held in February were Panama-flagged, and 23 out of 71 — or over 30% — in January hung the Panama flag.

America’s “repeated wrongful allegations only reveal its attempt to take control of the canal,” said Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in Washington. In a statement, he did not address the uptick in the number of Panama-flagged ships held up in Chinese ports.

It comes amid the backdrop of Panama's supreme court ruling in January that the concession held by a subsidiary of Hong Kong's CK Hutchison Holdings over the Balboa and Cristóbal terminals was unconstitutional.

The U.S. has pressured Panama and other Latin American countries to curb China's sway in the Western Hemisphere, where Trump has said he would increasingly focus. The Trump administration has gotten involved in Latin American affairs more aggressively than the U.S. government has in decades, most dramatically by capturing Venezuela's leader Nicolás Maduro in a military raid in January.

The Federal Maritime Commission in Washington has been tracking Panama-flagged vessels that are being detained or held up in Chinese ports.

“Secretary Rubio’s statement highlights the disruptive effects of the government of China’s actions against Panama-flagged vessels,” said Laura DiBella, chair of the commission. She said the commission “is not aware of any other country in recent history conducting vessel safety inspections and detentions in a punitive manner.”

Panama’s government has said APM Terminals, a subsidiary of the Danish group A.P. Moller-Maersk, would temporarily assume the administration of the terminals while a new contract is awarded. DiBella said that the Chinese Ministry of Transport had summoned Maersk to Beijing for high‑level discussions.

Panama’s government has sought to minimize the wider geopolitical tensions surrounding the ships. Officials did not respond to requests for comment about Rubio’s comments, but previously denied that the detentions had to do with disputes between China and Panama over the canal.

In March, Panama’s foreign minister, Javier Martínez, recognized that there had been an increase in detentions but said he believed they were “part of routine maritime industry practices, because detentions also occur in other ports and to other flags.”

“We want to maintain a respectful relationship with China,” he added.

After the ruling from the Panama supreme court in January, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said China would “take all measures necessary to firmly protect the legitimate and lawful rights and interests of Chinese companies.”

José Digeronimo, former president of the Panama Maritime Chamber, said actions with the ships could have a “huge impact” on Panama, which is a world leader in ship registries. The registries generate around $100 million for the government every year.

Digeronimo compared such registries to shipowners choosing passports, with owners registering their boats in places that “allow you to travel to the greatest number of countries without restrictions.” Harassment by Chinese authorities could put that in jeopardy, he said.

“If the world’s main exporter starts imposing restrictions for using the Panamanian flag, the last thing you’ll want is to have the Panamanian one,” Digeronimo said.

___

Solís reported from Panama City. Associated Press writers Megan Janetsky and Alexis Triboulard in Mexico City contributed to this report.

Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the Florida SAVE Act into law this week, describing it as a measure to safeguard the electoral process and improve oversight of the state’s voting system.

RELATED: DeSantis signs Florida’s version of SAVE Act while Trump attends Supreme Court deliberation about citizenship

Duval County Supervisor of Elections Jerry Holland said election fraud has not been a widespread issue locally, though he noted even a small number of questionable votes can matter in close races.

“From a size standpoint, it’s not a big issue, but we’ve had elections as tight as two votes,” Holland said. “You can never say it won’t impact an election.”

According to Holland, about 120 votes have been questioned in Duval County over the past three years.

Under the new law, current registered voters will not need to take additional steps to prove citizenship unless they are notified by the state. Holland emphasized that voters will not be required to show proof of citizenship at polling places.

Instead, the requirement will apply during the voter registration process. Citizenship verification will be tied to records handled through the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, which uses a federal system to confirm eligibility when issuing or updating identification.

The law also tightens rules on acceptable voter identification, eliminating some forms such as student IDs.

Voting rights groups, including the League of Women Voters, the Florida Immigrant Coalition, the ACLU, Florida Rising, Common Cause and the Hispanic Federation, have challenged the law in court. A federal lawsuit has already been filed seeking to block its implementation.

Rebecca Black, an immigration attorney, said the new requirements could create hurdles for some voters.

“It’ll create problems for people who don’t have their birth certificates or don’t know how to get them,” Black said. “It also creates challenges for people who have changed their names.”

Black added that in her experience, cases of noncitizens voting are extremely rare. She said the law could disproportionately affect elderly residents and minority communities who may have limited access to necessary documents.

The SAVE Act is scheduled to take effect in January 2027 and will not impact the November midterm elections.

Tina Peters is serving a nine-year prison term after being convicted of state crimes for sneaking in an outside computer expert to make a copy of her county's election computer system during a software update in 2021. A photo and video of confidential voting system passwords were later posted on social media and a conservative website.

Calls for Peters’ release have become a cause celebre in the election conspiracy movement. President Donald Trump has sought unsuccessfully to pardon Peters and pressured Colorado to set her free.

Judges on the Colorado Court of Appeals upheld her conviction in a 74-page ruling that rejected a range of issues raised by Peters, including the notion that Trump has authority to pardon her state crimes. But they said a lower court judge should not have considered Peters’ continued promotion of election fraud conspiracies when he sentenced her in 2024.

Judge called Peters a ‘charlatan’

One of Tina Peters’ lawyers, John Case, said the court’s ruling affirmed the importance of free speech.

“Tina Peters was punished for words that she used to criticize our insecure and illegal voting system," he said. “The decision affirms that people are free to speak what they believe in Colorado as well as the rest of the United States of America.”

Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, who has been considering granting clemency to Peters, praised the court's decision for rejecting Trump’s pardon but upholding her free speech rights.

“This case has been very challenging and a true test of our resolve as a state to have a fair judicial system, not just for people we agree with but a fair system for Coloradans that we vehemently disagree with,” Polis said in statement.

Peters was the former clerk in Mesa County, in the far western part of Colorado, and convicted by jurors in the Republican stronghold that has supported Trump.

She was unapologetic when she was sentenced by Judge Matthew Barrett and insisted that she tried to unearth what she believed was fraud for the greater good. He ripped into her, calling her a “charlatan” who had used her position to “peddle snake oil.”

The appeals court found that Barrett violated her rights to free speech by punishing Peters for persistently alleging fraud in the 2020 election. They noted that because Peters is no longer serving as an election clerk, she can no longer engage in the conduct that led to her conviction.

"The trial court obviously erred by imposing sentence at least partially based on Peters’ protected speech,” Judge Ted Tow wrote in Thursday's ruling.

What's next

The court sent Peters’ case back to a lower court for a judge to issue a new sentence. That can't happen for at least 42 days to give time for the parties to appeal.

Case said he would likely ask for Peters to be sentenced to time served and released.

But 21st Judicial District Attorney Dan Rubinstein, who prosecuted Peters, said the judge potentially could issue a sentence similar to the original one while complying with the appeals court ruling.

Trump has threatened to take “harsh measures” against Colorado unless the state releases Peters. In February, Trump said Colorado was “suffering a big price” for refusing to release her.

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat who is running for governor, has accused the Trump administration of waging a revenge campaign by choking off funds and ending federal programs over the state’s refusal to free Peters.

Weiser said in response to the ruling that the original sentence had been “fair and appropriate.”

“Whatever happens with her sentence, Tina Peters will always be a convicted felon who violated her duty as Mesa County clerk, put other lives at risk, and threatened our democracy. Nothing will remove that stain,” Weiser said in a statement.

Appeals court rejects Trump's pardon

The U.S. Justice Department inserted itself into Peters’ bid to be released while her state appeal was considered. The federal Bureau of Prisons also tried to get Peters moved to a federal prison. After both efforts failed, Trump in December announced a pardon for Peters.

However, the appeals court judges said they could find no prior example of a president pardoning someone for a state crime. And they rejected her attorneys' claims that Peters actions had been carried out while “defending a federal interest.”

“We have found no instance where the presidential pardon power has been stretched in such a way as to invade an individual state’s sovereignty,” they said, adding that the President’s pardon has “no impact” on the state’s case against Peters.

The Associated Press left messages with the White House for comment.

Peters was convicted of three counts of attempting to influence a public servant and one count each of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty and failure to comply with the requirements of the secretary of state.

Peters’ lawyers didn’t deny that she used the security badge of a local man she pretended to hire to allow the an associate of MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell to make a copy of the Dominion Voting Systems election computer server during an annual software update in 2021.

But they said she only wanted to preserve election data and find out whether any outside actor had accessed the system while ballots were being counted. They said she didn’t want the information made public.

____

Brown reported from Billings, Montana.

The departure followed months of scrutiny over the Justice Department's handling of files related to the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation and failed efforts to meet Trump's unwavering demands for criminal cases against his adversaries. As Trump's own frustrations mounted, he began privately discussing firing Bondi, people familiar with the matter say.

“Pam Bondi is a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend, who faithfully served as my Attorney General over the past year,” Trump said in a statement. He added, “We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future.”

Trump named Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, one of his former personal lawyers, as the acting attorney general. Three people familiar with the matter told The Associated Press on Thursday that he has privately discussed Lee Zeldin, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, as a permanent pick.

In her own statement, Bondi called the job “the honor of a lifetime” and said she would be working over the next month to transition the position to Blanche.

Bondi came into office 14 months ago, pledging that she would not play politics with the Justice Department. But she quickly set out to do Trump's bidding, heaping lavish praise at congressional hearings and White House events, firing prosecutors deemed insufficiently loyal to the president and opening investigations into his political foes. The intense turmoil contributed to the resignations of hundreds of employees, with the norm-breaking actions stirring concern that the department was being wielded as a tool to advance Trump's personal and political interests.

“Pam Bondi oversaw an unprecedented weaponization of the Justice Department that brought our nation’s rule of law to its knees,” said Sen. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat.

Bondi rejected accusations that she politicized the Justice Department and said her mission was to restore the institution’s credibility after overreach by President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration, which included two federal criminal cases against Trump. Bondi’s defenders have said she worked to refocus the department to better tackle illegal immigration and violent crime and brought much-needed change to an agency they believe unfairly targeted conservatives.

Embracing, supporting and protecting the president

Bondi’s public embrace of the president, however, marked a sharp departure from her predecessors, who generally took pains to maintain an arm’s-length distance from the White House to protect the impartiality of investigations and prosecutions. Bondi postured herself as Trump’s chief supporter and protector, praising and defending him in congressional hearings and placing a banner with his face on the exterior of Justice Department headquarters.

She called for an end to the “weaponization” of law enforcement that she said occurred under the Biden administration, even though Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland, and Jack Smith, the special counsel who produced two cases against Trump, have said they followed the facts, the evidence and the law in their decision-making. Bondi’s critics, meanwhile, said she was the one who had politicized the agency.

“You’ve turned the People’s Department of Justice into Trump’s instrument of revenge,” Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary committee, said at a February hearing.

Bondi delivered a combative performance but few substantive answers at that hearing, as she angrily insulted her Democratic questioners with name-calling and praised Trump for the performance of the stock market — “The Dow is up over 50,000 right now!” —- and openly aligned herself as in sync with a president whom she painted as a victim of past impeachments and investigations.

Even Republicans began to challenge her, with the GOP-led House Oversight Committee last month issuing a subpoena to her to appear for a closed-door interview about the Epstein files.

Under Bondi’s leadership, the department opened investigations into a string of Trump foes, including Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, New York Attorney General Letitia James, former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan. The high-profile prosecutions of Comey and James were short-lived as they were quickly thrown out by a judge who ruled that the prosecutor who brought the cases was illegally appointed.

Trump repeatedly praised and defended Bondi publicly but also showed flashes of impatience with his attorney general’s efforts to meet his demands to prosecute his rivals. In one extraordinary social media post last year, Trump called on Bondi to move quickly to prosecute his foes, including James and Comey, telling her, “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility.”

Bondi oversaw the exodus of thousands of career employees — both through firings and voluntary departures — including lawyers who prosecuted violent attacks on police at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021; environmental, civil rights and ethics enforcers; counterterrorism prosecutors; and others.

Fumbling the Epstein files

She struggled to overcome early stumbles over the Epstein files that angered conservatives eager for government bombshells about the case, which has long fascinated conspiracy theorists. She herself had fed the conspiracy theory machine with a suggestion in a 2025 Fox News Channel interview that Epstein’s “client list” was sitting on her desk for review. The department later acknowledged that no such document exists.

Bondi was ridiculed over a move to hand out binders of Epstein files to conservative influencers at the White House, only for it to be later revealed that the documents included no new revelations. And despite promises that more files were going to become public, the Justice Department in July said no more would be released, prompting Congress to pass a bill to force the agency to do so. Ultimately, the department said it had complied with its obligations by releasing millions more records.

Jess Michaels, an Epstein survivor who traveled to the U.S. Capitol last year to press for the files’ release, said she was optimistic when Bondi took office but lost faith after Bondi distributed the binders at the White House.

“I think she had this opportunity to be a hero and to really do right by survivors of sexual violence and trafficking, and she chose not to,” Michaels said by phone. “It is outrageous, the volume of miscalculation she has made.”

The Epstein files fumbles led to a stunning public criticism from White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, a close friend of Bondi’s, who told Vanity Fair that the attorney general “completely whiffed.” The Justice Department’s release of millions of pages of Epstein files did little to tamp down criticism, prompting a House committee, with the support of five Republicans, to subpoena Bondi to answer questions under oath.

Bondi, who defended Trump during his first impeachment trial, was his second choice to lead the Justice Department, picked for the role after former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida withdrew his name from consideration amid scrutiny over sex trafficking allegations.

___

Associated Press writers Matthew Daly in Washington and Jennifer Peltz in New York contributed to this report.