Trump falsely claims ‘treason’ in ordering his acting AG to target freedom of the press

Donald Trump and his acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, are targeting The Wall Street Journal in an effort to learn the identity of sources who leaked information to its journalists about internal dissent over the war in Iran, according to CNN reporters Hannah Rabinowitz and Kaitlan Collins. Trump himself has reportedly told Blanche that reporters for the Journal and other news organizations committed “treason.” More about that below, but first: How did we get here?

Follow my Bluesky newsfeed for additional news and commentary. And please join my Patreon for just $6 a month. You’ll receive a supporters-only newsletter every Thursday.

In October 2022, then-Attorney General Merrick Garland issued guidelines that severely restricted the conditions under which the Justice Department could seek to force journalists to identify anonymous sources or turn over confidential documents.

Garland’s action was intended as a response to the discovery that Justice had secretly obtained phone records of three Washington Post reporters during Trump’s first term. In fact, though, presidents had been pursuing reporters over leaks for years. Journalists were threatened with jail under both George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and Garland’s order reversed actions taken during the early months of Joe Biden’s administration as well.

According to John R. Vile of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University:

Garland’s order, which stressed that “[a] free and independent press is vital to the functioning of our democracy,” did not prohibit all such actions against journalists, but limited them to “special circumstances.” These include cases where reporters were themselves targets of criminal investigations, cases involving criminal acts, or cases related to terrorism or other imminent threats.

Compulsory legal processes could further be used “to prevent an imminent or concrete risk of death or serious bodily harm, including terrorist acts, kidnappings, specified offenses against a minor” or “incapacitation or destruction of critical infrastructure.” Even then, the written consent of the attorney general or a deputy or assistant AG would be required. Moreover, even in these cases compulsory processes would be employed as a last resort, would be “narrowly drawn,” and would require proper notification to the news reporters involved.

Vile further notes that the Post’s then-publisher, Fred Ryan, wrote that Garland’s guidance was a step in the right direction but warned that it could be undone by a future president and attorney general. Ryan called for Congress to enact those rules into law, writing in an op-ed piece:

The fact that these crucial protections are now enshrined in federal regulation is important. These rules will be official procedure for the Justice Department, and we trust that staff at all levels will apply them. Yet there remains the risk that a future administration — one less respectful of citizens’ First Amendment rights — might eliminate these new safeguards. The best way to defend against this vulnerability is for Congress to give these protections the force of law.

It didn’t happen. And when Trump returned, his first attorney general, Pam Bondi, acted quickly to undo Garland’s actions, once again raising the specter that the government would seek to transform the press into an arm of law enforcment — or worse. Her guidance states, in chilling language:

This Justice Department will not tolerate unauthorized disclosures that undermine President Trump’s policies, victimize government agencies, and cause harm to the American people. “Where a Government employee improperly discloses sensitive information for the purposes of personal enrichment and undermining our foreign policy, national security, and Government effectiveness — all ultimately designed to sow chaos and distrust in Government — this conduct could properly be characterized as treasonous.” The perpetrators of these leaks aid our foreign adversaries by spilling sensitive and sometimes classified information on to the Internet. The damage is significant and irreversible. Accountability, including criminal prosecutions, is necessary to set a new course.

The investigation into who leaked to the Journal was reported late Monday afternoon by Journal reporters Sadie Gurman, Josh Dawsey and Aruna Viswanatha. Trump was particularly exercised over a Feb. 23 article reporting that the Pentagon had expressed serious reservations about the pending invasion of Iran. “In one meeting,” the Journal reported Monday, citing an unnamed “administration official,” “Trump passed a stack of news articles he and other senior officials thought threatened national security to Blanche with a sticky note on it that said ‘treason.’”

The T-word again. Punishable by death, although Trump was less dramatic at a news conference: “We’re going to go to the media company that released it, and we’re going to say, ‘national security; give it up or go to jail.’”

The Trump regime is investigating other leaks as well. The Journal article notes that the White House is also upset about a New York Times story  about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s pressure campaign urging Trump to go to war with Iran. The Times declined to comment to the Journal, as did Axios and The Washington Post, both of which published stories on the Pentagon’s reservations that were similar to the Journal’s.

And a reminder that the Post is still dealing with the aftermath of an illegal raid by the FBI on reporter Hannah Natanson’s apartment. Agents were seeking information Natanson’s sources regarding her Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting on Elon Musk’s DOGE rampage through the federal government. The judge in that case later lambasted the government for failing to provide him with legally mandated guidance before he issued a search warrant, and investigators so far have been barred from searching Natanson’s devices.