From the Oval Office to a Guilty Plea: Trump's Former National Security Advisor John Bolton Agrees to Felony Charge
He once sat in the most powerful room in the world. He knew America's secrets. He advised the President of the United States on matters of war, intelligence, and national security. And now, John Bolton — Donald Trump's former National Security Advisor — has agreed to plead guilty to a federal felony.
The news broke Thursday, sending shockwaves through Washington and beyond.
Bolton reached a plea deal over mishandling sensitive national security information, agreeing to plead guilty to one felony count of illegal retention of classified national security information. He also agreed to pay a fine of more than $2 million.
Bolton faces up to 60 months in prison for the single felony count he is pleading guilty to, though the plea deal may allow him to avoid prison time entirely.
For anyone who has followed the dramatic, bitter relationship between Donald Trump and John Bolton, this moment feels like the final chapter of one of Washington's most explosive personal feuds.
Bolton served as Trump's National Security Advisor from 2018 to 2019 — one of the most powerful positions in the entire US government. He sat in on classified briefings. He advised the president on nuclear threats, military operations, and covert intelligence. He was, by every measure, an insider at the highest level.
Then Trump fired him. And everything changed.
Bolton struck back by writing a tell-all book — "The Room Where It Happened" — filled with damaging accounts of Trump's behavior behind closed doors. Trump called him a liar, a traitor, and worse. Bolton called Trump unfit for office and dangerous to American democracy. The two men became bitter enemies in full public view.
Bolton is now the first successful case in Trump's campaign of retribution against those he perceives to be his political enemies. Two other prominent Trump critics — former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James — were also indicted by the Trump Justice Department. But Bolton's guilty plea makes him the first to actually be convicted.
According to sources familiar with the matter, the count Bolton is pleading guilty to involves keeping classified national security information in personal diaries. Bolton is expected to maintain that he did not take documents with classification markings out of government offices, and that no classified information appeared in his published memoir.
The only people who were reportedly exposed to the sensitive information were Bolton's wife and daughter.
To his supporters, Bolton is a victim — a man being prosecuted not for genuine crimes but for daring to speak the truth about a vindictive president. They argue that the charges were motivated entirely by Trump's personal anger, not by a good-faith pursuit of justice.
To Trump's supporters, the guilty plea is proof of exactly the opposite. Bolton, they say, betrayed his president, leaked secrets, and used his access to power for personal gain. His conviction, in their eyes, is long overdue justice.
A conviction hearing has been scheduled for June 26, when Bolton is expected to formally enter his guilty plea before a federal judge.
What happens after that remains uncertain. Will the judge impose prison time — or allow Bolton to walk free with just the financial penalty? Will Trump comment publicly, declaring victory over one of his most hated adversaries? And will this guilty plea embolden the Trump Justice Department to push even harder against the other targets on its list?
For Vietnamese Americans watching from across the United States, this story carries a deeper meaning. It is a reminder that in America, no one — not even those who once held the highest offices in the land — is above the law. Or at least, that is what the justice system is supposed to guarantee.
Whether this conviction represents true justice or political revenge is a question every American must answer for themselves.
But one thing is certain: the man who once knew all of Trump's secrets just admitted, in a court of law, that he broke the law.
And in Washington, nobody is quite sure what comes next.
Sources: CNN, ABC News, UPI, CNBC, PBS NewsHour
Vote To Remove Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar From Congress Being Considered By Republican Congressman
Minnesota - June 7, 2026
In a closely divided 5-3 vote that fell one short of the required threshold, Minnesota House Republicans failed to secure a subpoena compelling U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar to testify and produce documents tied to the Feeding Our Future fraud scandal.
The outcome on May 5 marked the dramatic conclusion of months of mounting scrutiny over the congresswoman’s legislative actions and community outreach during the pandemic-era program at the center of one of the largest federal fraud investigations in recent Minnesota history. The House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Committee, operating under a bipartisan agreement that demands six votes to authorize a subpoena, saw every Republican member support the measure while all three Democrats opposed it.
Committee Chair Kristin Robbins (R-Maple Grove) argued that the subpoena had become the only remaining tool after Omar repeatedly declined invitations to appear and failed to respond to formal document requests.
“We have reached out to Representative Ilhan Omar on multiple occasions, inviting her to testify and inviting and requesting documents,” Robbins said ahead of the vote. “The only tool left for us as a committee if we want to get these documents is to issue a subpoena.”
Republicans on the panel have focused on Omar’s sponsorship of the federal MEALS Act, enacted in March 2020. They contend the legislation loosened critical oversight requirements in federal child nutrition programs and helped create the conditions that enabled large-scale fraud.
“Representative Omar had some role, whether inadvertent or not,” Robbins said. “She passed the MEALS Act in March of 2020, and that took the guardrails off the federal school nutrition program which created the conditions for Feeding Our Future.”
The Feeding Our Future scandal stands as one of Minnesota’s most significant public corruption cases in recent decades. Federal prosecutors allege that organizers and associates diverted hundreds of millions of dollars intended to feed low-income children through fabricated meal claims, shell nonprofit organizations, and fraudulent reimbursement requests. Dozens of individuals have been charged, including nonprofit founder Aimee Bock and multiple business operators connected to Minnesota’s Somali community.
Committee Republicans specifically sought communications between Omar’s office and several individuals named in the federal investigation, along with records related to her public promotion of Safari Restaurant in Minneapolis, a business later linked to the scandal. Robbins also referenced a Somali-language television appearance in which Omar highlighted the restaurant as a meal distribution site during the pandemic.
“We thought it’d be very helpful to understand from Rep. Omar’s perspective how she thought the MEALS Act impacted the community, why she brought it, what communication she had with the fraudsters,” Robbins said during the hearing.
Democrats on the committee strongly opposed the effort, accusing Republicans of politicizing the investigation and targeting Omar for partisan advantage. Dave Pinto, the committee’s lead Democrat, questioned both the timing and practical purpose of pursuing a subpoena with only days remaining in the legislative session.
“Even if Omar were to testify or information is received, I do not see the committee doing anything with that information,” Pinto argued.
Pinto further referenced broader concerns about investigations involving political opponents under the current federal administration.
“We know the president and federal administration have got no hesitation going after political enemies and investigating them in all sorts of ways,” he said during the hearing.
The failed vote effectively prevents the Minnesota House committee from compelling Omar’s testimony or documents before the legislative session ends later this month. Nevertheless, Robbins signaled that Republicans are exploring alternative avenues to continue the pursuit.
“They’re fading,” Robbins said. “But I’ll certainly talk to our friends in Congress to see if they would be willing to issue a subpoena.”
Robbins noted that federal authorities retain “a whole menu of legal options” because Omar is a sitting member of Congress. The controversy unfolds amid broader Republican efforts at both state and national levels to highlight waste, fraud, and inadequate oversight in federal spending programs enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic.
New California Leader Announced After Overnight Count as Kash Patel Demands Recount Over Democrat Fraud
Primary voters in Folsom, Rancho Cordova, and Citrus Heights went to the polls on Tuesday night to decide who would represent California’s 7th Assembly District.
According to early results from the California Secretary of State’s Office, Josh Hoover, the Republican incumbent, has surged to first place with about 54 percent of the vote as of 1 p.m. Wednesday. Democratic candidate Amy Slavensky got about 44 percent of the vote.
Based on reports from the Associated Press, the two candidates will face off in November. The seat went from being Democratic to Republican under Hoover in 2022.
Hoover, who lives in Folsom, was Kevin Kiley’s chief of staff when he was an assemblyman. He hosts the political podcast “Point of Order” and belongs to the bipartisan California Problem Solvers Caucus.
Slavensky came out of retirement to become the interim deputy superintendent for the San Juan Unified School District. She retired in 2021 as superintendent of the Amador County Unified School District.
California faced fresh criticism this week over Tuesday’s primary elections, with Democratic leaders warning that full ballot counting could take weeks.
In Los Angeles, incumbent Democrat Karen Bass fell short of 51 percent, forcing a November runoff. Republican Spencer Pratt, a former reality TV personality, leads Democrat and City Council member Nithya Raman.
With 62 percent of votes counted as of Wednesday night, New York Times figures as of Thursday morning show:
Karen Bass — 183,701 (35 percent)
Spencer Pratt — 157,116 (29.9 percent)
Nithya Raman — 119,809 (22.8 percent)
No Republican has won Los Angeles mayor in over three decades. Pratt’s performance signals voter frustration with the city after years of Democratic rule.
Spencer Pratt filed a complaint Tuesday on X against Karen Bass.
“Karen Bass just violated election law here,” Pratt wrote.
“She is so accustomed to breaking the law with no accountability, she even filmed herself doing it. Well, those days are over. We just filed a formal complaint for illegally gaming the election. We must protect our democracy.”
“Electioneering within 100 feet of a ballot box is AGAINST THE LAW. Soliciting votes at a ballot box is AGAINST THE LAW,” he wrote.
“These clear violations show a reckless disregard for the rule of law and our democratic process.”
“A person in a position of power such as Bass should be especially respectful of our democratic laws, but this is just emblematic of Karen’s mafia-like regime. It’s ‘rules for thee, but not for me,’” Pratt said.
Pratt posted a photo of the complaint. California law bans electioneering within 100 feet of ballot drop boxes. The complaint targets a Bass video showing her urging votes near a ballot box. A Bass spokesperson dismissed the complaint and questioned Pratt’s campaign.
