Pam Bondi Directs FBI to Offer Cash Bounty for Promoters of “Radical Gender Ideology”

Read more at Them.

The Justice Department has instructed the Federal Bureau of Investigation to crack down on supposed “domestic terrorist” organizations, the definition of which includes those who promote “radical gender ideology.” Part of that crackdown involves the establishment of a cash reward system for providing information on leaders of so-called “domestic terrorist organizations.”

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memorandum to federal prosecutors and law enforcement agencies on December 4, in accordance with NSPM-7, President Donald Trump’s September directive ordering the investigation of “domestic terrorist” organizations. At the time, NSPM-7 did not come with any enforcement mechanisms; Bondi’s memo provides specific instructions to prosecutors and law enforcement agencies.

The Bondi memo was leaked on December 8, and on Tuesday, LGBTQ Nation first reported on the fact that the memo includes “radical gender ideology” as part of its definition of “domestic terrorism.” In additional to “radical gender ideology,” the memo also defines potential domestic terrorist ideologies as “extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders… anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity… hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality,” and more. Under the Trump administration, “radical gender ideology” has been used as a catchall phrase to encompass issues related to trans and nonbinary communities.

The memo encourages prosecutors to “be particularly mindful of the potential applicability” of charges such as “picketing or parading with intent to obstruct the administration of justice,” “obstruction during civil disorders,” and “providing material support for terrorist activity.” In other words, the memo encourages prosecutors to press charges against certain forms of protest, or for providing supposed aid to organizations that promote what the government is now defining as “terrorist activity.”

The material support statute, in particular, has been used to significantly hinder the work of humanitarian groups, and has been widely criticized for prohibiting free speech. According to the ACLU, material support is defined as any “service,” “training,” “expert advice or assistance,” or “personnel” — an incredibly vague definition that has been used to surveil people and groups without basis since the implementation of the Patriot Act in 2001. Contemporarily, Hina Shamsi, the director of the ACLU’s national security project, wrote about the worrying implications of NSPM-7 on the ACLU’s website in October, stating, “If anyone needed proof that ‘terrorism’ and ‘political violence’ are slippery and fraught categories subject to political, ideological, and racial manipulation and bias — well, this is it.”

The Bondi memo also specifically instructs federal law enforcement agencies to “review their files and holdings for Antifa and Antifa-related intelligence,” and deliver those materials to the FBI within 14 days of its issuance. The FBI is also set to “compile a list of groups of entities engaged in acts that may constitute domestic terrorism” within 30 days of issuance. The FBI will also “disseminate an intelligence bulletin on Antifa and Antifa-aligned anarchist violent extremist groups,” including information on “structures, funding sources, and tactics.” Lastly, the memo directs the FBI to better publicize its domestic terrorism tip line, and will “establish a cash reward system for information that leads to the successful identification and arrest of individuals in the leadership of domestic terrorist organizations.”

The language contained in the Bondi memo is reminiscent of that found in a September report from independent journalist Ken Klippenstein. In the report, two anonymous national security experts claimed that the FBI intended to categorize trans people as “Nihilistic Violent Extremists,” a threat category that was created earlier this year. The FBI defines “Nihilistic Violent Extremism” as “criminal conduct… in furtherance of political, social, or religious goals that derive primarily from a hatred of society at large and a desire to bring about its collapse by sowing indiscriminate chaos.” This also ties neatly into the ongoing right-wing attempts to scapegoat trans people for mass shootings and other forms of gun violence, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

Notably, all of the federal government’s messaging about “domestic terrorism” ignores the fact that the vast majority of research points to the fact that the bulk of domestic terrorists in the U.S. are aligned with the right-wing.

Veteran FBI employee files lawsuit claiming he was fired for displaying Pride flag

Read more at CBS News.

A 16-year FBI employee has filed a lawsuit alleging he was fired last month because he had a Pride flag draped near his desk. 

David Maltinsky, who was weeks away from being elevated to the position of agent, claims the firing was unlawful and sent a ripple of fear through the LGBT employees at the FBI.   

“We’re not the enemy and we’re not some political mob. We’re proud members of the FBI, and we have a mission to do. We go to work every day to do it,” Maltinsky told CBS News in his first interview.

In a civil complaint filed Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Maltinsky seeks a court order to restore his job. 

The suit makes several allegations, including an argument that the FBI has violated Maltinsky’s First Amendment rights and retaliated against him for protected expression.

According to the lawsuit, the First Amendment “forbids government officials from firing government employees, or otherwise retaliating against them, simply for engaging in expressive conduct concerning a matter of public concern.”

The lawsuit states that Maltinsky was fired in a letter signed by FBI Director Kash Patel in October. A copy of the letter was provided by Maltinsky to CBS News. In it, Patel writes: “I have determined that you exercised poor judgment with an inappropriate display of political signage in your work area during your previous assignment at the Los Angeles Field Office. Pursuant to Article II of the United States Constitution and the laws of the United States, your employment with the Federal Bureau of Investigation is hereby terminated.”

The FBI had no comment regarding Maltinsky’s lawsuit.

Maltinsky, who began working at the FBI in 2008, was in the midst of a training program for future agents at the FBI’s facility in Quantico, Virginia, when he was fired, according to the lawsuit.

The rainbow flag that Maltinsky displayed at his workspace in the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office was presented to him after it had previously been displayed outside the Bureau’s federal office complex there, according to the lawsuit.   

Maltinsky said the federal government approved the display of Pride flags at federal office complexes in June 2021. His lawsuit alleges that a colleague filed a complaint with a supervisor about Maltinsky’s flag on Jan. 20, 2025, the day of President Trump’s second Inaugural.

In an hourlong interview with CBS News, Maltinsky said his firing has had a chilling impact inside the Bureau.  

“The ripple effect of fear has been felt. Many gay colleagues have removed Pride flags from their desks, allies have removed Pride flags from their desk,” he said.

“David’s dream was to serve our country as an FBI Special Agent,” said Christopher M. Mattei, counsel for Maltinsky and a partner at Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, PC. “When that dream was cruelly taken from him, he stayed true to his oath and is now fighting to protect the rights of all Americans.”

“This case is about far more than one man’s career—it’s about whether the government can punish Americans simply for saying who they are,” Mattei said.

Under questioning at a congressional hearing in September, Patel told senators he was not taking action against any “enemies list,” including among FBI employees.

“The only actions we take, generally speaking, for personnel at the FBI, are ones based on merit and qualification and your ability to uphold your constitutional duty,” Patel said. 

“You fall short, you don’t work there anymore.”

Maltinsky’s firing is part of a large and growing wave of terminations, resignations and retirements inside the Justice Department since Jan. 20. Justice Connection, an organization that supports the ex-employees, told CBS News more than 5,000 employees have left or been fired from the agency this year.  

The purge includes agents and prosecutors who handled the U.S. Capitol riot prosecutions and the special counsel criminal probes of President Trump, which were dropped after Mr. Trump won the election in November 2024.

“It’s very sad that it’s happening,” Maltinsky told CBS News. “But part of this filing is that: I’m not intimidated. We’re not intimidated.” 

“Diversity means so much to so many different people,” he added. “There is no one definition that everyone will agree on. What I believe is diversity brings strength.”

LGBTQ advocates warn of FBI plan to label trans people as ‘violent extremists’

Read more at the Washington Blade.

The nation’s leading LGBTQ advocacy groups are sounding the alarm over reports that the FBI may soon classify transgender people as a threat group — a move advocates say would be unconstitutional, dangerous, and rooted in political retribution.

At a joint press briefing held over Zoom last week, the heads of the Human Rights Campaign, Transgender Law Center, Equality Federation, GLAAD, PFLAG, and the Southern Poverty Law Center condemned the possibility that the FBI, in coordination with the Heritage Foundation, is working to designate transgender people as “violent extremists.”

The warning comes after a story earlier this month by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, who reported that two anonymous national security officials said the FBI is considering treating trans subjects as a subset of its new threat category. That classification — originally created under the Biden administration as “Anti-Authority and Anti-Government Violent Extremists” (AGAAVE) — was first applied to Jan. 6 rioters and other right-wing extremists.

After pardoning all of the Jan. 6 insurrectionists, the Trump administration shifted the FBI’s terminology, replacing AGAAVE with “Nihilistic Violent Extremists (NVEs),” or, in some cases, “Transgender Ideology-Inspired Violent Extremism (TIVE).” The possibility of such a label follows several high-profile media errors in which reporters incorrectly linked Charlie Kirk’s shooter to the transgender community, fueling anti-trans rhetoric on the far-right.

For more than an hour last Wednesday, LGBTQ leaders denounced the reported FBI proposal and warned of the consequences of targeting one of the country’s most vulnerable communities. They emphasized that such a move would represent a violation of basic human rights, further fuel misinformation, and give legitimacy to political attacks already directed at transgender people.

Kelley Robinson, president of the Human Rights Campaign, warned of the broader danger for the LGBTQ community if this happens.

“Americans can no longer count on the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not when political violence runs rampant, not when political retribution goes unchecked, not when hate is being incited by our president.”

Robinson argued that claims of “Transgender Ideology-Inspired Violent Extremism” are not rooted in reality. For example, Gun Violence Archive Executive Director Mark Bryant has said that out of 5,000 mass shootings tracked by the archive, the number of trans or LGBTQ+ suspects is in “the single digit numbers.”

“Trans Americans are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than a perpetrator of one… violence committed by trans Americans is a lie, a lie that only begets more violence.”

Shelby Chestnut of the Transgender Law Center warned that the federal government’s posture would escalate attacks on the community.

“Bullying communities and manufacturing chaos will never erase the truth that we are far more connected than divided,” Chestnut said. “In the coming days and weeks, you will see increased targeting of our organizations and our communities and mis and disinformation being weaponized at the highest level of government.”

Fran Hutchins of the Equality Federation described the move as a direct assault on trans people, echoing Chestnut’s points — but made it clear that this will not stop organizations supporting transgender people from continuing their work.

“This is a campaign that weaponizes fear and misinformation to isolate and harm our communities,” she said. “Let’s call it what it is. It’s political violence… We will not be erased.”

Sarah Kate Ellis, president of GLAAD, the LGBTQ media watchdog organization, urged the press not to fall into false equivalencies, reminding reporters that transgender people face the highest risk of violence, contrary to the narratives pushed by some MAGA Republicans.

“Trans people exist. They always existed, and they will continue to exist,” she said. “The truth is the real trans terrorism… is the terror experienced by trans people in this country.”

Ellis also emphasized that this is an issue of civil and human rights, not something abstract — with real consequences.

“Do not treat civil rights as a both sides issue.”

Brian Bond of PFLAG (Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) framed the FBI’s proposal as a betrayal of American values, calling it “un-American” and “despicable,” while warning that even if it doesn’t immediately affect everyone, it represents a slippery slope.

“Every child in their family, every family member, every neighbor, transgender or not, is affected.”

He added: “PFLAG parents… will not back down.”

Beth Littrell of the Southern Poverty Law Center underscored the constitutional implications of these potential actions, their consequences for other marginalized groups, and the role of the media in calling out the Trump administration’s tactics.

“The real threat is when the government targets a group of people and those who support them for unequal treatment based only on who they are or what they believe,” Littrell said. “It should go without saying, but I say it anyway, transgender children do not threaten anyone’s ability to safely live and thrive in our nation or anywhere else.”

“What is being reported is unconstitutional. What is happening is dangerous,” she added. “We have seen this playbook before… We fought alongside the communities then, we will continue to do so now.”

Advocates closed the call with a unified demand: that political leaders, the media, and the public reject any attempt to label transgender people as extremists and instead hold accountable those responsible for spreading violence and misinformation.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑