More than a year after Attorney General Pam Bondi launched a special “Weaponization Working Group” to investigate alleged political misuse of federal law enforcement in cases involving former President Donald Trump, the Justice Department is now rushing to compile its first findings. According to a person familiar with the effort, internal urgency has intensified as leaders push for a formal report.
The task force, created to examine what Bondi described as potential “abuses of the criminal justice process,” recently saw a leadership shakeup. Ed Martin, who had been appointed to lead the group in May, was removed from the role last week without a public explanation.
Daily Meetings and Internal Pressure
Justice Department officials are pressing the team to show tangible progress within weeks. Members are expected to hold daily meetings to address the investigative priorities outlined in Bondi’s original directive. Another individual familiar with the matter said the group’s initial report could be released soon.
In a statement, a department spokesperson said the team is actively reviewing the issues identified in Bondi’s “Day One” memo and is drawing on resources across multiple divisions in an effort to “restore integrity” to the agency.
The growing urgency reflects broader political pressure. According to a White House official, Trump has privately criticized Bondi in recent weeks, describing her as insufficiently aggressive in pursuing cases against political adversaries. Shortly afterward, officials connected to the task force were reportedly reprimanded internally over the lack of visible results.
Public Support Despite Private Frustrations
Despite the criticism, Bondi’s position does not appear to be at risk. Trump has publicly reaffirmed his confidence in her work, calling her a longtime ally and praising what he described as “tremendous progress.”
The White House has also circulated supportive comments from Vice President JD Vance, Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, signaling continued backing from senior administration figures.
Origins and Mission of the Working Group
The task force was established following Trump’s executive order titled “Ending the Weaponization of the Government,” which directed agencies to review past investigations the administration considers politically motivated.
Bondi’s February 5, 2025 memo outlined the group’s core mission: examine actions taken by prosecutors and investigators involved in high-profile cases against Trump and others. Among the areas under review are:
-
Former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigations
-
Federal coordination with New York officials in Trump-related cases
-
Prosecution strategies in January 6 cases
-
A controversial FBI memo regarding extremist ideology
-
Justice Department guidance on school board threats
-
Use of the FACE Act in protest-related prosecutions
-
Allegations of retaliation against whistleblowers
Sources say the review of the special counsel’s work is expected to be the most time-consuming element.
Legal Setbacks and Criticism
The task force’s progress has been complicated by legal challenges. Two cases linked to the initiative—one involving New York Attorney General Letitia James and another involving former FBI Director James Comey—were dismissed by a federal judge over questions about a U.S. attorney’s appointment. Officials are considering whether to refile at least one of those cases, while an inquiry involving Sen. Adam Schiff has stalled.
At the same time, the department has reassigned career personnel and opened politically sensitive investigations involving Democratic lawmakers and local officials, moves that critics say raise concerns about politicization.
Stacey Young, a former Justice Department attorney who now leads the nonprofit Justice Connection, said the effort has produced little legal success so far and warned that the administration risks undermining long-standing institutional norms.
Limited Outreach and Uncertain Impact
Some individuals who expected to be contacted by the working group say they have heard little or nothing. Former FBI agent Steve Friend, who has claimed whistleblower status, said neither he nor colleagues had been approached. Others who provided materials related to January 6 prosecutions said they remain unsure how their information will be used.
Meanwhile, the department is simultaneously pursuing charges under the FACE Act in a Minnesota case involving a church protest—an approach that appears to conflict with the task force’s review of how the law has been applied.
Leadership Questions and Ongoing Operations
The current leadership of the working group has not been publicly identified. The size of the team is also unclear, though it has at times coordinated with officials from the intelligence community, the IRS, Homeland Security, and other agencies.
Ed Martin, the group’s former head and a longtime advocate for January 6 defendants, had previously said he intended to publicly identify individuals he believed engaged in misconduct—a proposal that would mark a departure from traditional Justice Department practice. On social media this week, Martin dismissed speculation about internal tensions, a message that was echoed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.
A High-Stakes Moment
As internal deadlines approach, the task force faces growing expectations from both political leadership and outside observers. Whether the forthcoming report delivers substantive findings—or intensifies the debate over the Justice Department’s role—remains to be seen. For now, a source says the Trump DOJ’s “weaponization” task force is facing mounting pressure to produce results, underscoring the high stakes surrounding the initiative.
