Donald Trump’s acting US Attorney Lindsey Halligan is facing scrutiny after her private messages with a journalist came to light.

Over the weekend, Halligan apparently struck up a conversation with Lawfare journalist Anna Bower on the encrypted app Signal about Trump’s case against Letitia James, Attorney General of New York after Bower posted on X about a New York Times article about grand jury testimony in the case.

“You are biased. Your reports are not accurate. I am the one handling the case and I am telling you that,” one of the Signal messages read. “If you want to twist and torture the facts to fit your narrative, there’s nothing I can do. It’s a waste to even let you know.”

Bower said he initially wondered if someone posing as Halligan had sent him the messages. She later confirmed that it was indeed the acting federal prosecutor who was contacting her.

“I was very surprised and, honestly, I was very curious to see what he had to say,” Bower told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Monday.

“It’s not very often that you see a sitting federal prosecutor who, without being asked, approaches a reporter to talk about something related to an ongoing process involving grand jury testimony,” he said.

Lindsey Halligan holds ceremonial proclamations to be signed by President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House, March 6, 2025.
Lindsey Halligan holds ceremonial proclamations to be signed by President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House, March 6, 2025.

Al Drago via Getty Images

“I had no pre-existing relationship with Lindsey Halligan in terms of speaking to her as a reporter,” Bower explained to Collins. “We met once, many years before, while I was reporting on Trump’s criminal investigations and criminal cases,” and Halligan was on Trump’s defense team.

But deep in their Signal chat, Halligan told Bower that their conversation needed to be “off the record,” meaning he didn’t want the journalist to publish or quote their exchange.

However, Bower said he never agreed to those terms. People trained to interact with the press know that a request to keep certain information off the record must be made before sharing it with a journalist, and that the journalist must agree.

“Lindsey Halligan never suggested we were off the record. She reached out to me,” Bower said.

The journalist finally shared her unexpected exchange with Halligan about Lawfare, as well as an angry statement from the Department of Justice, which confirmed that Halligan’s messages were authentic.

“Halligan was trying to point you to facts, not gossip, but by clarifying that you would adhere to the rule of law and not reveal Grand Jury information, you are threatening to leak an entire conversation,” Justice Department spokeswoman Natalie Baldassarre wrote. “Good luck getting someone to talk to you when you post their texts.”

MAGA does‘your mom’jokes

Your supportFuelsOur Mission

Your supportFuelsOur Mission

We make the headlines.

Serious questions deserve better than high school humor.

We remain committed to bringing you the unwavering, fact-based journalism everyone deserves.

Thank you again for your support along the way. We are truly grateful for readers like you! Your early support helped get us here and strengthened our newsroom, keeping us strong in uncertain times. As we continue, we need your help more than ever. We hope you will join us once again.

We remain committed to bringing you the unwavering, fact-based journalism everyone deserves.

Thank you again for your support along the way. We are truly grateful for readers like you! Your early support helped get us here and strengthened our newsroom, keeping us strong in uncertain times. As we continue, we need your help more than ever. We hope you will join us once again.

News themezone Support

Have you already contributed? Sign in to hide these messages.

Collins agreed with Bower that the conversation with the U.S. attorney was not “off the record,” and Bower reiterated that she did not “threaten” Halligan but simply “reached out to the Department of Justice for comment” based on journalistic ethics.