Trump hounds Bondi to prosecute adversaries in now-deleted Truth Social post: ‘They’re all guilty as hell’
Former President Donald Trump briefly posted, then deleted, a Truth Social message urging U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute James Comey, Adam Schiff and Letitia James — calling them “guilty as hell” and intensifying concerns about politicized justice.
Key takeaways
- Deleted Truth Social post: Reporting by the Economic Times says Trump posted — then removed — a message urging AG Pam Bondi to charge James Comey, Adam Schiff and Letitia James.
- Blunt language: The message reportedly called the three targets “guilty as hell” and described Bondi as “all talk, no action.” (Economic Times).
- DOJ friction and resignations: The post comes amid reported internal pressure at the Justice Department and the resignation of interim U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert; reporting includes the CBS News account.
- Nomination ties: The White House has nominated a senior aide for the U.S. attorney post in Virginia, a move observers link to the push surrounding the Letitia James inquiries (Fox News).
What Trump posted — and what it suggests
Investigative reporting indicates the Truth Social message was likely aimed as a private direct message to Attorney General Pam Bondi but was published publicly and swiftly deleted. The post named three long-standing critics — James Comey, Adam Schiff and Letitia James — and insisted they be prosecuted, using blunt language that included “guilty as hell.”
“They’re all guilty as hell” — reported wording from the deleted Truth Social message.
Interpretations: The rapid deletion leaves open possible explanations: a mistaken public post instead of a DM, or a deliberate short-lived public prod meant to signal urgency while limiting a permanent record. Either way, it demonstrates the former president’s continued use of social platforms to apply pressure on justice officials.
Pam Bondi’s role and political context
Pam Bondi, a former Florida attorney general and known Trump ally, now serves as U.S. Attorney General. Trump’s message criticized her as “all talk, no action” and chided delays in pursuing cases he deems politically necessary. Bondi and the Department of Justice did not immediately provide comment in the published reporting, leaving open whether a private communication ever reached her.
The targets named by Trump
James Comey: The former FBI director has been a frequent target of Trump’s ire; calls to prosecute Comey have circulated among some conservative circles stemming from the Russia investigation.
Adam Schiff: The California Democrat and former House Intelligence Committee chair led impeachment-related hearings and has long been a Trump critic; Trump has repeatedly demanded legal consequences for those involved in investigations of him.
Letitia James: The New York attorney general led probes into Trump’s business practices; reporting ties a DOJ inquiry in Virginia to alleged mortgage-fraud matters connected to her office, and the interim U.S. attorney in that inquiry resigned amid reports of pressure to pursue charges (CBS News; Economic Times).
The Erik Siebert resignation and follow-up moves
Erik Siebert, the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, stepped down after handling an inquiry tied to Letitia James. Reporting indicates his departure followed pressure from Trump officials to pursue prosecutions despite questions about the strength of evidence. Trump later accused Siebert of having “lied to the media” in a separate Truth Social post (CBS News; Economic Times).
The White House later moved to nominate a senior aide for the U.S. attorney post in Virginia, a selection observers tie to the broader effort to shape prosecutorial priorities (Fox News).
Why watchdogs and legal experts are watching
Civil liberties groups and legal observers argue the episode highlights longstanding concerns about politicizing the Justice Department. Public demands from political figures for prosecutions risk creating an appearance that legal decisions are driven by politics rather than evidence and law — concerns magnified when a former president names specific targets.
Conservative reaction: Many conservatives frame Trump’s posts as a push for equal enforcement and accountability, arguing that those who instigated investigations should face scrutiny if laws were broken. The episode thus deepens the partisan debate over standards for prosecution.
Implications for Redding, California
Though national in scope, the episode may produce local effects in places like Redding:
- Economic: High-profile federal prosecutions can move markets and campaign-related spending; Redding businesses tied to legal services, media or political campaigns could see short-term shifts.
- Political: In conservative-leaning Redding, the episode may energize GOP voters and local officials seeking nominees who promise aggressive enforcement; moderates may worry about political interference in the Justice Department.
- Social: Local civic groups and community forums could see increased discussion about checks and balances on prosecutorial decisions and roles of federal versus local law enforcement.
- Practical: Officials in Shasta County may host informational sessions explaining federal vs. local prosecutorial roles and respond to public inquiries about cooperation with federal investigations.
What to watch next
- Any formal response from Attorney General Pam Bondi or the Department of Justice; as of reporting, neither issued a statement (Economic Times).
- Whether the nomination for U.S. attorney in Virginia advances and how that selection affects ongoing inquiries tied to Letitia James (Fox News).
- Any renewed legal activity involving Comey, Schiff or Letitia James or new disclosures about Siebert’s resignation and relevant evidence (CBS News).
Sources
Reporting for this article relied on accounts from Times Media Service and published reporting by:
