
Dan Bongino breaks silence after feud with Pam Bondi over Epstein files: ‘What I have learned…shocked me'
Also Read: Michigan stabbing suspect identified? 5 key facts about Traverse City Walmart attacker
Bongino's cryptic post after Epstein humiliation
In his puzzling post on social media, Bongino wrote, 'During my tenure here as the Deputy Director of the FBI, I have repeatedly relayed to you that things are happening that might not be immediately visible, but they are happening.'
He sparked a firestorm on social media with his post, which hinted at something without naming anyone. The following is a very public clash with Bondi over the handling of the controversial Epstein files. Bongiono declared that he and FBI Director Kash Patel are committed to rooting out corruption. In a metaphor, he also suggested that he has taken the red pill in The Matrix and has awoken up to the harsh reality, as reported by The Daily Beast.
In his post, Bongino continued, "What I have learned in the course of our properly predicated and necessary investigations into these aforementioned matters, has shocked me down to my core. We cannot run a Republic like this. I'll never be the same after learning what I've learned.'
He reassured that he will ensure to "conduct these righteous and proper investigations by the book and in accordance with the law. We are going to get the answers WE ALL DESERVE. As with any investigation, I cannot predict where it will land, but I can promise you an honest and dignified effort at truth. Not 'my truth,' or 'your truth,' but THE TRUTH.' The FBI Deputy Director ended his note with 'God bless America, and all those who defend Her'.
Also Read: Walmart stabbing suspect slashed shopper 'in the eye,' witnesses recount horrifying scene in Michigan
Bongino's exit after
The feud between Bondi and Bongino erupted over the controversial files of the convicted sex offender. In mid-July, he awkwardly backed out after a tense standoff with his boss. He skipped a day at work and threatened to resign over frustration with Bondi's control of the investigation.
At the time, White House insiders revealed that Trump was secretly furious with Bongino after causing a MAGA meltdown and was forced to side with Bondi as confusion grew about the President's ambiguous past.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
4 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump suspects Netanyahu prolonging Gaza war for political gain, but unlikely to act: Report
President Trump increasingly suspects that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is extending the war in Gaza for political gain and obstructing ceasefire efforts, according to a report, citing two unnamed administration officials read more President Donald Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrive for a news conference in the East Room of the White House, on Feb. 4, 2025, in Washington. AP File US President Donald Trump increasingly suspects that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is extending the war in Gaza for political gain and obstructing ceasefire efforts, according to The Atlantic report, citing two unnamed administration officials. Despite these concerns, the officials said it is unlikely Trump will take any serious action against Netanyahu. A White House official told the publication that 'there is no significant rupture' in the relationship, adding, 'allies can sometimes disagree, even in a very real way.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Prime Minister Netanyahu's stance is complicating President Trump's efforts to stabilise the region and advance trade and business initiatives, reported The Atlantic. According to the report, citing US officials, one reason for envoy Steve Witkoff's current visit to Israel is to conduct an independent review of Israel's aid delivery to Gaza, amid Trump's rising concern over reports of a growing hunger crisis. Despite feeling slighted by Netanyahu, President Trump's frustration has not led to any major change in US policy. He continues to hold Hamas responsible for the latest collapse in ceasefire negotiations and has declined to align with France and the United Kingdom, who this week pledged to recognise a Palestinian state if Israel fails to improve humanitarian conditions in Gaza and commit to a peace process. On Thursday morning, seemingly trying to set aside his differences with Netanyahu, Trump wrote on Truth Social: 'The fastest way to end the Humanitarian Crises in Gaza is for Hamas to SURRENDER AND RELEASE THE HOSTAGES!!!' A few weeks ago, President Trump and PM Netanyahu exchanged gestures of symbolic significance: Trump publicly criticised the 'out-of-control' prosecutors handling Netanyahu's corruption trial, while Netanyahu nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize he has long sought. However, the goodwill from these moves quickly faded, overshadowed by deeper tensions between the two leaders. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In recent days, Trump has openly distanced himself from Netanyahu, rejecting his efforts to downplay Gaza's famine. Disturbed by images of starving children, Trump sent envoy Steve Witkoff to pressure Israel on aid access. The White House was also caught off guard by Israeli strikes in Syria and a missile that hit Gaza's only Catholic church. With inputs from agencies


Time of India
12 minutes ago
- Time of India
Federal court question Trump's tariff authority; cites limit of emergency law, case likely headed to Supreme Court
Appellate judges question Trump's authority to impose tariffs (Image credits: AP) Appellate judges expressed skepticism Thursday over US President Donald Trump's legal rationale for imposing broad tariffs without congressional approval, raising doubts about his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify the move. During a 99-minute hearing before the US court of appeals for the federal circuit, members of the 11-judge panel repeatedly challenged the Trump administration's unprecedented interpretation of the 1977 law, which allows the president to seize assets and block financial transactions during a national emergency. The law, originally signed by former President Jimmy Carter, makes no mention of tariffs. 'IEEPA doesn't even mention the word 'tariffs' anywhere,' said Circuit Judge Jimmie Reyna as quoted by AP. Attorney Brett Schumate, representing the Trump administration, acknowledged that 'no president has ever read IEEPA this way,' but argued that the country's trade deficit constituted a national emergency requiring such action. He insisted the law grants the president 'broad and flexible' authority in emergencies, but claimed Trump was not seeking 'unbounded authority.' Chief Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore questioned that logic. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like This Japanese AI invention allows you to speak 68 languages instantly. The idea? Genius. Enence 2.0 Undo 'If the president says there's a problem with our military readiness and he puts a 20% tax on coffee, that doesn't seem to necessarily deal with (it),' she said. Neal Katyal, attorney for the plaintiffs, called the administration's argument a 'breathtaking' overreach. 'It amounts to saying the president can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, for as long as he wants, so long as he declares an emergency,' he said. No ruling was issued Thursday, but the case is widely expected to reach the US Supreme Court. The legal battle stems from Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs imposed on April 2, which levied new duties on nearly all imports. The lawsuit does not challenge tariffs targeting China or those on steel, aluminum, and autos, many of which remain under former President Joe Biden. In May, a three-judge panel of the US court of international trade ruled that Trump exceeded his authority. The current appeal seeks to overturn that decision. Trump addressed the case on his Truth Social platform, posting: 'If our Country was not able to protect itself by using TARIFFS AGAINST TARIFFS, WE WOULD BE 'DEAD,' WITH NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL OR SUCCESS.' The lawsuit is one of at least seven filed against Trump's tariff policies, with plaintiffs including 12 US states and several businesses, such as a wine importer and a plumbing supply company. Although the US Constitution gives Congress the power to impose tariffs, decades of delegation have allowed presidents increasing control over trade policy. Trump capitalised on this, raising the average US tariff to over 18%- the highest rate since 1934, according to Yale University's Budget Lab.


The Print
34 minutes ago
- The Print
AIADMK MP approaches HC to restrain state govt from introducing scheme in living personality's name
In his petition, Shanmugam sought to restrain the state government from introducing/rebranding any scheme in the name of any living personality pending the disposal of his Writ Petition. The first bench comprising Chief Justice M M Shrivatsava and Justice Sunder Mohan gave the directive orally while hearing Public Interest Litigation filed by AIADMK MP CeV Shanmugam and advocate Iniyan. Chennai, July 31 (PTI) Madras High Court, hearing a plea that sought to restrain the state government from introducing or rebranding any scheme in the name of any living personality on Thursday said any new scheme to be introduced by the Tamil Nadu government should be strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court. He also sought a direction to the Election Commission of India and the Committee on Content Regulation in Government Advertising to take necessary action against the DMK political party under Paragraph 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 and consequently forbear the state government from using the name 'Stalin' in relation to the activities of the scheme emanating from G.O. (Ms) No. 390, Public (Mudhalvarin Mugavari) Department, dated 19.06.2025 and thus render justice. When the petitions came up for hearing, Senior advocate Vijay Narayan, appearing for Shanmugam, submitted that the state government had introduced a scheme under the name 'Ungaludan Stalin'. An advertisement was also issued in which the photographs of three ideological leaders of the ruling party were published. The advertisement also carried the name of the Chief Minister and the DMK party election symbol. This was totally in violation of the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court and the orders of the ECI. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation to take action. But, there was no response, he added. He also said on August 2, the state government will be introducing another scheme. Therefore, the DMK party should be restrained from repeating the same in the forthcoming advertisement, he added. Advocate General P S Raman submitted that the photograph of the chief minister was allowed. The Supreme Court clarified it when it reviewed its earlier order. The advertisement, which the petitioner relied upon, was not the advertisement given by the state government, he added. Showing a copy of an advertisement given by the state government, Raman said there was no party symbol in the advertisement. Moreover, it carried a DIPR code at the right side bottom, he added. When the bench asked Vijay Narayan from where the petitioner got the advertisement, he said the petitioner got it from a Twitter handle. Senior counsel P Wilson, appearing for the DMK party, submitted that the petitioners projected a false case. It was politically motivated, he added. The bench asked the State government and the ECI to file their counters within a week. Thereafter, within three days, the petitioner should file his rejoinder. Thereafter, it will take up the case for final hearing, the bench added. PTI COR VGN ADB This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.