A
Justice Department review found that Ed Martin improperly handled grand
jury materials that were part of an investigation targeting Donald
Trump’s political enemies, at least two sources familiar with the review
told CNN. It was at least part of the reason Martin was pushed out of
DOJ headquarters early this year.
The
review, which was overseen by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s
office, focused on whether grand jury material gathered in the
department’s mortgage fraud inquiries into Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff
and New York Attorney General Letitia James had been illegally shared
with people not authorized to possess that information, multiple people
briefed on the matter told CNN.
The department
found that Martin had shared the secret grand jury material in the
Schiff case, one of the sources said. The person said Martin initially
denied sharing the material with unauthorized people when asked by
department leaders, but emails soon surfaced showing that Martin had in
fact shared the grand jury material.
A second
person told CNN a finding of misconduct gave the deputy attorney general
a reason to further ostracize Martin. Martin was removed as the head of
the so-called Weaponization Working Group on the first day of 2026 and
he was relocated out of department headquarters to a building across
town that houses the pardon attorney — Martin’s one remaining role.
He
shared the secret grand jury material in the Schiff case. That means
he broke the law. Grand jury material is supposed to remain secret.
But Ed Martin shared it. Ewan Palmer (DAILY BEAST) adds:
Martin
was removed from the weaponization group on the first day of 2026 and
shifted out of DOJ headquarters to a separate building miles away to
continue his work as a pardon attorney. He is expected to fully leave
the DOJ in the coming weeks.
Martin was also
among those who spearheaded the probe into former FBI Director James
Comey. That investigation was later dismissed by a judge after it was
determined that the Trump-appointed prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, had
been unlawfully appointed. A separate case against New York Attorney
General Letitia James—who prosecuted Trump in an earlier civil case—was
also dismissed.
The internal DOJ review was
launched to determine whether grand jury material gathered during
mortgage fraud inquiries into Schiff and James had been improperly
shared with unauthorized individuals, CNN reported.
The
findings were among the reasons Martin was pushed out of DOJ
headquarters in Washington, D.C., earlier this year, as well as being
removed from his role within the Weaponization Working Group.
Ed Martin broke the law and needs to be prosecuted.
Comments on Palmer's article include:
Robert Wright
55 minutes ago
What
stands out here is the institutional contradiction: internal reviews
identify conduct severe enough to justify removing someone from a
sensitive role, yet the public explanation frames the shift as a routine
reassignment. It’s becoming a familiar pattern — instead of an outright
dismissal, the person is moved into a lower‑profile position that’s
easier to contain, while the department insists nothing unusual
happened. The gap between internal actions and external messaging is
what raises the real questions.
Michael Armstrong
1 hour ago
Leaking
grand jury testimony. Would think that would break some laws and, at a
minimum, lead to disbarment. Guess that only happens if they share
their findings, which given past protective behavior isn't likely to
happen.
STEVE WALRATH
6 minutes ago
The
regime of the Orange Stain is packed with criminals losers, starting at
the top. It is what happens when the people of this country decide to
put a criminal con man in the Oval Office. We will be very fortunate to
survive this. Thanks MAGA and republicans. If we do? I certainly hope
none of these bastards ever see elected office ever again.
Generally,
we keep grand jury material secret for a reason. It protects
investigative integrity and the rights of the accused. When prosecutors
leak that material, it’s at least contemptuous and at worst obstruction
of justice. That’s one of those actual crimes, not the made-up “somebody
criticized Elon Musk” crimes Martin threatened people with during his
tenure as interim D.C. U.S. Attorney.
Deputy AG
Todd Blanche reportedly oversaw the review, resulting in Martin’s exile
from the weaponization project to concentrate on his role overseeing
pardons for a president almost assuredly selling pardons. But Blanche
isn’t going to sell out a fellow MAGA warrior. In his statement to CNN,
Blanche offers a masterclass in lawyerly semantics:
[T]here are no misconduct investigations into Ed Martin. Ed is doing a great job as Pardon Attorney.
The
present tense does some conspicuous heavy lifting here. No misconduct
investigations currently, but don’t ask Blanche the follow-up about
investigations they’ve already concluded. Ed may be doing a great job as
Pardon Attorney — he’s not, but he may have been — but how’s he doing
as Weaponization Working Group chief, Todd?
CNN data analyst Harry Enten burst out laughing as he broke down the government’s historic dysfunction under Donald Trump.
The
data guru revealed on Tuesday that of all the days the government has
been shut down in American history, 61 percent have occurred under
Trump.
“I mean, this is just sort of nuts,
right?” Enten, 37, told CNN News Central host John Berman as he broke
out in chuckles. “We‘ve spoken about government shutdowns before, but
now it‘s happening so often that the clear majority of times that the
government has been shut down has been under Donald John Trump.”
A right-on comment on the article:
Foo Cough
18 hours ago
And
all the completely predictable result of hiring a toddler to do an
adult's job. the only thing mildly surprising is that there are still
Americans stupid enough to support this incompetent moron.
He
just lies day after day about everything. And he's obsessed with
Barack Obama. He's all Jan Brady when it comes to Barack. I don't
remember Barack ever bragging about his polling but he was popular as a
president. Chump can't shut up about his polling but he lies about it
to make himself look good. Rachel Dobkin (INDEPENDENT) notes:
President
Donald Trump has bragged that his polling is the highest he has “ever
received,” despite his approval rating dropping throughout his second
term.
In a Truth Social post Monday night,
Trump wrote, “The highest Poll Numbers I have ever received. Obviously,
people like a strong and powerful Country, with the best economy, EVER!”
But most Americans are actually looking down on the job Trump is doing, including his handling of the economy.
A
new The Economist/YouGov poll found that 54 percent of Americans
disapprove of Trump’s job as president, while only 40 percent approve.
Trump still has a solid approval rating among his party, with 86 percent
of Republicans supporting the job he’s doing.
When
asked specifically about the economy, 53 percent of Americans say they
disapprove of Trump’s handling of the issue, and just 39 percent
approve.
The latest Associated Press-NORC
polling from early January shows an even grimmer approval rating for
Trump. Nearly 60 percent of Americans disapprove of the job Trump is
doing, while just 40 percent approve. Trump’s approval rating has mostly
dropped every month since last August, when it sat at 45 percent,
according to AP-NORC polling.
Even more Americans, 62 percent, said they disapproved of Trump’s handling of the economy, while 37 percent said they approved.
The
billionaire investor Ken Griffin has accused Donald Trump’s
administration of “enriching” its families, and criticised its
interference in American businesses as “distasteful”.
Griffin,
who is the chief executive of the hedge fund Citadel and a large
Republican donor, rebuked the Trump administration, saying it “has
definitely made missteps in choosing decisions or courses that have been
very, very enriching to the families of those in the administration”.
“That
calls into question, is the public interest being served?” he said at a
conference on Tuesday in Florida hosted by the Wall Street Journal.
Griffin
is one of the most vocal critics of Trump on Wall Street, although it
is the first time he has commented on how the president’s family appear
to have made financial gain from their proximity to the White House.
Wednesday, February 4, 2026. The lies of Homeland Security are exposed
further in a Democratic Party hearing, day drinking FOX "NEWS"
personality creates more problems for Donald Chump, the Epstein scandal
continues to haunt Chump, and much more.
As we've noted throughout 2025, ICE lies. They lie over
and over. They've lied to the American people repeatedly and they have
lied to the courts. That's why we're no longer interested in what they
say took place on the day someone's kidnapped or wounded or killed.
They are known liars and they are demonstrable liars. The courts should
not believe a word from their mouths because they have lied
repeatedly. Those who aren't getting it still should refer to Sam Levin's report for THE GUARDIAN:
Immediately
after a US border patrol agent shot two people in Oregon last month,
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said the targets were
“vicious” gang members connected to a prior shooting and alleged they
had “attempted to run over” officers with their vehicle.
In the weeks since, key parts of the federal government’s narrative have fallen apart.
The
events took place on the afternoon of 8 January, one day after a US
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer fatally shot Renee
Nicole Good in Minneapolis.
According
to a DHS press release and social media posts issued the following day,
border patrol agents were conducting a “targeted” stop of a vehicle in
Portland occupied by two members of Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan gang.
Yorlenys Zambrano-Contreras, a woman in the passenger seat, had been
“involved” in a Portland shooting last year, the agency wrote.
During
the border patrol stop, the driver, Luis Niño-Moncada, “weaponized
their vehicle against” officers, DHS said, prompting an agent “to defend
himself and others” by shooting the occupants. Zambrano-Contreras was
hit in the chest, Niño-Moncada was hit in the arm and both were
hospitalized, then taken into federal custody, DHS noted. The agents
were uninjured.
But court records obtained by the
Guardian reveal a Department of Justice prosecutor later directly
contradicted DHS’ Tren de Aragua statements in court, telling a judge,
“We’re not suggesting … [Niño-Moncada] is a gang member.” An FBI
affidavit issued following the incident also suggests that in the
previous shooting cited by DHS, Zambrano-Contreras was not a suspect,
but rather a reported victim of a sexual assault and robbery. Neither
Niño-Moncada or Zambrano-Contreras have prior criminal convictions,
their lawyers have said.
Immigration and
criminal justice experts who reviewed the case records characterized the
federal government’s communications as a “smear campaign” against the
two Venezuelan immigrants, with mischaracterizations of their pasts and
unsubstantiated allegations of criminality.
Niño-Moncada,
the 33-year-old driver, who is undocumented, remains detained, facing
charges of aggravated assault of an officer based on claims he tried to
“intentionally” hit agents with his car. Zambrano-Contreras, 32, was not
criminally charged, but has pleaded guilty to improper entry to the US,
a misdemeanor. Prosecutors have said the two were dating.
“The
federal government cannot be trusted. Our default position should be
skepticism and understanding they lie very regularly,” said Sameer
Kanal, a Portland city councilor. “There’s a playbook of demonizing
people … and claiming vehicles were used as ‘weapons.’ We see a pattern
of victim-blaming, and it’s important we push back, because it’s
propaganda.”
In September, DHS claimed that Silverio Villegas González,
who ICE killed by shooting him in the neck while he was coming home
after dropping off his two children at school and day care, had hit and
dragged an officer with his car. But there was no video evidence of
this despite multiple angles of the incident being caught on camera,
and one of the officers reported that his own injuries were “nothing
major.”
Over the last year, immigration officials falsely accused protesters in Los Angeles of assaulting border patrol officers. They also inflated the number of assaults against officers nationwide and mislabeled footage of ICE operations in their advertisements.
Time and again, they
have been caught lying. And it's what they're encouraged to do. And
it's what Pam da Bimbo Bondi, as Attorney General, wants prosecutors to
do. It's why prosecutors keep quitting on her. They understand the
importance of ethics. They also aren't her age. At her age, she can be
stripped of her ability to practice law and it won't harm her. She's
corrupt and she's made quite the nest egg for herself. But others fear
following her orders and risking their ability to continue to practice
the law. Daniel Hampton (RAW STORY) reports:
Chaos
continues at the Minnesota U.S. Attorney's Office, which is
hemorrhaging more talent, with eight more federal prosecutors heading
for the exits, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported Monday.
The
latest wave of departures comes on the heels of a startling mass exodus
last month, when six veteran prosecutors walked away in protest over
controversial Justice Department directives — including a widely
condemned refusal to launch a civil rights investigation into the
killing of 37-year-old mother Renee Good, who was gunned down in her car
by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
Among
the prosecutors abandoning ship is Ana Voss, the civil division chief,
who has frantically juggled hundreds of wrongful detention petitions
since federal immigration enforcement operations ramped up across
Minnesota.
On Monday, Department of Homeland
Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced that all federal agents in
Minnesota would be outfitted with body-worn cameras effective
immediately, a move that raisedeyebrows given the mounting legal
fallout.
Pam
Bondi’s Department of Justice is hemorrhaging prosecutors in Minnesota
as more attorneys have decided to leave their jobs rather than defend
the Trump administration’s violent immigration enforcement tactics.
Eight
veteran prosecutors have either left or announced they are leaving the
U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota, The Minnesota Star Tribune
reported, bringing the total to 14 outgoing prosecutors after six others
quit in mid-January.
That’s more than the office
typically loses in a year, let alone a month, according to the Star
Tribune. Key staff members, including a victim-witness coordinator and
an evidence technician, also recently left.
The
mass exit was triggered in part by the DOJ’s refusal to open a civil
rights investigation into the killings of U.S. citizens Renee Nicole
Good and Alex Pretti, who were fatally shot by immigration agents in
January.
The departing attorneys had also
voiced their concerns to U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen about the Trump
administration’s efforts to prevent state and local investigators from
probing the killings as potential homicides, and about orders to rush
through charges against defendants accused of assaulting federal
officers without conducting a full investigation.
The attorneys also thought they should consider whether the agents’ conduct contributed to the encounters.
da
Bimbo continues to be both a menace and an embarrassment. People have
grown tired of da Bimbo and her attacks on the rule of law. They have
grown tired of the law breaking ICE. Yesterday, Democrats in Congress
heard from some of the people whose lives have been damaged and
destroyed by ICE.
Nearly one month
after a federal immigration agent shot and killed Renee Good, 37, in
Minneapolis, two of her siblings, Brent and Luke Ganger, appeared on
Capitol Hill on Tuesday and urged lawmakers to move to rein in the
deportation crackdown.
“In the last
few weeks, our family took some consolation thinking that perhaps Nee’s
death would bring about change in our country,” Luke Ganger told members
of Congress, using a nickname for his sister. “And it has not.”
Reading
from the eulogy he said he had given for his sister days earlier, Brent
Ganger called Ms. Good “unapologetically hopeful.” Choking back tears
as he described Ms. Good as a devoted mother, he likened his sister to a
dandelion.
“They keep coming back stronger, brighter, spreading seeds of hope everywhere they land,” he said.
Ms.
Good’s brothers spoke at a public forum held by congressional
Democrats, which was focused on the use of force by federal agents
conducting the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
Though Democrats have demanded limits on
Immigration and Customs Enforcement throughout President Trump’s second
term, their calls intensified after Ms. Good’s death and the killing
weeks later of Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old I.C.U. nurse who was also an
American citizen.
During his
testimony, Luke Ganger made clear that he viewed the shooting of Ms.
Good, who was shot by an ICE agent while she was driving, as part of a
larger pattern of abuses by immigration officers.
“This
is not just a bad day or a rough week or isolated incidents,” Mr.
Ganger said. “These encounters with federal agents are changing the
community and changing many lives, including ours, forever.”
Tuesday’s
event, led by Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and
Representative Robert Garcia of California, came as Democrats threatened
to block long-term funding from the Department of Homeland Security if
Republicans do not agree to new restrictions on immigration enforcement
efforts.
The forum comes as congressional Democrats, including Blumenthal and
Garcia, demand reforms to the Department of Homeland Security to put
stricter guardrails on Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border
Patrol agents. On the same day as the hearing, the House passed a
spending package to end a partial government shutdown and fund DHS
through Feb. 13, giving lawmakers less than two weeks to negotiate
changes to the agency.
Marimar Martinez, who was shot
five times in Chicago, said agents rushed medical staff to dress her
wounds, so that blood was soaking through her bandages when officers
took her from the hospital after less than three hours. She said she
overheard agents discussing whether a jail would accept her with her
wounds bleeding and she had to plead to be taken to a second hospital
for proper medical care.
She
testified that she had been on her way to deliver some clothes she’d
collected from her home to a church, when she spotted immigration
enforcement vehicles and tried to warn friends and neighbors of their
presence by honking her horn and shouting “La Migra.”
Martinez
said the Border Patrol agent swerved twice into her lane and that,
after she stopped her car, “it seemed time stopped.” Initially she
thought the sensations in her arms and legs were from being hit by
pepper balls. She tried to continue driving, but heard her back
passenger window shatter and felt “bullets continue to pierce my body.”
“I
was losing this battle. I saw my life flash before me and slowly began
to think, ‘This is the end of me,’” she told the panel.
Senator Blumenthal's office issued the following:
Today, Blumenthal & U.S.
Representative Robert Garcia are hosting a forum to hear public
testimony from Americans who have experienced the violence &
brutality of ICE & CBP agents firsthand
[WASHINGTON, DC] – Today, U.S.
Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Ranking Member of the Permanent
Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI), and U.S. Representative Robert
Garcia (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, held a bicameral public forum to receive testimony on
the violent tactics and disproportionate use of force by agents of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The following Americans shared their personal experiences with the lawless and deadly tactics used by DHS agents:
Marimar Martinez: Ms.
Martinez is a U.S. citizen and resident of Chicago, Illinois. In
October, she was shot five times by Customs and Border Patrol (CBP)
agents. After being shot by the Border Patrol Agent, Ms. Martinez was
later charged with assaulting the agents who shot her. All charges were
dropped by the U.S. Attorney's Office six weeks later.
“I know that what happened to me
in the matter of seconds on October 4 will unfortunately be with me for a
lifetime. The physical scars will always be there,” Ms. Martinez said. “And
perhaps even worse, the mental scars will always be there as a reminder
of the time my own government attempted to execute me and when they
failed at that to vilify me.”
“I know that by being a survivor
it is my duty to be here today to let you elected officials know what is
happening on the streets of our country because silence is no longer an
option. This needs to stop now!”
Ms. Martinez’s written testimony is available here.
Aliya Rahman: Ms. Rahman
is a U.S. citizen and resident of Minneapolis, Minnesota. She is also a
person with autism and a traumatic brain injury. In January, she was
violently dragged from her car by immigration agents after telling them
she had a disability; she was then detained without immediate access to
medical care or accommodations.
“I now cannot lift my arms
normally. I was never asked for ID, never told I was under arrest, never
read my rights, and never charged with a crime,” Ms. Rahman said.
“Before I blacked out on the cell
floor, my cell mate pleaded over and over to get me emergency medical
care. A voice outside said ‘We don't want to step on ICE's toes.’ When I
opened my eyes at Hennepin County’s emergency room, I learned I was
brought there to be treated for assault.”
Martin Daniel Rascon: Mr.
Rascon, who goes by Daniel, is a U.S. citizen and resident of San
Bernardino, California. Last August, Mr. Rascon was in a car with family
members unlawfully stopped by ICE and CBP agents when a CBP agent fired
on the car multiple times.
“I will never forget the fear and
having to quickly duck my head as the shots were fired at the passenger
side of the car. Any one of those bullets could have killed me or two
people that I love,” Mr. Rascon said.
Luke and Brent Ganger: Luke
and Brent Ganger are brothers of Renee Nicole Macklin Good, a U.S.
citizen and resident of Minneapolis, Minnesota who was shot and killed
by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in January.
“Our family is a very American
blend. We vote differently, and we rarely completely agree on the finer
details of what it means to be a citizen of this country. We attend
various churches and some, not at all. Despite those differences, we
have always treated each other with love and respect,” said Luke Ganger. “We
have gotten even closer during this very divided time in our country,
and we hope that our family can be even a small example to others to not
let political ideals divide us. To be Good, like Renee.”
“Renee is not gone from us—she’s
in the light that finds us on hard days. She’s in the resilience we
didn’t know we had until we needed it. She’s in the laughter, the
memories, the love that continues to grow,” said Brent Ganger.
Luke and Brent Ganger’s written testimony is available here.
Antonio Romanucci: Mr.
Romanucci is an attorney representing the family of Renee Nicole Macklin
Good, a U.S. citizen and resident of Minneapolis, Minnesota who was
shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in
January.
“I have handled excessive force
cases across the country for decades. My colleagues and I are deeply
distressed at these invasions onto fellow Americans’ civil rights by our
own government that have gone well beyond the initial scope of removing
criminals,” said Mr. Romanucci. “The occupation by ICE
and CBP in our cities is way beyond their mission, leading to
unnecessary provocation that causes needless harm and death.”
Mr. Romanucci’s written testimony is available here.
Seth Stoughton: Mr.
Stoughton is a former police officer and Professor at the University of
South Carolina School of Law, where he is the Faculty Director of the
Excellence in Policing & Public Safety (EPPS) Program.
“The current administration’s
approach to immigration enforcement falls far short of professional
norms This is not policing. It is not normal. And it is not
professionally acceptable,” said Mr. Stoughton.
Mr. Stoughton’s written testimony is available here.
Sen. Blumenthal
called the hearing “extraordinary and unprecedented” because Good and
Pretti were “murdered by their own government” and “were killed in cold
blood.”
He
called for a complete overhaul of DHS and a revamping of policies,
resulting in bodycams for each ICE agent, “masks off all the time,” and
additional training and monitoring for all officers.
“These
stories are not just about Minneapolis,” he said. “The nation is
Minneapolis. We are all Minneapolis. These stories are a call to
action.”
Chicago
Mayor Brandon Johnson announced that he will direct city police to
investigate alleged wrongdoing by federal immigration agents in the
city.
This past weekend, Mayor Johnson signed
an executive order that he said will lay the groundwork for prosecuting
agents with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or Customs and
Border Protection (CBP). Johnson said in a statement, “Nobody is above
the law. There is no such thing as ‘absolute immunity’ in America.”
[. . .]
Before
signing the “ICE on Notice” executive order, Johnson said, “We need to
send a clear message: If the federal government will not hold these
rogue actors accountable, then Chicago will do everything in our power
to bring these agents to justice.”
He added in
his official statement, “We are putting ICE on notice in our city.
Chicago will not sit idly by while Trump floods federal agents into our
communities and terrorizes our residents.”
Adeola Adeosun (NEWSWEEK) notes another development, "Department
of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced Monday that all
federal immigration enforcement officers will be equipped with body-worn
cameras, marking a significant policy shift for the agency. The
immediate deployment will begin in Minneapolis, with plans to expand the
program nationwide as funding becomes available."
As Senator Blumenthal noted, Renee Nicole Gold and Alex Pretti were murdered by their own government. Amy McCarthy (PEOPLE) reports:
The
official cause of death for Alex Pretti, the man shot and killed by
federal agents amid protests against increased immigration enforcement
activity in Minneapolis on Jan. 24, has been released.
The
Hennepin County Medical Examiner's office released the results of its
inquiry into Pretti's death on Monday, Feb. 2. The cause of death was
listed as "multiple gunshot wounds," and the manner of death is listed
as "homicide," according to the medical examiner's report obtained by
PEOPLE.
The medical examiner's report also
noted that Pretti was "shot by law enforcement officer(s)." No other
"significant conditions" that could have contributed to his death were
listed on the report.
Pretti, 37, was killed on Jan. 24 as he stood among a group of protesters with his phone in his hand.
ICE has resulted in many victims being targeted. Tracey Ashlee (INQUISITR) notes one who had praised Donald Chump and told people that only "crooks" were being targeted by ICE:
For
months, Júnior Pena told his followers there was nothing to fear as far
as Trump’s immigration policies were concerned. The Brazilian
influencer, who built a large online audience by documenting immigrant
life in the United States, repeatedly defended President Donald Trump’s
immigration crackdown. When reports surfaced that ICE agents were
detaining Brazilians, Pena waved off the concern.
“They’re
all crooks. The lot of them.” he said in a video posted in Portuguese.
“Don’t panic.” But it seems as if he should have had every reason to
panic.
On Saturday, Pena was
arrested by ICE in New Jersey. Pena, whose full name is Eustáquio da
Silva Pena Júnior, was taken into custody and transferred to the Delaney
Hall detention facility in Newark, according to friends and local
Brazilian media. One friend told an outlet, per The Guardian,
that Pena was detained after missing a court hearing related to his own
immigration status. His absence from the hearing proved to be his
biggest mistake.
[. . .]
Supporters
posted messages asking followers to pray and launched a fundraising
campaign seeking $50,000 to cover legal fees. Others were less
sympathetic. Left-leaning Brazilians flooded his social media accounts,
accusing him of backing policies that ultimately caught up with him.
“You
supported Trump and suffered the consequences,” one commenter wrote.
Another added, “What goes around comes around.” For years, Pena insisted
ICE was only coming for criminals. Now, his own case sits inside the
system he once told others not to fear.
FAFO.
And now he knows. After he's made excuses for Donald Chump, after he's
defended Donald Chump and after he's refused to see reality in front of
his own eyes. Wonder what he tells himself now that reality has
slapped him hard across the face? Is he honest with himself now? Or is
he still trying to excuse the actions of Donald Chump?
For
months, the federal government has faltered in its attempt to comply
with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the bipartisan bill signed by
President Donald Trump that mandated the full release of the Justice
Department’s enormous trove of documents and media related to its
investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. The Trump administration blew past the
congressionally mandated deadline and is staggering its Epstein
releases, dropping millions of pages in batches that have included some problematic redactions
along with the expected disturbing revelations. But the Trump
administration’s latest release — an imposing tranche containing more
than 3 million pages and 180,000 images — revealed another level of
government sloppiness.
A Wall Street Journal analysis
found that the Justice Department failed to redact the full names of 43
victims in Friday’s file release. The Journal reported that some of the
women’s names appeared more than 100 times throughout the batch of
documents. Of the victims left exposed, the Journal reports that the
names of more than two dozen minor victims were unredacted and some were
accompanied by identifying information including home addresses.
,In addition, the New York Times reports
that the federal government published at least 40 photos that showed
the nude bodies of young women, including their unredacted faces. Per
the Times, the images show at least seven different individuals
appearing in different locations, including bedrooms and what’s believed
to be the beach on Epstein’s private island. Many of the images were
removed from the Justice Department’s website after the Times flagged
them.
As we've noted, all the files have not been released. There are at least three million pages that have not been released. Meryl Kornfield (WASHINGTON POST) notes:
But
the Trump administration won’t release millions of other files in its
possession and many other records were released with heavy redactions,
exacerbating concerns from those critical of the administration who
argue the releases have not answered some of the most significant
questions around Epstein’s sexual abuse of young girls, his interactions
with rich and powerful people and the ways he avoided any serious legal
consequences despite years of scrutiny.
The
disclosure of most of the government’s Epstein documents was forced by
the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act. Reps. Ro Khanna
(D-California) and Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), the architects of that
law, told The Washington Post that they have spoken to victims who have
not yet seen their statements to law enforcement released to the public,
raising their concerns that the disclosure has been incomplete. The two
argued that the redactions appeared to not comply with the law, which
requires that no document should be withheld or redacted based on
“embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.” Officials
should instead make redactions to protect the privacy of victims, the
law mandated.
“They, through incompetence,
failed to redact the victims’ names,” Massie said, “while at the same
time intentionally withholding documents and redacting documents that
contain names of people that should probably be investigated.”
Massie
pointed to the 2007 draft indictment of Epstein, one of the most
anticipated records of the release, which had described a number of
allegations of sex crimes federal prosecutors had compiled before
Epstein reached a plea deal for lesser charges. Massie said he believed a
number of the redactions had included co-conspirators, who he thinks
should be publicly named.
Alex Bollinger (LGBTQ NATION) quotes US House Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asking, "Why
is Pam Bondi and the Department of Justice continuing to hide the
majority of the Epstein files still, which they admit to the public
contain much more, even more direct evidence of shocking, genuinely
shocking crimes and sexual abuse of women, minors, and also increasingly
men that are saying they were trafficked in connection to the Epstein
orbit? And so we need to get to the bottom of it."
Khanna
told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that the files show communications between
Epstein and “some of the most powerful people in technology, in finance,
in real estate, emailing Jeffrey Epstein to go to his island, knowing
that Jeffrey Epstein is a pedophile, and knowing that underage girls
were being raped on that island. They showed up in many cases to parties
where underage girls were being paraded around.”
“At
the very least, every single person who went to Epstein‘s island should
have an investigation, and they should be asked who else was on that
island who raped these underage girls?” Khanna continued. “Did you see
people raping underage girls? Do you know anyone who raped these
underage girls? But just to say, ‘Oh, these were just rich people who
were playboys,’ that‘s just disrespectful to these survivors.”
Khanna
also dismissed Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s comments on
Sunday that it “isn’t a crime to party with Mr. Epstein,” calling it
“one of the most offense things that the deputy attorney general said.”
Newly released FBI documents allege that Jeffrey Epstein played matchmaker for Donald and Melania Trump.
The explosive claim directly contradicts the couple's long-told origin story.
According
to the 11-page, heavily redacted record, a former Epstein assistant —
who worked for him from 2005 to 2006 — told federal authorities that
Epstein "introduced MELANIA TRUMP to DONALD TRUMP," in files seen by The
Daily Beast.
The woman gave her statement under immunity in July 2019, just days after Epstein was arrested on child s-- trafficking charges.
The
woman's statement, part of a "proffer agreement," was made to both FBI
agents and federal prosecutors. The record details her year-long
employment under Epstein and her experiences as a sexual abuse victim,
including a disturbing incident in Paris where Epstein allegedly "took a
"vibrating thing" and "rubbed it on her."
The claim clashes with Melania's 2024 memoir, in which she describes meeting Donald at a party in 1998.
"'Hi.
I’m Donald Trump,' the man said when he reached my table. 'Nice to meet
you.' I recognized the name, and I knew he was a businessman or
celebrity, but not much else. He put his hand out to shake mine," she
wrote.
She recalled that he "took the seat next to mine and started a conversation."
Day
drinking again? And on the clock? Jeanine Pirro's stepped into it
again. Chump's administration is again declaring war on gun rights
advocates. Anna Commander (NEWSWEEK) notes, "U.S.
Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Ferris Pirro, an
appointee of President Donald Trump, threatened to arrest law-abiding
gun owners, as violent crime in the nation’s capital has decreased." NEWSWEEK's Khaleda Rahman picks up the story:
U.S.
Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s threat to jail law-abiding gun owners who
travel to Washington, D.C., with firearms has sparked anger from
Republicans, including some of President Donald Trump’s staunchest
supporters.
Pirro, the chief federal prosecutor
in the District of Columbia and a Trump appointee, said on Monday that
anyone who brings a gun to the nation’s capital should “count on going
to jail” even if they are licensed elsewhere.
The
comments also drew pushback from gun rights advocates, including the
National Association of Gun Rights, which called them “unacceptable and
intolerable.”
Pirro
made a video on X Tuesday, seeking to clarify her comments, saying in
part, “I want to be crystal clear. I am a proud supporter of the Second
Amendment. I have guns myself.“
“President Trump’s goal here, and my goal as well, is to make sure we take guns out of the hands of criminals,” she continued.
Republicans
across the board sprang forth to condemn Pirro’s anti-gun rights
remarks, from libertarian champion of the Epstein files Rep. Thomas
Massie to MAGA-loving Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
“The
District of Columbia has been ‘shall issue’ since 2017 when the
requirement that you must have a ‘good reason’ to carry a handgun was
struck down,” Massie, the Trump administration’s latest congressional
harassment target, said on X. “Non-residents can obtain a permit in DC —
don’t ask me how I know."
DeSantis
also slammed Pirro’s comments, saying, “Second Amendment rights are not
extinguished just because an American visits DC. American gun owners
who conceal carry are among the most law-abiding citizens in the nation.
They are friends of law enforcement; they should not be targeted by law
enforcement.”
Even some Democrats got in the
mix, with Rep. Brendan Boyle saying he was “Old enough to remember the
‘Obama is going to grab your guns’ hysteria. Turns out it was the Trump
White House.”
Pirro’s
inflammatory remarks come only nine days after federal Border Patrol
agents shot and killed VA ICU nurse Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, a legal
gun owner who was carrying a concealed firearm that was disarmed when he
was killed.
Trump and other administration
officials argued that Pretti’s firearm justified his killing, but gun
rights organizations, including the National Rifle Association, disputed
their claims on the basis of the Second Amendment.
“The
NRA unequivocally believes that all law-abiding citizens have a right
to keep and bear arms anywhere that they have a legal right to be,” the
group said in a statement shared on X.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
Murray: “We cannot fund DHS if we do not rein in DHS.”
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray
(D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, delivered the
following remarks at the Senate Democratic Leadership press conference
regarding negotiations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
appropriations bill.
Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:
“Last week, we wrapped up 11 of our 12
funding bills, and passed those bills that rejected the devasting cuts
from Trump and the House Republicans, it ended the slush fund continuing
resolution, and it took Congress’ power of the pen back from Russ
Vought, and rejected every far-right poison pill.
“But our work is not done—there is one bill left: DHS. Because we cannot fund DHS if we do not rein in DHS.
“That is a clear, hard line. Law enforcement cannot be lawless—but that’s exactly what we have been seeing from ICE and CBP.
“What is happening in Minneapolis has not been subtle, federal agents
are going door to door—asking for papers. And just as often ignoring
papers—taking in people who are legally seeking asylum—like little
5-year-old Liam and his father, who a judge forced them to release this
week.
“We have people that have done nothing wrong being abducted by masked
agents with no warrant, shipped across the country, and herded into
overcrowded detention centers, for who knows how long. Some of
them—taken in Minneapolis mind you—are being left out in the street in
Texas, no way to get home when ICE is forced to grapple with the reality
that they were here legally all along.
“The response to this lawless catastrophe has been
understandable: outrage from everyone who believes this is a country
where law, order, due process, and basic human decency matters.
“People have protested peacefully, people have documented the
chaos as legal observers, and the Trump Administration’s response to
that has only grown more unhinged and infuriating.
“We saw protesters tear gassed—even as they were
pinned on the ground. We saw the shocking murders of Renee Good and Alex
Pretti, and we heard the Administration lie every step of the way. They
lied about little Liam and his dad being here illegally. They lied
about Alex Pretti brandishing a weapon and called him a terrorist.
“Just this week, we all saw a video of a woman who
was abruptly cut off and pulled over, guns immediately drawn on her,
nearly arrested before the local police stepped in and saved her from
ICE. And yet—the Trump Administration is trying now to lie about that
too.
“Enough. We are not going to fund a rogue Department with its unchecked agents and officers.
“We
are going to have accountability at DHS or there will not be Democratic
votes to fund a lawless agency. If Republicans refuse to make the
changes the American people are demanding—they are forcing a Republican
shutdown of DHS.
“The chaos, the brutality—all of it has happened at the
explicit direction of this President and a Republican Congress that
wrote him a blank check. If Republicans want Democratic votes to fix
this—then they need to understand that half-measures won’t cut it. It
really is that simple.
“This is somber stuff—legal immigrants being brutalized, American
citizens being detained, American citizens being shot and killed by our
own immigration enforcement. The Trump administration needs to take
these abuses seriously and understand that what Democrats are demanding
is reasonable and it is necessary.
“End the roving patrols. Hold federal agents accountable and hold
them to the same standards as local law enforcement on the basic things
like use of force. Get ‘masks off,’ get body cameras on, and ensure
proper identification.
“So, my message to Trump and this entire administration: Stop
the lying. Stop slandering American citizens and lawful immigrants.
Stop insulting our intelligence and spitting on the Constitution. This
country sees right through this. The people recognize that Democrats are
fighting to protect basic, American principles and basic American
rights.
“My message to Republicans: We are at the
table, and we are ready to negotiate serious measures to rein in these
rogue federal agencies. We are focused on getting a bill—and it has to
be a bill that reins in the abuses we are seeing done by ICE and CBP.
“Americans deserve accountability, we will settle for nothing less.”
###
Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Cosplay Expert" went up last night and the following sites updated:
"One
of the things that Donald Trump relies upon is having the press in
there, taking his picture and putting him on TV," Acosta said. "It's
what he likes and craves. And so I say, if he's going to continue to
arrest journalists — take it. Take it away from him.
"And
I just think at this point it's going to take some kind of collective
action. And I just think, you know, there's been so much bending the
knee over the last year that it's emboldened him. And so I think what's
needed at this point is just strong, determined action to send the
message that we're just not going to tolerate this. And we also need to
make sure that folks like Don [Lemon] understand that we all support
him. This shouldn't be a moment where folks say, well, you know, 'Don
did this or that,' or 'maybe I don't like Don. And so I'm not going to
support him.' No."
Acosta has had plenty of
experience of pushing back against the Trump administration. In 2018,
the White House revoked Acosta's press pass and barred him from covering
the president. Acosta has described how the president's approval was
not his concern.
Don Lemon was arrested for reporting. Reporting in the US under Chump is a crime. That's how much Chump has degraded our country.
Legal
experts say President Donald Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the
IRS over the leak of his tax information raises a plethora of legal and
ethical questions, including the propriety of the leader of the
executive branch pursuing scorched-earth litigation against the very
government he is in charge of.
The
lawsuit, filed Thursday in federal court in Florida, includes the
president’s sons Donald Jr. and Eric as plaintiffs. It alleges that the
leak of Trump's and the Trump Organization’s confidential tax records
caused “reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, unfairly
tarnished their business reputations, portrayed them in a false light,
and negatively affected President Trump, and the other Plaintiffs’
public standing.”
In 2024, former IRS
contractor Charles Edward Littlejohn, of Washington, D.C. — who worked
for Booz Allen Hamilton, a defense and national security tech firm — was
sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to leaking tax
information about Trump and others to two news outlets between 2018 and
2020.
The outlets were not named in the
charging documents, but the description and time frame align with
stories about Trump’s tax returns in The New York Times and reporting
about wealthy Americans’ taxes in the nonprofit investigative journalism
organization ProPublica. The 2020 New York Times report found Trump
paid $750 in federal income tax the year he first entered the White
House and no income tax at all some years thanks to reported colossal
losses.
[. . .]
Amy
Hanauer, executive director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic
Policy, says a legal remedy has already been provided for the leak.
“The
contractor who leaked this information has been imprisoned, the Trump
administration’s Treasury Department canceled its contracts with the
company that employed the leaker, and the IRS issued a rare public
apology to taxpayers affected by the leak,” and the IRS has pledged to
strengthen its data protection procedures as a result, Hanauer said.
She
adds that “even if an unbiased judge rightly rejects Trump’s demands as
preposterous, there is a great danger that the IRS would ‘agree’ to
settle and pay out an enormous sum of taxpayer dollars to Trump.”
The
standoff between President Donald Trump and Harvard University
escalated late Monday night, with the president posting on Truth Social
that he is now demanding $1 billion in damages and declaring that his
administration wants "nothing further to do, into the future, with
Harvard University."
The post
came hours after The New York Times reported his administration had
dropped a previous demand for a $200 million settlement to resolve a
long-running dispute with the Ivy League school.
Trump
has repeatedly accused Harvard and other universities of engaging in
antisemitic behavior by falling to protect Jewish students during
pro-Palestinian rallies on campus protests in 2024, and of promoting
what he calls "woke" ideology through diversity and inclusion policies.
The
Wall Street Journal and other outlets have reported that the Trump
administration has cut off billions of dollars in federal research
grants, frozen funding, threatened Harvard's tax-exempt status and
targeted the enrollment of international students. Several of those
actions have been challenged in court, including a ruling last year by a
federal judge in Boston restoring Harvard's federal funding and
blocking limits on international students.
The
Times reported Monday that Trump had "backtracked" on negotiations,
citing four people familiar with the matter who said the president no
longer expected a $200 million payment to end the dispute.
Hours later, Trump publicly rejected the report, accusing both Harvard and the newspaper of spreading misinformation.
"Strongly
Antisemitic Harvard University has been feeding a lot of nonsense to
the Failing New York Times," he wrote. "Harvard has been, for a long
time, behaving very badly! They wanted to do a convoluted job training
concept. "
Trump went on to accuse the
university of proposing a "convoluted job training concept" as a way to
avoid paying what he described as a $500 million settlement. The Times
reported that Harvard had previously rejected the idea of paying
hundreds of millions of dollars to the U.S. Treasury amid backlash from
liberal students and faculty.
His
greed will condemn him. It will put him in the coffin before this is
all over. And the world won't shed a tear when -- in the midst of one
of his rages -- he has a stroke and taps on out of this life.
Tuesday, February 3, 2026. Donald Chump's name is all over the pages
released last Friday in the latest Epstein document dump, at least three
million pages remain unreleased, Donald wants the Republican Party to
oversee voting in the US, Hegseth continues his embarrassing attack on
Senator Mark Kelly, and much more.
Donald
Chump is lying again, claiming he's not even mentioned in the latest
dump of 3 million pages of The Epstein Files when, in fact, he's
mentioned over 1,000 times.
Another lies that they tell is that these are all the documents and they're not. And no one believes them. Barney Henderson (NEWSWEEK) reports:
The
DOJ has itself identified over 6 million pages of Epstein documents,
Democratic members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee pointed out
over the weekend, but “released only about half of them—including over
200,000 pages that DOJ redacted or withheld.”
So
what’s missing from the documents and is the worst yet to come for
Trump, as the ghost of Epstein continues to haunt his old friends?
[. . .]
Robert
Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, accused
Attorney General Pam Bondi and the DoJ of breaking the law.
In
a statement he said: “Donald Trump and his Department of Justice have
now made it clear that they intend to withhold roughly 50% of the
Epstein files, while claiming to have fully complied with the law. This
is outrageous and incredibly concerning.
“The
Oversight Committee subpoena directs Pam Bondi to release all the files
to the committee, while protecting survivors. They are in violation of
the law.
“We are demanding the names of Epstein’s co-conspirators and the men and pedophiles who abused women and girls.”
NPR's review of the documents has found numerous examples of the
Justice Department failing to redact names of publicly identified
victims of sexual abuse as well as names of individuals who have not
previously been publicized.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act,
signed by President Trump last year, called for the Justice Department
to minimize its redactions while turning over information about the life
and death of Epstein and the criminal charges he and his accomplice
Ghislaine Maxwell faced. Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence in
federal prison for sexual exploitation and trafficking of children,
crimes she committed with Epstein.
Those redactions, too, are inconsistent with what the law directs.
"In
addition to the documentary redactions, which includes personal
identifying information, victim information and other privileges, there
is extensive redaction to images and videos to protect victims," Blanche
said Friday, announcing the final batch of files. "We redacted every
woman depicted in any image or video, with the exception of Ms. Maxwell.
We did not redact images of any men unless it was impossible to redact
the woman without also redacting the man."
But multiple examples can be found in the Epstein files repository that
show the faces of women and hide the faces of men, including one text
message conversation between former Trump adviser Steve Bannon and
Epstein where Trump's face in a news article was obscured with a black
box.
The files aren't shared in chronological order or grouped in any
identifiable way. Countless duplicate copies of email threads,
investigative files and correspondence are spread throughout the
database, sometimes with different levels of redactions applied.
The same PowerPoint
presentation prepared last fall by the Justice Department detailing the
timeline and cases against Epstein and Maxwell, alleged victims and
powerful figures in his orbit who faced allegations of misconduct
appears six times with different information blocked out in each
version.
Annie Farmer, one of the women who testified in court against Epstein and Maxwell, told NPR's All Things Considered on Monday that the redaction issues felt intentional.
"There's
just no explanation for how it could've been done so poorly," she said.
"They've had victims' names for a very long time. I don't think this is
just about rushing to get this information out."
MEIDASTOUCH NEWS notes that the dump appears to exist to protect Chump "from political fallout."
"Roughly
half of the material remains withheld or heavily redacted," MTN notes.
Six million pages and only three million released. Anna Betts (GUARDIAN) notes:
One document in the newly released tranche is a
summary that FBI officials appear to have compiled last summer, of more
than a dozen tips received by the agency involving Trump and Epstein.
It
is unclear why the investigators put together the summary, and it does
not say when the tips, which include unsubstantiated claims of sexual
abuse, were received. The document also does not include any
corroborating evidence or indication that the tips were verified.
Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. In response to a request for comment from the New York Times, the White House referred to a statement
from the justice department on Friday, which stated that the new
tranche of documents “may include fake or falsely submitted images,
documents or videos”.
“Some
of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against
President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020
election,” the DoJ statement added. “To be clear, the claims are
unfounded and false, and if they have a shred of credibility, they
certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already.”
Survivors
of Epstein have been further attacked by the US government with the
release of the papers which has not redacted all of their names, which
has included non-redacted photos of the survivors.
As Lawrence O'Donnell noted last night, this has led some survivors to call for pages released to be deleted.
And for a closer look at the legal issues surrounding
this latest release of Epstein files, we turn to Barbara McQuade. She's a
former federal prosecutor and a professor at the University of Michigan
Law School.
It's great to have you back on the program.
Barbara McQuade, Former U.S. Attorney:
Thanks, Geoff. Glad to be here with you.
Geoff Bennett:
So the Justice Department says Friday's release brings it
into compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but millions
of files, as you well know, remain unreleased, withheld for reasons like
attorney-client privilege, privacy concerns, and the like.
Democrats are now demanding access to the full record. From a legal standpoint, did the DOJ actually comply with the law?
Barbara McQuade:
Well, no.
First of all, the deadline was December
19, and here we are many weeks after that deadline. But also, in light
of all of these redactions, Geoff, I think there is some room to argue
here that they're not in compliance in it.
Within 15 days, which
should have been 15 days from December 19, the Justice Department is
also required to produce a log explaining what was redacted and why. One
of the things they have said they have redacted is internal memoranda
and things that disclose their deliberative privileges.
But that
was specifically spelled out in the statute that required production.
That could be something that the Justice Department and Congress might
have to litigate if the Justice Department continues to refuse to
produce those things.
But I think that the enormous amount of
redactions seems to go beyond the scope of what would be obvious, things
like names of survivors and other things. And so I think we're going to
have to see that log first before Congress can really ascertain exactly
what was withheld.
Geoff Bennett:
Why have no perpetrators beyond Jeffrey Epstein and
Ghislaine Maxwell been charged, despite years of investigation and the
volume of information that's now public?
Barbara McQuade:
Well, of course, we still don't know what's behind those redaction bars.
But
I think what the public is seeing here is, there is a difference
between things that are wrong, morally reprehensible, shady, even awful.
But to prove a crime, you would have to show that someone engaged in
actual sex trafficking. That means transporting someone across state
lines who is underage for the purpose of engaging in sex acts or, if
they are not a minor, doing so through threats or coercion.
That
requires a level of intent, knowledge, and the actions of doing these
things. And I don't know that we have seen any evidence that that was
done. Certainly, just associated with Jeffrey Epstein or even making
comments about women is not enough to bring a case.
And so, as I
said, we don't know what's behind those redaction bars, but it would not
surprise me if the Justice Department simply did not have sufficient
evidence to prove some of these cases.
Geoff Bennett:
And that might address a question I have seen a lot
online since Friday's release, which is, why did the Justice Department,
under multiple presidential administrations, to include the Biden
administration under Merrick Garland, why did they not pursue broader
prosecutions tied to Epstein's network?
Barbara McQuade:
Yes, I think it's the same.
So, certainly, Jeffrey
Epstein was charged before he committed suicide, and Ghislaine Maxwell
was charged and convicted. I think her trial occurred in 2021. But just
because -- we had a term we used when I was working as a prosecutor,
which is awful, but lawful.
Sometimes, people engage in really
hideous conduct. You investigate, but you are just not able to prove the
elements of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt. And so certainly
there is some shady information here going on, but it is actually one of
the reasons that the Justice Department typically does not disclose
records unless there is an indictment.
And that is to protect
people's reputations when there really is just sort of this sort of
slimy, kind of awful conduct that doesn't amount to a crime. So we're
seeing all these disclosures about these wealthy and powerful men and
their affiliations with Jeffrey Epstein.
Certainly, perhaps they
showed poor judgment. They may even have attended parties and gone to
his island and other kinds of things. But if they have not engaged in
the crime of sex trafficking, it's really sort of inappropriate.
Typically, the Justice Department protects people like that from
disclosure to protect reputations when they cannot prove a criminal
case.
Geoff Bennett:
We have also seen some survivors say that their
identifying information was released accidentally. I would imagine, in
these documents that they weren't properly redacted.
What
obligation does the DOJ have to survivors in releases like this? And
what corrective steps, if any, could be taken at this point to correct
the wrong?
Barbara McQuade:
Well, the statute itself said that they should not
produce, they should withhold and protect from production the names and
other identifying information about survivors, which is par for the
course.
It is typical, when the prosecution produces even
discovery to a defendant, to redact those names and provide only that
which is necessary to share with them for a fair trial. And so, in some
instances, it strikes me as sloppy.
Now, I know they had millions
of documents they had to review in a very short period of time, but
that's the law. You need to make those your priorities. Maybe there's
some things you can't do that month. Maybe there's some immigrants,
Geoff, that can't be arrested that month because you need prosecutors to
be reviewing the documents, in compliance with the law.
What can
be done about it? I suppose there could be civil lawsuits to the extent
that survivors want to file a lawsuit to suggest that they have been
defamed in some way by the production of their names, in violation of
this federal statute. I think they could have some civil remedies
available.
Geoff Bennett:
I also want to get you to weigh in on another important
matter. And that's President Trump today suggesting that Republicans
should, in his words, nationalize the voting process.
And he
argued it's necessary to prevent what he calls crooked Democrat-led
states from allowing illegal voting. Here's what he told Dan Bongino.
President Donald Trump:
These people were brought to our country to vote, and
they vote illegally. And the -- amazing that the Republicans aren't
tougher on it. The Republicans should say, we want to take over. We
should take over the voting in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans
ought to nationalize the voting.
Geoff Bennett:
When the president says "these people," he's talking about undocumented immigrants.
The
Brennan Center for Justice has said time and time again that this is a
lie. It's a conspiracy theory. There is no widespread voting by
noncitizens. But from a constitutional standpoint, what would it even
mean to nationalize elections? And does the federal government have the
authority to do that when elections are the authority of state
governments?
Barbara McQuade:
No, the Constitution says that it is the states that set
the time, place and manner for elections. And that has consistently been
held to mean that we have not one national election. We have 50
elections throughout our country on Election Day.
And there's good
reason for that. One is state sovereignty, but another is, that kind of
decentralized system is what protects us against some sort of
widespread fraud that attacks our nation or the collection of one
database of all voting records.
But in terms of administering the
elections, that is all done at the state level by the Constitution. So
the only way to nationalize elections would be through a constitutional
amendment.
President Trump
called in a new interview for the Republican Party to “nationalize”
voting in the United States, an aggressive rhetorical step that was
likely to raise new worries about his administration’s efforts to
involve itself in election matters.
During
an extended monologue about immigration on a podcast released on Monday
by Dan Bongino, his former deputy F.B.I. director, Mr. Trump called for
Republican officials to “take over” voting procedures in 15 states,
though he did not name them.
“The
Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over,’” he said. “We should
take over the voting, the voting in at least many — 15 places. The
Republicans ought to nationalize the voting.”
Under
the Constitution, American elections are governed primarily by state
law, leading to a decentralized process in which voting is administered
by county and municipal officials in thousands of precincts across the
country. Mr. Trump, however, has long been fixated on the false claims
that U.S. elections are rife with fraud and that Democrats are
perpetrating a vast conspiracy to have undocumented immigrants vote and
lift the party’s turnout.
President
Donald Trump’s domestic militia troops are still wearing masks as they
terrorize American communities. But the mask is off the Trump regime’s
fascist brutality, especially since the execution-style killing of VA
nurse Alex Pretti by federal immigration officers and the brazenly
dishonest smear campaign waged against the murdered man by top
administration officials.
Millions
of Americans saw the truth virtually in real time thanks to video taken
at the scene. Pretti was using his phone to peacefully document federal
officials’ actions in Minneapolis. He came to the aid of a woman who
had been shoved to the ground. Then he was attacked by multiple masked
officers and without justification shot multiple times in the back while
he lay on the ground.
The regime’s
well-practiced propaganda machine swung into action immediately, trying
to frame media coverage with outlandish lies.
The
Department of Homeland Security and its leader Kristi Noem lied that
Pretti “wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement” and
“violently resisted.” White House deportation czar Stephen Miller called
Pretti a “would-be assassin” who “tried to murder law enforcement.”
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth responded to the Pretti killing by
telling ICE officials “we have your back 100 percent” and posting “ICE
> MN.” Right-wing pundits parroted the official line, suggesting that
Pretti was to blame for his own killing.
This
has been the administration’s go-to strategy in previous incidents of
violence at the hands of federal law enforcement. And the
administration’s MAGA lapdogs once again played their part, spreading
the lies and smears.
But it isn’t working
this time. The video evidence is just too clear. And that made the
response by administration officials too obviously dishonest and
dishonorable.
Stevan
Bunnell, Gus Coldebella, Ivan Fong, Kara Lynum, Jonathan Meyer and John
Mitnick "all served as general counsels or acting general counsels for
the Department of Homeland Security." At THE NEW YORK TIMES, they write:
Immigration
and Customs Enforcement has reportedly issued a memorandum that
authorizes its agents to enter private residences forcibly without a
judicial warrant. James Percival, the general counsel for the Department
of Homeland Security, recently defended the department’s policy and
wrote that “deep-state actors in the federal government have for decades
told ICE officers that they may not enter a fugitive alien’s home even
with a final order of removal and administrative warrant.”
We disagree.
We
previously sat in the seat he now occupies, serving in both Republican
and Democratic administrations; this is not a partisan issue. We
disagree not only with Mr. Percival’s position but also with his
characterization of lawyers at the Department of Homeland Security and
elsewhere who seek to uphold the rule of law.
It
is not the so-called deep state that has restrained ICE from entering
homes using only administrative warrants. It is the Fourth Amendment to
the Constitution — and the lawyers who took an oath to support and
defend it. We worked with thousands of homeland security lawyers. They
sought to ensure that the department’s actions are lawful and protect
the constitutional rights of the people its agents encounter in
day-to-day operations. Attempting to tarnish department attorneys as
“deep state” operatives for giving legal advice that is faithful to the
Constitution is not only offensive but also dangerous. It sends a
message: If you give your best professional advice and urge the
department to respect the law, you will be attacked for doing your job.
Judge
Fred Biery of the Western District of Texas issued an order releasing
five-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos and his father Adrian Conejo Arias from
the Dilley Immigration Processing Center. Liam became a symbol of the
human cost of the Trump administration’s occupying surge in Minnesota
when a camera caught him standing in the cold with a blue bunny hat and
backpack while government agents arrested the child. Judge Biery’s
short, poignant order delivers a comprehensive civics lesson laced with
contempt for what the judge calls “the perfidious lust for unbridled
power.”
[. . .]
Judge Biery may have fired off a bare bones opinion, but it only takes a handful of sentences to lay out the legal issue:
Civics
lesson to the government: Administrative warrants issued by the
executive branch to itself do not pass probable cause muster. That is
called the fox guarding the henhouse. The Constitution requires an
independent judicial officer.
This is, of
course, exactly right. ICE has been conducting enforcement actions based
on administrative warrants — essentially permission slips the executive
branch writes for itself — rather than judicial warrants supported by
probable cause. The Fourth Amendment requires the latter. This has
always been the case, and the administration keeps lying about it.
We noted that verdict yesterday but it's worth noting again especially when Joe's the one weighing in on it.
Secretary of Play War Pete Hegseth continues his attack on US Senator Mark
Kelly. The TV personality learned at FOX "NEWS" that you can repeat any
lie and people may believe you. As usual, Pete's gotten a number of
the brain dead to think he can legally demote Kelly for comments he
made. As usual, Panties Pete is learning that the bulk of Americans are
not stupid. Julie Roland (FULCROM) explains:
Pete
Hegseth's attacks on Senator Mark Kelly represent such an astonishing
threat to the foundation of our democracy that over forty-one retired
high-ranking military leaders have come together to sound off in
protest.
While the Trump Administration was
conducting Caribbean boat strikes of questionable legality, Kelly posted
a video wherein he and other lawmakers reminded servicemembers that
they should feel empowered to refuse to follow an unlawful order. He
didn't mention the strikes; he was correct on the law, yet Secretary
Hegseth wrote in a letter of censure that Kelly's speech "bring[s]
discredit upon the armed forces," "prejudices good order and
discipline," and amounts to "conduct unbecoming an officer," threatening
him with a demotion and cuts to his benefits. These antics are so
un-American that King George would be tickled.
As
outlined in the amicus brief submitted by the Vet Voice Foundation along
with dozens of Admirals and Generals, no retired servicemember can
lawfully be sanctioned for making factual statements. But while
Hegseth's arguments have no basis, a bogus claim could still set a
dangerous precedent if Kelly loses, which would, as the venerable
veterans articulated in their brief, make it "unclear what
constitutional protection would remain for veterans wishing to express
public disagreement with a present Administration…" In other words, if a
veteran can get punished for this, what just happened to freedom of
speech?
As a prior Lieutenant Commander in the
Navy, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. I felt
proud to defend the doc that holds our Bill of Rights. Similarly, as I
learned to fire hellfire missiles and rockets, I was comforted by the
constant reminder of my obligation to disobey unlawful orders. When
Admirals lectured us on judgment and ethics, I could detect the checks
and balances in the subtext of their speeches and felt reassured. This
is not the message the Secretary of War is sending today. Hegseth's
subtext says something more like: shut up and don't you dare challenge
us.
Let's wind down with this from Senator Elizabeth Warren's office:
“The cuts to federal student
lending in President Trump’s OBBBA will make it more difficult for
Americans to finance their educations—opening the door for private
lenders to swoop in on vulnerable borrowers and their families”
“[These findings] underscore
an urgent need for oversight of the private lending market as these
companies prepare to cash in on the Administration’s agenda”
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Elizabeth
Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs Committee, along with Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer
(D-N.Y.) and U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ranking Member of the
Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee; Richard
Blumenthal (D-Conn.); Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii); Ron Wyden (D-Ore.); Chris
Van Hollen (D-Md.); Ed Markey (D-Mass.); and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.),
released a new report revealing the findings of their investigation into
how private student loan lenders will reap the benefits from cuts to
federal student loan access enacted in Republicans’ Big, Beautiful Bill
(OBBBA). The report is the first Congressional analysis of the impacts
of the OBBBA’s student loan restrictions on the private lending market.
“Our report confirms what I’ve long sounded the alarm about: the Big
Beautiful Bill is a massive giveaway to private student loan lenders,” said Senator Warren in a separate statement.
Instead of helping sketchy private lenders profit from our college
affordability crisis, the Trump administration should be lowering costs
for students and borrowers.”
“The anticipated expansion of the role of private lending is deeply
concerning, since private student loan lenders have a long record of
predatory practices that raise costs for borrowers and deprive them of
basic consumer protections,” wrote the senators.
OBBBA set new caps on federal student loan borrowing for graduate
students and others, paving the way for a significant expansion of the
private student loan market. The private student loan market currently
accounts for approximately 8 percent of student loan debt, but represents more than
40 percent of student loan-related complaints submitted to the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau. The senators pressed six significant
private student loan lenders, Citizens, College Ave, Navient, Nelnet,
Sallie Mae, and SoFi—which, combined, lent over $14.7 billion via
private student loans in 2024—to provide details on their policies,
lending activity, and future plans related to OBBBA. The investigation
found that:
There is a history of persistent predatory behavior in the
private student loan market - and major lenders have been expanding
their student loan activity each year;
Private student loan lenders expect more students to turn to
private loans due to OBBBA’s loan limits, and at least one lender is
already making plans to expand its loan offerings in response to this
policy change;
Most of the private lenders surveyed offer minimal
protections for borrowers who are defrauded by their schools or who face
a sudden school closure;
Half of the private lenders surveyed either have sold student loans to private equity firms or plan to do so in the future; and
Private lenders do not yet have concrete plans in place to
expand customer service capacity if they increased their student loan
activity.
“Private student loan lenders have a record of utilizing abusive
practices, including lying to borrowers about the availability of debt
cancellation, autopay discounts, and unemployment protections for
borrowers,” the senators warned.
“The Trump administration continues to capitulate to big corporations
and special interest – all while increasing the pain and costs for
American families. Higher education is a ticket for the middle class,
and Republicans are trying to destroy this opportunity,” said Leader Schumer.
“Our findings were horrific – but unfortunately not shocking. The
so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ forces students to turn to the predatory
private student loan market to finance their education. And, as our
report finds, this will expose students to predatory lending practices
and a lack of consumer protections. Senate Democrats will continue to
fight to protect students and borrowers so that anyone, regardless of
income or family background, can have a chance at higher education.”
“This report makes it even more clear that by placing an arbitrary
cap on federal student loans, President Trump and his Republican allies
are making it more expensive for everyday students to pursue higher
education. Why? To support huge tax breaks for themselves and their
billionaire buddies,” said Senator Hirono. “Students
should be able to pursue higher education without taking on a lifetime
of debt. I will continue to do everything in my power to ensure that we
put an end to abusive practices that exploit borrowers, to institute
further consumer protections, and to prevent companies from cashing in
on this regime’s political agenda.”
“Instead of addressing the rising cost of higher education, the Trump
Administration and Republicans have slashed access to federal student
loans – limiting opportunities for American students to pursue degrees,
especially in fields where we face workforce shortages. Private lenders
are eager to profit off these harmful restrictions, and more students
will be at risk of falling victim to deceptive, predatory practices,” said Senator Van Hollen.
“Trump and MAGA Republicans’ Big Ugly Bill has made borrowing for
college and graduate school riskier and more expensive, pushing the
dream of higher education further out of reach for working and
middle-class Americans,” said Senator Markey. “I’ll continue to fight to
defend borrowers from predatory lenders and restore loan protections
for students.”
“The Republican vision of ‘Families Lose, Billionaires Win’ is
leading to less affordable student loan repayment options and a higher
risk of folks falling victim to predatory lending, which overwhelmingly
harms working families,” said Senator Merkley. “As
private lenders prepare to cash in on this disastrous agenda, our report
makes clear that urgent oversight is needed to protect borrowers and
ensure they can access affordable higher education for generations to
come.”
In response to the findings, the senators called for careful
oversight of any new private loan offerings targeting students and
families affected by the federal loan caps and for experts to examine
potential impacts of private lenders selling student loans to private
equity firms.
“One year into the Trump Administration, President Trump and
Secretary McMahon have made countless efforts to strip federal support
from student loan borrowers as part of their crusade to dismantle the
Department of Education…[These findings] underscore an urgent need for
oversight of the private lending market as these companies prepare to
cash in on the Administration’s agenda,” the senators concluded.
