By ERIC TUCKER

WASHINGTON (AP) — FBI Director Kash Patel was not part of a Signal chat in which other Trump administration national security officials discussed detailed attack plans, but that didn’t spare him from being questioned by lawmakers this week about whether the nation’s premier law enforcement agency would investigate.

Patel made no such commitments during the course of two days of Senate and House hearings, declining to comment on the possibility and testifying that he had not personally reviewed the text messages that were inadvertently shared with the editor-in-chief for The Atlantic who was mistakenly included on an unclassified Signal chat.

That Patel would be grilled on what the FBI might do was hardly surprising.

Even as President Donald Trump insisted “it’s not really an FBI thing,” the reality is that the FBI and Justice Department for decades have been responsible for enforcing Espionage Act statutes governing the mishandling — whether intentional or negligent — of national defense information like the kind shared on Signal, a publicly available app that provides encrypted communications but is not approved for classified information.

Related Articles

Senators overseeing the military request an investigation at the Pentagon into use of the Signal app

Trump places 25% tariff on imported autos, expecting to raise $100 billion in tax revenues

Department of Health and Human Services will lay off 10,000 workers in a major restructuring plan

US cities located in states won by Trump would be most hurt by Canadian tariffs, an analysis finds

In Jamaica, Marco Rubio vows to revisit US travel warning

The Justice Department has broad discretion to open an investigation, though Attorney General Pam Bondi, who introduced Trump at a Justice Department event this month, signaled at an unrelated news conference on Thursday that she was disinclined to do so. She repeated Trump administration talking points that the highly sensitive information in the chat was not classified, though current and former U.S. officials have said the posting of the exact launch times of aircraft and times that bombs would be released before those pilots were even in the air would have been classified.

She also quickly pivoted to two Democrats, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former President Joe Biden, who found themselves under investigation but never charged for allegedly mishandling classified information. Indeed, the department has conducted multiple high-profile investigations in recent years, albeit with differences in underlying facts and outcomes.

Multiple high-profile figures have found themselves under investigation in recent years over their handling of government secrets, but the differences in the underlying facts and the outcomes make it impossible to prognosticate what might happen in this instance or whether any accountability can be expected. There’s also precedent for public officials either to avoid criminal charges or be spared meaningful punishment.

“In terms of prior investigations, there were set-out standards that the department always looked at and tried to follow when making determinations about which types of disclosures they were going to pursue,” including the sensitivity of the information exposed the willfulness of the conduct, said former Justice Department prosecutor Michael Zweiback, who has handled classified information investigations.

A look at just a few of the notable prior investigations:

Hillary Clinton

The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee was investigated but not charged for her use of a private email server for the sake of convenience during her time as secretary of state in the Obama administration. There appear to be some parallels with the Signal chat episode.

The politically fraught criminal investigation was initiated by a 2015 referral from the intelligence agencies’ internal watchdog, which alerted the FBI to the presence of potentially hundreds of emails containing classified information on that server. Law enforcement then set out to determine whether Clinton, or her aides, had transmitted classified information on a server not meant to host such material.

The overall conclusions were something of a mixed bag.

Then-FBI Director James Comey, in a highly unusual public statement, asserted that the bureau had found evidence that Clinton was “extremely careless” in her handling of classified information but recommended against charges because he said officials could not prove that she intended to break the law or knew that the information she and her aides were communicating about was classified.

The decision was derided by Republicans who thought the Obama administration Justice Department had let a fellow Democrat off the hook. Among those critical were some of the very same participants in the Signal chat as well as Bondi, who as Florida’s attorney general spoke at the 2016 Republican National Convention and mimicked the audience chant of “Lock her up!”

David Petraeus

Among the biggest names to actually get charged is Petraeus, the former CIA director sentenced in 2015 to two years’ probation for disclosing classified information to a biographer with whom he was having an extramarital affair.

That material consisted of eight binders of classified information that Petraeus improperly kept in his house from his time as the top military commander in Afghanistan. Among the secret details in the “black books” were the names of covert operatives, the coalition war strategy and notes about Petraeus’ discussions with President Barack Obama and the National Security Council, prosecutors have said.

Petraeus, a retired four-star Army general who led U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, wound up pleading guilty to a single misdemeanor count of unauthorized retention and removal of classified material as part of a deal with Justice Department prosecutors. Some national security experts said it smacked of a double-standard for its lenient outcome.

Comey himself would later complain about the resolution, writing in a 2018 book that he argued to the Justice Department that Petraeus should have also been charged with a felony for lying to the FBI.

“A poor person, an unknown person — say a young black Baptist minister from Richmond — would be charged with a felony and sent to jail,” he said.

Joe Biden and Donald Trump

These investigations don’t bear much parallel to the Signal episode but nonetheless serve as examples of high-profile probes launched by the department into the mishandling of classified information.

Both found themselves investigated by Justice Department special counsels, with Trump being charged with hoarding top-secret records at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Trump had taken those records after leaving office. He was also accused of showing off a Pentagon attack plan to a visitor at his Bedminster golf club.

The case was dismissed by a Florida-based judge who concluded that special counsel Jack Smith had been improperly appointed. Prosecutors abandoned the case after Trump won in November.

Biden, too, was investigated for his retention of classified information in his home following his tenure as vice president. A special counsel found some evidence that Biden had willfully retained the records but concluded that criminal charges were not merited.

Jeffrey Sterling

A former CIA officer, Sterling was convicted of leaking to a reporter details of a secret mission to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions by slipping flawed nuclear blueprints to the Iranians through a Russian intermediary.

He was sentenced in 2015 to 3 1/2 years in prison, a punishment whistleblower advocates and other supporters decried as impossible to square with Petraeus’ misdemeanor guilty plea just a month earlier.

The details of the operation disclosed by Sterling were published by journalist James Risen in his 2006 book “State of War.”

Sterling was charged in 2010, but the trial was delayed for years, in part because of legal wrangling about whether Risen could be forced to testify. Ultimately, prosecutors chose not to call Risen as a witness, despite winning legal battles allowing them to do so.

By ALEX VEIGA, AP Business Writer

The average rate on a 30-year mortgage in the U.S. fell slightly this week, a welcome reversal for homebuyers in what is traditionally the busiest time of the year for the housing market.

Related Articles

Trump places 25% tariff on imported autos, expecting to raise $100 billion in tax revenues

Stock market today: Wall Street drifts as auto tariffs hurt GM, help Tesla and others

US applications for unemployment benefits hold steady, remain in recent healthy range

NTSB chairwoman says reviewing the data after midair crash may prevent the next aviation accident

Founders of Black-owned brands adapt their hopes and business plans for a post-DEI era

The rate fell to 6.65% from 6.67% last week, mortgage buyer Freddie Mac said Thursday. A year ago, the rate averaged 6.79%.

This is the first decline in the average rate after rising two weeks in a row. The average rate has been mostly trending lower since mid-January, when it climbed to just over 7% — a welcome trend for aspiring homebuyers struggling to afford a home after years of soaring home prices.

Borrowing costs on 15-year fixed-rate mortgages, popular with homeowners refinancing their home loans, rose this week, however, pushing the average rate to 5.89% from 5.83% last week. A year ago, it averaged 6.11%, Freddie Mac said.

Mortgage rates are influenced by several factors, including bond market investors’ expectations for future inflation, global demand for U.S. Treasurys and the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policy decisions.

The overall decline this year in the average rate on a 30-year mortgage loosely follows the moves in the 10-year Treasury yield, which lenders use as a guide to pricing home loans.

By STEPHEN GROVES and AAMER MADHANI, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee requested an investigation Thursday into how Trump national security officials used the Signal app to discuss military strikes, ensuring at least some bipartisan scrutiny on an episode President Donald Trump has dismissed as frivolous.

Sen. Roger Wicker, the Republican chair of the committee, and Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat, signed onto a letter to the acting inspector general at the Department of Defense for an inquiry into the potential “use of unclassified networks to discuss sensitive and classified information, as well as the sharing of such information with those who do not have proper clearance and need to know.”

Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., speaks to Stephen Feinberg, President Donald Trump’s choice to be deputy secretary of defense, as he appears before the Senate Armed Services Committee for his confirmation hearing, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 25, 2025. (AP Photo/Ben Curtis)

The senators’ assertion that classified information was potentially shared was notable, especially after Trump’s Republican administration has contended there was no classified information on the Signal chain that had included Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine. In Congress, most Republicans seemed content to allow the controversy to blow over, while Democrats have slammed it as a reckless violation of secrecy that could have put service members at risk.

Asked by a reporter on Wednesday about the call by Wicker, of Mississippi, and Reed, of Rhode Island, for an inspector general probe at the Pentagon, Trump replied, “It doesn’t bother me.”

Related Articles

Department of Health and Human Services will lay off 10,000 workers in a major restructuring plan

US cities located in states won by Trump would be most hurt by Canadian tariffs, an analysis finds

In Jamaica, Marco Rubio vows to revisit US travel warning

Trump places 25% tariff on imported autos, expecting to raise $100 billion in tax revenues

Turkish student at Tufts University detained, video shows masked people handcuffing her

Wicker, one of the most ardent defense hawks in Congress, has also said the committee will request a classified hearing with a top administration official, as well as for the administration to verify the contents of the Signal chat, which were published by The Atlantic. The contents show that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth listed weapons systems and a timeline for the attack on Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen earlier this month.

The White House National Security Council has also said it would investigate the matter. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Thursday that she had no update on the status of that investigation.

“We’ve been incredibly transparent about this entire situation, and we will continue to be,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt is one of three Trump administration officials who face a lawsuit from The Associated Press on First and Fifth Amendment grounds. The AP says the three are punishing the news agency for editorial decisions they oppose. The White House says the AP is not following an executive order to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.

By JOSH BOAK, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump said he was placing 25% tariffs on auto imports, a move the White House claims would foster domestic manufacturing but could also put a financial squeeze on automakers that depend on global supply chains.

“This will continue to spur growth,” Trump told reporters Wednesday. “We’ll effectively be charging a 25% tariff.”

The tariffs, which the White House expects to raise $100 billion in revenue annually, could be complicated as even U.S. automakers source their components from around the world. The tax hike starting in April means automakers could face higher costs and lower sales, though Trump argues that the tariffs will lead to more factories opening in the United States and the end of what he judges to be a “ridiculous” supply chain in which auto parts and finished vehicles are manufactured across the United States, Canada and Mexico.

To underscore his seriousness about the tariffs directive he signed, Trump said, “This is permanent.”

The U.S. president reiterated his willingness to challenge allies by saying Thursday on social media that if the European Union coordinated with Canada, tariffs “far larger than currently planned” would be placed on them in retaliation.

Shares in General Motors tumbled roughly 5% in Thursday morning trading. Ford’s stock fell 2%. Shares in Stellantis, the owner of Jeep and Chrysler, dropped 1%. But the stock prices of electric vehicle makers Tesla and Rivian were up.

The American Automotive Policy Council, which represents domestic automakers, said in a statement that “it is critical that tariffs are implemented in a way that avoids raising prices for consumers and that preserves the competitiveness of the integrated North American automotive sector.”

Trump has long said that tariffs against auto imports would be a defining policy of his presidency, betting that the costs created by the taxes would cause more production to relocate to the United States while helping narrow the budget deficit. But U.S. and foreign automakers have plants around the world to accommodate global sales while maintaining competitive prices — and it could take years for companies to design, build and open the new factories that Trump is promising.

“We’re looking at much higher vehicle prices,” said economist Mary Lovely, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “We’re going to see reduced choice. … These kinds of taxes fall more heavily on the middle and working class.’’

She said more households will be priced out of the new car market — where prices already average about $49,000 — and will have to hang on to aging vehicles.

The tariffs on autos would start being collected on April 3, Trump said. If the taxes are fully passed onto consumers, the average auto price on an imported vehicle could jump by $12,500, a sum that could feed into overall inflation. Trump was voted back into the White House last year because voters believed he could bring down prices.

Foreign leaders were quick to criticize the tariffs, a sign that Trump could be intensifying a broader trade war that could damage growth worldwide.

“This is a very direct attack,” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said. “We will defend our workers. We will defend our companies. We will defend our country.”

In Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen expressed regret at the U.S. decision to target auto exports from Europe and vowed that the bloc would protect consumers and businesses.

“Tariffs are taxes — bad for businesses, worse for consumers equally in the U.S. and the European Union,” she said in a statement, adding that the EU’s executive branch would assess the impact of the move, as well as other U.S. tariffs planned for coming days.

Related Articles

Department of Health and Human Services will lay off 10,000 workers in a major restructuring plan

US cities located in states won by Trump would be most hurt by Canadian tariffs, an analysis finds

In Jamaica, Marco Rubio vows to revisit US travel warning

Turkish student at Tufts University detained, video shows masked people handcuffing her

Congressional Republicans target PBS, NPR funding in contentious hearing

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said Thursday that Mexico did not want to be drawn into taking positions with each new tariff, but that under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement negotiated during Trump’s first term that “there shouldn’t be any tariffs, that is the essence of the commercial treaty.”

As Trump announced the new tariffs, he indicated that he would like to provide a new incentive to help car buyers by allowing them to deduct from their federal income taxes the interest paid on auto loans, so long as their vehicles were made in America. That deduction would eat into some of the revenues that could be generated by the tariffs.

The new tariffs would apply over time to both finished autos and parts used in the vehicles, according to a White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the taxes on a call with reporters. The tariffs would be on top of any existing taxes and were legally based on a 2019 Commerce Department investigation that occurred during Trump’s first term on national security grounds.

Trump’s directive creates the space to preserve auto parts trade with Canada and Mexico, as the Trump administration has to figure out how it could implement auto parts taxes on those trading partners. The administration’s goal is for the 25% tariffs to only apply to non-U.S. content.

The administration is reasoning that there is excess capacity at U.S. automakers that will enable them to ramp up production to avoid the tariffs by manufacturing more domestically, with the official noting that automakers have known since the Trump campaign that tariffs were coming.

The auto tariffs are part of a broader reshaping of global relations by Trump, who plans to impose what he calls “reciprocal” taxes on April 2 that would match the tariffs, sales taxes charged by other nations.

Trump has already placed a 20% import tax on all imports from China for its role in the production of fentanyl. He similarly placed 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada, with a lower 10% tax on Canadian energy products. Parts of the Mexico and Canada tariffs have been suspended, including the taxes on autos, after automakers objected and Trump responded by giving them a 30-day reprieve that is set to expire in April.

The president has also imposed 25% tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports, removing the exemptions from his earlier 2018 taxes on the metals. He also plans tariffs on computer chips, pharmaceutical drugs, lumber and copper.

His taxes risk igniting a broader global trade war with escalating retaliations that could crush global trade, potentially hurting economic growth while raising prices for families and businesses as some of the costs of the taxes get passed along by importers. When the European Union retaliated with plans for a 50% tariff on U.S. spirits, Trump responded by planning a 200% tax on alcoholic beverages from the EU.

Trump also intends to place a 25% tariff on countries that import oil from Venezuela, even though the United States also imports oil from that nation.

Trump’s aides maintain that the tariffs on Canada and Mexico are about stopping illegal immigration and drug smuggling. But the administration also wants to use the tariff revenues to lower the budget deficit and assert America’s preeminence as the world’s largest economy.

The president on Monday cited plans by South Korean automaker Hyundai to build a $5.8 billion steel plant in Louisiana as evidence that tariffs would bring back manufacturing jobs.

Slightly more than 1 million people are employed domestically in the manufacturing of motor vehicles and parts, about 320,000 fewer than in 2000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. An additional 2.1 million people work at auto and parts dealerships.

The United States last year imported nearly 8 million cars and light trucks worth $244 billion. Mexico, Japan and South Korea were the top sources of foreign vehicles. Imports of auto parts came to more than $197 billion, led by Mexico, Canada and China, according to the Commerce Department.

Associated Press writer Rob Gillies in Toronto and AP Economics Writer Paul Wiseman contributed to this report.