Independent: White House admits Trump’s message to [Bimbo #3] Bondi to prosecute enemies was supposed to be a DM: report

Apparent error provides another glimpse into radically reshaped Justice Department under Trump’s command

Donald Trump’s Truth Social post urging Attorney General Pam [Bimbo #3] Bondi to prosecute his perceived political enemies without “delay” was intended to be a private message, according to administration officials.

A post from the president’s account September 20 addressed to [Bimbo #3] “Pam” demands “justice be served” against his former FBI director James Comey, who was indicted five days later.

Trump — suggesting in his post that the prosecution of his favored targets is retribution for his impeachments and indictments against him — believed he had sent [Bimbo #3] Bondi the message directly, and was surprised to learn it was public, The Wall Street Journalreported.

[Bimbo #3] Bondi was reportedly upset over his mistake, which Trump quickly sought to correct with a follow-up message roughly one hour later praising [Bimbo #3] Bondi for doing a “GREAT job.”

The error has provided a glimpse into a radically reshaped Department of Justice, stripped of its historic independence with both [Bimbo #3] Bondi and Trump at the helm.

When asked about the message in a Senate oversight hearing this week, [Bimbo #3] Bondi replied: “I don’t think he said anything that he hasn’t said for years.”

Comey pleaded not guilty to lying to Congress and obstruction in his first court appearance on the charges Wednesday. A trial date is tentatively scheduled to begin January 5, 2026, but Comey’s attorneys are expected to try to have the case thrown out altogether, citing Trump’s “vindictive” prosecution.

Trump’s message to [Bimbo #3] Bondi is likely to be at the heart of that motion, showing the judge overseeing that case that the president directed the nation’s top law enforcement official to investigate a target he labeled “guilty” before any charges were brought against him.

The Trump administration has ousted dozens of officials and government attorneys deemed insufficiently loyal to the president’s agenda, but in his September 20 post, the president singled out Erik Siebert, the now-former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia — who Trump himself nominated and then pushed out of the role after he resisted pressure to prosecute Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Trump complained that “nothing is being done” against Comey, James and Senator Adam Schiff, who are “all guilty as hell,” in his social media post.

He complained that “we almost put in a Democrat supported U.S. Attorney, in Virginia, with a really bad Republican past,” despite Siebert being one of Trump’s own nominees for the job.

Trump called him a “woke RINO, who was never going to do his job,” and said he “fired him” because he wouldn’t take up the case against Comey.

His personal attorney Lindsey Halligan “is a really good lawyer, and likes you, a lot,” Trump wrote in the message to [Bimbo #3] “Pam.”

“We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility,” Trump wrote. “They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 times!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!! President DJT.”

Three hours later, Trump announced on Truth Social that he was nominating Halligan, who has no prosecutorial experience.

Before Halligan entered office, federal prosecutors repeatedly sought to make a case against charging Comey, who is now the first former senior government official facing criminal charges under Trump’s retribution campaign.

According to an internal memo in which career prosecutors explained why they would not seek an indictment, prosecutors determined that a central witness — Comey’s longtime friend Daniel Richmond, a law professor at Columbia University — would prove “problematic” and likely prevent them from establishing a case, according to ABC News.

Richmond’s testimony would result in “likely insurmountable problems” for the prosecution, the memo stated.

In a highly unusual move, Halligan presented the case to a grand jury herself, and the grand jury voted to indict him last month.

A majority of the grand jury voted against charging Comey with one of three counts presented by Halligan, according to court documents. Comey was indicted on two other counts — making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding — after only 14 of 23 jurors voted in favor.

During her contentious confirmation hearing in January, [Bimbo #3] Bondi promised to end what she has called the partisan “weaponization” of the agency against perceived political enemies — echoing claims from Trump and his allies who have characterized the president’s own federal indictments as a politically motivated conspiracy against him.

In that hearing, she did not explicitly rule out prosecuting Trump’s targets. Asked again Tuesday whether she had any instruction from the White House to investigate anyone, [Bimbo #3] Bondi refused to answer. “I’m not going to discuss any conversations,” she said.

Trump, [Bimbo #3] Bondi and law enforcement across the Justice Department — now filled with loyalists and attorneys to dominate agencies that the president claims were weaponized against him — are also targeting other prominent Democratic officials as well as progressive fundraising groups and an array of ideological opponents the administration alleges are tied to acts of terrorism.

Prosecutors in Maryland are expected to bring charges against former national security adviser turned Trump critic John Bolton, according to WSJfollowing a raid at his home in August. A case file on a federal court docket remains sealed.

Former FBI director Christopher Wray, another Trump appointee who remained in office under Joe Biden, also is under investigation, according to the newspaper, though the subject of the probe is unclear.

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/bondi-truth-social-trump-james-comey-b2842585.html

Morning Rush: Columbia Grad Student Faces Deportation Over Undisclosed Activities [Video]

Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate student and pro-Palestinian activist, has been ordered by an immigration judge to be deported from the United States. Khalil, who has been detained in Louisiana since his arrest in March, is facing deportation to either Syria or Algeria, despite not being charged with any crime. As a legal permanent resident, his deportation comes as a result of failing to disclose connections to a campus anti-Israel group on his green card application, according to court documents. This case has sparked discussion on the transparency requirements for immigration applications and the rights of permanent residents in the U.S. Khalil’s situation underscores the complex intersection of immigration law and activism, raising questions about the balance between national security and individual freedoms.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/columbia-grad-student-faces-deportation-over-undisclosed-activities/vi-AA1MPWqI

Reuters: US immigration judge orders Khalil deportation, his lawyers say separate ruling protects him

  • Mahmoud Khalil was detained for over 100 days earlier this year
  • Trump has cracked down on pro-Palestinian protest movement
  • Rights advocates have raised free speech, due process concerns

A U.S. immigration judge ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil be deported to Algeria or Syria over claims that he omitted information from his green card application, court documents showed on Wednesday.

Khalil’s lawyers said they intend to appeal the deportation order while saying a federal district court’s separate orders remain in effect that prohibit the government from immediately deporting or detaining him as his federal court case proceeds.

Immigration judge Jamee Comans said Khalil “willfully misrepresented material fact(s) for the sole purpose of circumventing the immigration process and reducing the likelihood his application would be denied.”

Khalil’s lawyers submitted a letter to a federal court in New Jersey overseeing his civil rights case and said he will challenge Comans’ decision.

Khalil, a 30-year-old permanent U.S. resident of Palestinian descent and a Columbia University student, was detained by U.S. immigration authorities for more than 100 days earlier this year as the Trump administration sought to deport him.

His wife, who is a U.S. citizen, was pregnant at the time and Khalil missed the birth of their child while in jail.

He was released on June 20. U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz of New Jersey said at the time, while referring to Khalil, that punishing someone over a civil immigration matter was unconstitutional.

President Donald Trump’s administration has cracked down on pro-Palestinian protesters such as Khalil, calling them antisemitic and supporters of extremism.

Protesters, including some Jewish groups, say the government wrongly equates their criticism of Israel’s assault on Gaza and its occupation of Palestinian territories with antisemitism and their advocacy for Palestinian rights with support for extremism.

“It is no surprise that the Trump administration continues to retaliate against me for my exercise of free speech,” Khalil said.

“When their first effort to deport me was set to fail, they resorted to fabricating baseless and ridiculous allegations in a bid to silence me for speaking out and standing firmly with Palestine, demanding an end to the ongoing genocide.”

Rights groups raise free speech and due process concerns over the deportation attempts and federal funding threats to universities where protests occurred.

Columbia was at the heart of last year’s protests that demanded an end to Israel’s war and a divestment by universities of funds from companies that support Israel.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-immigration-judge-orders-khalil-deportation-his-lawyers-say-separate-ruling-2025-09-18

Slingshot News: ‘I Might Be Wrong’: When Trump Humiliated The Wife Of An Appointee By Insulting Her Marriage During A Swearing-In Ceremony

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/judge-overturns-trump-administration-funding-cuts-to-harvard/ar-AA1LP6E9

NBC News: Stanford student newspaper sues Trump officials over immigration law that they say led to chilling of free speech

The Stanford Daily accused the administration of using immigration provisions to threaten deportation, leading to censorship and violating First Amendment rights.

Stanford University’s student newspaper sued the Trump administration Wednesday over two provisions in federal immigration law that it says the officials have wielded against those with pro-Palestinian views.

The Stanford Daily, in addition to two former college students, filed the lawsuit against Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, accusing the administration of using the provisions to threaten deportation and the revocation of visas. They say the situation has led to censorship and violations of free speech rights.

The paper’s staff members who are on visas have self-censored and declined assignments related to the war in Gaza, fearful that their reporting could jeopardize their lawful immigration status, the lawsuit said.

“In the United States of America, no one should fear a midnight knock on the door for voicing the wrong opinion,” Conor Fitzpatrick, an attorney at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which is helping represent the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “Free speech isn’t a privilege the government hands out. Under our Constitution it is the inalienable right of every man, woman, and child.”

A senior State Department official declined to comment and directed NBC News to comments Rubio has about visa holders and complying with U.S. law.

In April, Rubio wrote in an opinion piece published on Fox News that he would be taking a “zero-tolerance approach to foreign nationals who abet terrorist organizations.”

“The Supreme Court has made clear for decades that visa holders or other aliens cannot use the First Amendment to shield otherwise impermissible actions taken to support designated foreign terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hizballah, or the Houthis, or violate other U.S. laws,” Rubio said.

Tricia McLaughlin, spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, described the lawsuit as “baseless.”

“There is no room in the United States for the rest of the world’s terrorist sympathizers, and we are under no obligation to admit them or let them stay here,” she said in a statement.

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs take aim at the Deportation Provision and Revocation Provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act. The first provision allows the secretary of state to deport noncitizens if the secretary “personally determines that the alien’s admission would compromise a compelling United States foreign policy interest.” The second gives the secretary the power to revoke a visa or documentation at his or her discretion.

As the lawsuit points out, the Trump administration has cited the Deportation Provision as the basis for trying to deport Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil, who was arrested and detained for more than three months. Similarly, the administration used the Revocation Provision to detain Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk, who has also since been released.

Because of the administration’s use of the statutes, the lawsuit said, the Stanford Daily has received a number of requests from lawfully present noncitizens to have their names, quotes or photos removed from articles. Many international students have stopped speaking to the paper’s journalists, and current and former writers have asked for their opinion editorials to be taken down, the lawsuit said.

“The First Amendment cements America’s promise that the government may not subject a speaker to disfavored treatment because those in power do not like his or her message,” the lawsuit said. “And when a federal statute collides with First Amendment rights, the Constitution prevails.”

One of the unnamed plaintiffs appeared on the Canary Mission, the suit said. The website, run by an anonymous group, has published a detailed database of students, professors and others who it says have shared anti-Israel and antisemitic viewpoints. It has been accused of doxxing and harassment, in addition to launching personal attacks that depict pro-Palestinian activists as being in “support of terrorism,” the Middle East Studies Association of North America said. The plaintiff has stopped publishing and “voicing her true opinions” on the Palestinian territories and Israel, the suit said.

Canary Mission has told NBC News that it documents people and groups who “promote hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews” across the political spectrum. It did not respond to criticisms of its work.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to issue preliminary and permanent injunctions that block the officials from using the provisions against them based on engaging in what they consider protected speech.

“There’s real fear on campus and it reaches into the newsroom,” Greta Reich, the Stanford Daily’s editor-in-chief, said in a statement. “The Daily is losing the voices of a significant portion of our student population.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/stanford-student-newspaper-sues-trump-officials-immigration-law-rcna223477

Independent: Married immigrants trying to get green cards could be deported, new Trump-era guidance says

Immigration authorities now say people seeking permanent lawful status through a citizen spouse or family member can still be removed

Immigrants who are married to U.S. citizens have long expected that they won’t be deported from the country while going through the process of obtaining a green card.

But new guidance from Donald Trump’s administration explicitly states that immigrants seeking lawful residence through marriage can be deported, a policy that also applies to immigrants with pending requests.

Immigration authorities can begin removal proceedings for immigrants who lack legal status and applied to become a lawful permanent resident through a citizen spouse, according to guidance from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services issued this month.

The policy also applies to immigrants with pending green cards through other citizen family members.

People who entered the country illegally aren’t the only ones impacted. Under new guidance, immigrants trying to get lawful status through a spouse or family member are at risk of being deported if their visas expired, or if they are among the roughly 1 million immigrants whose temporary protected status was stripped from them under the Trump administration.

Immigrants and their spouses or family members who sponsor them “should be aware that a family-based petition accords no immigration status nor does it bar removal,” the policy states.

The changes were designed to “enhance benefit integrity and identify vetting and fraud concerns” and weed out what the agency calls “fraudulent, frivolous, or non-meritorious” applications, according to USCIS.

“This guidance will improve USCIS’ capacity to vet qualifying marriages and family relationships to ensure they are genuine, verifiable, and compliant with all applicable laws,” the agency said in a statement.

Those changes, which were filed on August 1, are “effective immediately,” according to the agency.

Within the first six months of 2025, immigrants and their family members filed more than 500,000 I-130 petitions, which are the first steps in the process of obtaining legal residency through a spouse or family member.

There are more than 2.4 million pending I-130 petitions, according to USCIS data. Nearly 2 million of those petitions have been pending for more than six months. It is unclear whether those petitions involve immigrants who either lost their legal status or did not have one at the time they filed their documents.

Immigrants and their spouses or family members who sponsor them “should be aware that a family-based petition accords no immigration status nor does it bar removal,” the policy states.

The changes were designed to “enhance benefit integrity and identify vetting and fraud concerns” and weed out what the agency calls “fraudulent, frivolous, or non-meritorious” applications, according to USCIS.

“This guidance will improve USCIS’ capacity to vet qualifying marriages and family relationships to ensure they are genuine, verifiable, and compliant with all applicable laws,” the agency said in a statement.

Those changes, which were filed on August 1, are “effective immediately,” according to the agency.

Within the first six months of 2025, immigrants and their family members filed more than 500,000 I-130 petitions, which are the first steps in the process of obtaining legal residency through a spouse or family member.

There are more than 2.4 million pending I-130 petitions, according to USCIS data. Nearly 2 million of those petitions have been pending for more than six months. It is unclear whether those petitions involve immigrants who either lost their legal status or did not have one at the time they filed their documents.

Previously, USCIS would notify applicants about missing documents or issue a denial notice serving as a warning that their case could be rejected — with opportunities for redress.

Now, USCIS is signaling that applicants can be immediately denied and ordered to immigrant courts instead.

Outside of being born in the country, family-based immigration remains the largest and most viable path to permanent residency, accounting for nearly half of all new green card holders each year, according to USCIS data.

“This is one of the most important avenues that people have to adjust to lawful permanent status in the United States,” Elora Mukherjee, director of the Immigrants’ Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, told NBC News.

Under long-established USCIS policies, “no one expected” to be hauled into immigration court while seeking lawful status after a marriage, Mukherjee said. Now, deportation proceedings can begin “at any point in the process” under the broad scope of the rule changes, which could “instill fear in immigrant families, even those who are doing everything right,” according to Mukherjee.

Obtaining a green card does not guarantee protections against removal from the country.

The high-profile arrest and threat of removing Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil put intense scrutiny on whether the administration lawfully targeted a lawful permanent resident for his constitutionally protected speech.

And last month, Customs and Border Protection put green card holders on notice, warning that the government “has the authority to revoke your green card if our laws are broken and abused.”

“In addition to immigration removal proceedings, lawful permanent residents presenting at a U.S. port of entry with previous criminal convictions may be subject to mandatory detention,” the agency said.

Another recent USCIS memo outlines the administration’s plans to revoke citizenship from children whose parents lack permanent lawful status as well as parents who are legally in the country, including visa holders, DACA recipients and people seeking asylum.

The policy appears to preempt court rulings surrounding the constitutionality of the president’s executive order that unilaterally redefines who gets to be a citizen in the country at birth.

That memo, from the agency’s Office of the Chief Counsel, acknowledges that federal court injunctions have blocked the government from taking away birthright citizenship.

But the agency “is preparing to implement” Trump’s executive order “in the event that it is permitted to go into effect,” according to July’s memo.

Children of immigrants who are “unlawfully present” will “no longer be U.S. citizens at birth,” the agency declared.

Trump’s order states that children whose parents are legally present in the country on student, work and tourist visas are not eligible for citizenship

USCIS, however, goes even further, outlining more than a dozen categories of immigrants whose children could lose citizenship at birth despite their parents living in the country with legal permission.

That list includes immigrants who are protected against deportation for humanitarian reasons and immigrants from countries with Temporary Protected Status, among others.

The 14th Amendment plainly states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

The Supreme Court has upheld that definition to apply to all children born within the United States for more than a century.

But under the terms of Trump’s order, children can be denied citizenship if a mother is undocumented or is temporarily legally in the country on a visa, and if the father isn’t a citizen or a lawful permanent resident.

More than 150,000 newborns would be denied citizenship every year under Trump’s order, according to plaintiffs challenging the president’s order.

A challenge over Trump’s birthright citizenship order at the Supreme Court did not resolve the critical 14th Amendment questions at stake. On Wednesday, government lawyers confirmed plans to “expeditiously” ask the Supreme Court “to settle the lawfulness” of his birthright citizenship order later this year.

This is an abomination that will turn many thousands of lives upside down, separate countless couples and families who don’t have the resources to reunite and restart the immigration paperwork from overseas.

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-uscis-green-card-deportations-married-immigrants-b2803296.html

Newsweek: Harvard finds international student lifeline amid Trump visa showdown

The Harvard Kennedy School of Government (HKS) has brokered a deal with the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy to accept foreign students should the Trump administration succeed in blocking Harvard from enrolling them.

In remarks provided to Newsweek via email, HKS Dean Jeremy Weinstein thanked the Munk School—”and other partners”—for their help “to ensure that we can continue to provide all HKS students with the excellent education they deserve.

https://www.newsweek.com/harvard-finds-international-student-lifeline-trump-visa-showdown-2091869

Mirror: Cyberattack hits major university with pictures of Donald Trump

Columbia University has been dealing with “widespread outages” since 7 a.m. Tuesday, which has prevented students from accessing any online platforms.

The Columbia Spectator reports that several screens were taken over and displayed images deemed “unrelated to University activities.” At least one dorm television screen showed a picture of President Donald Trump.

Police had no information as of 4:15 p.m. to update the community on the situation.

An investigation is still ongoing, though a University spokesperson told the Spectator that it was able to debunk posts circulating online from a group claiming responsibility for the cyberattack. It is not clear what post or group they were referring to at press time.

Suck it up, fellas! King Donald is Columbia’s new Deal Leader!

https://www.themirror.com/news/us-news/breaking-cyberattack-hits-major-university-1214335

Daily Mail: Tourist who claimed he was banned entry to US because of a JD Vance meme on his phone was actually denied for a different reason, Homeland reveal

A Norwegian tourist who claimed he was denied entry to the United States after immigration officers found a meme of JD Vance on his phone was actually turned away for a different reason, U.S. officials have revealed.

Mads Mikkelsen, 21, was sent away after arriving at New Jersey‘s Newark Airport on June 11 for a holiday. 

He told Norwegian outlet Nordlys that he had been pulled aside by border control and put in a cell.

‘They asked questions about drug trafficking, terrorist plots and right-wing extremism totally without reason,’ he alleged in an interview with the outlet.

Mr Mikkelsen claimed that the officers then threatened him with a $5,000 fine or five years in prison if he refused to give the password to his mobile phone.

The guards were said to have found a meme on the device’s camera roll showing an edit of US vice president JD Vance with a bald, egg-shaped head. Mikkelsen said after discovering the image the authorities sent him home to Norway the same day.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection, operating under the Department of Homeland Security, has since clarified that ‘Mads Mikkelsen was not denied entry for any memes or political reasons’.

Bullshit! Just another lie from Homeland Security!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14842359/Norwegian-tourist-21-barred-entering-US-ICE-guards-meme.html

NBC News: Pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil released after months in detention

Minutes after the Columbia University activist was released, the Trump administration filed an appeal of his release.

Pro-Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil was released from detention Friday evening, ending more than three months of custody in a test of the executive branch’s power to unilaterally act against legal U.S. residents.

Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin lashed out at “rogue” U.S. District Court Judge Michael Farbiarz, saying he had no authority to order Khalil’s release.

“This is yet another example of how out of control members of the judicial branch are undermining national security,” McLaughlin said. “Their conduct not only denies the result of the 2024 election, it also does great harm to our constitutional system by undermining public confidence in the courts.”

Government attorney Dhruman Sampat had argued that Congress has given the executive branch sweeping powers to determine who could be removed from the county.

The courts should not have the authority to interfere, Sampat said.

With regard to permanent residents, this presumed “authority” is total b*llsh*t!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/rcna214163