Anti-Anti-Nazi Barbarian Hordes are Knocking Down the Gates

[admin]

Raskin: ‘You just have to know how to read’ to know Trump is blowing past the U.S. Constitution
by Jen Psaki and Jamie Raskin
Inside with Jen Psaki
MSNBC
Mar 23, 2025 #jamieraskin #trump #constitution

Congressman Jamie Raskin reacts to the Trump administration's increasingly aggressive rhetoric targeting courts.



Transcript

>> OKAY, SO RIGHT NOW, JUST TO
SUM IT.
>> UP, I.
>> KNOW YOU ALL HAVE BEEN PAYING
VERY CLOSE.
>> ATTENTION. BUT DONALD TRUMP
IS IGNORING
>> COURT ORDERS.
>> HE'S ATTACKING EVERY ASPECT
OF THE LEGAL
>> SYSTEM, INCLUDING LAW FIRMS.
AND HIS
THREATS AGAINST JUDGES CONTINUE
TO RISE. AND I
>> JUST WANT TO
>> START BY STATING, PERHAPS,
WHAT SOUNDS EXTREMELY OBVIOUS
HERE. THIS IS NOT NORMAL.
>> AND I MEAN BY
>> HISTORICAL STANDARDS, TOO. I
MEAN,
>> IGNORING A JUDGE'S ORDER IS
NOT AT
>> ALL NORMAL.
>> INSULTING AND ATTACKING A
JUDGE ON SOCIAL
>> MEDIA, OR
>> WHATEVER FORM OF
COMMUNICATIONS THERE MAY HAVE
BEEN AT MOST POINTS IN HISTORY,
IS NOT NORMAL. AND CALLING FOR A
JUDGE'S IMPEACHMENT SIMPLY
BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE THEIR
RULING IS DEFINITELY NOT NORMAL.
I MEAN, LOOK, LOTS OF PRESIDENTS
HAVE BEEN MAD AT LOTS OF JUDGES
IN THE PAST, THROUGHOUT HISTORY
I MEAN.
>> THROUGHOUT HISTORY, BOTH
PRESIDENTS OF BOTH PARTIES HAVE
HAD COURTS RULE
>> AGAINST THEM, BUT NONE OF
THEM ACTED
>> LIKE DONALD TRUMP.
>> LET'S GO BACK TO 1952.
PRESIDENT TRUMAN SEIZED CONTROL
OF STEEL MILLS TO
>> MAKE SURE
>> THERE WAS CONTINUED
PRODUCTION DURING THE KOREAN
WAR.
>> THE SUPREME COURT SAID HE
ACTED
>> UNCONSTITUTIONALLY, WHICH
WOULD MAKE ANY PRESIDENT MAD,
RIGHT? EVEN IRATE. BUT DID
TRUMAN IGNORE THEM? DID HE CALL
FOR THE JUSTICES TO BE
IMPEACHED? OF COURSE NOT. HE
IMMEDIATELY ORDERED THE RETURN
OF THE STEEL MILLS
>> TO THEIR
>> OWNERS, EVEN THOUGH THEIR
WORKERS IMMEDIATELY WENT ON
STRIKE.

THAT TAKES US TO 1974.
THE SUPREME COURT DEALT A HUGE
BLOW, OF COURSE, TO PRESIDENT
NIXON, ORDERING HIM TO HAND
>> OVER THE WATERGATE TAPES. AND
NIXON
>> COMPLIED, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS
THE NAIL IN
>> THE COFFIN FOR HIS ENTIRE
PRESIDENCY.
>> AND I'M NOT EXCUSING ANYTHING
HE
>> DID HERE.
>> OBVIOUSLY, I'M MAKING A
DIFFERENT POINT. BUT HE DIDN'T
CALL FOR THE JUSTICES TO STEP
DOWN. HE ACTUALLY STEPPED DOWN
HIMSELF. HE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A
CHOICE, RESIGNING FROM OFFICE
ONLY TWO WEEKS LATER.

THEN THERE WAS THE TIME IN 2006,
THE SUPREME COURT
>> RULED THAT
>> PRESIDENT GEORGE W BUSH
OVERSTEPPED HIS AUTHORITY IN
ORDERING WAR CRIME TRIALS FOR
DETAINEES AT GUANTANAMO BAY.
>> YES, TRUE.
>> BUT LISTEN TO HOW BUSH
RESPONDED TO THAT RULING AT A
PRESS CONFERENCE THAT VERY SAME
DAY.

>> "I HAVEN'T.
>> HAD A CHANCE TO FULLY REVIEW
>> THE FINDINGS
>> OF THE
>> SUPREME COURT.
>> I WANT
>> TO ASSURE YOU THAT WE TAKE
>> THEM VERY SERIOUSLY.
>> I WILL
>> PROTECT THE PEOPLE,
>> AND AT
>> THE SAME
>> TIME, CONFORM WITH THE
FINDINGS OF THE SUPREME COURT."

>> LOOK, I'M NOT EXCUSING ANYTHING
THAT LED TO THAT RULING. BUT THE
POINT HERE IS HE SAID,
>> "I WILL CONFORM WITH THE
FINDINGS OF THE COURT." I HAVEN'T
HEARD A WHOLE LOT OF THAT
LATELY, HAVE WE?

IN 2016, THE SUPREME
>> COURT BLOCKED PRESIDENT
OBAMA'S IMMIGRATION PLAN THAT
WOULD HAVE SHIELDED AS MANY AS
5 MILLION PARENTS FROM BEING
DEPORTED, AND IT WOULD HAVE ALSO
HELPED THEM FIND LEGAL WORK IN
THE UNITED STATES. HE WAS
FRUSTRATED ,AND HE WAS UPSET,
BELIEVE ME, BUT HE ABIDED BY THE
RULING.

THEN THERE WAS THE TIME
IN 2022, WHEN THE SUPREME COURT
BLOCKED THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION
FROM ENFORCING ITS VACCINE OR
TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR LARGE
PRIVATE COMPANIES. THIS WAS KIND
OF THE PART OF THE HEIGHT OF
COVID, OF COURSE. BIDEN DIDN'T
AGREE WITH IT, BELIEVE ME, HE
DIDN'T AGREE WITH IT, BUT HERE'S
WHAT HE SAID IN RESPONSE.

"THE COURT HAS RULED THAT MY
ADMINISTRATION CANNOT USE THE
AUTHORITY GRANTED TO IT BY
CONGRESS TO REQUIRE THIS
MEASURE, BUT THAT DOES NOT STOP
ME FROM USING MY VOICE AS
PRESIDENT."

LOOK, THE POINT HERE
IS THERE HAVE BEEN MOMENTS IN JUST
ABOUT EVERY PRESIDENCY --
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS,
DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTS -- WHEN A
COURT RULED AGAINST THE GUY
SITTING IN THE OVAL OFFICE.
NONE OF THESE PRESIDENTS LIKED
THE OUTCOME, BUT THEY ABIDED BY
THE COURT'S DECISION. AND RIGHT
NOW DONALD TRUMP IS DOING THE
OPPOSITE. BY ANY STANDARD, IT
CERTAINLY APPEARS THAT HE AND
HIS ADMINISTRATION DELIBERATELY
VIOLATED A COURT ORDER WHEN THEY
FLEW HUNDREDS OF VENEZUELAN
IMMIGRANTS TO EL SALVADOR TO BE
IMPRISONED WITHOUT ANY DUE
PROCESS. THAT'S WHAT
DIFFERENTIATES US AS A COUNTRY,
BY THE WAY. AND NOW THEY'RE
STONEWALLING THE JUDGE WHO'S
TRYING TO FIND OUT IF HIS ORDER
WAS WILLFULLY IGNORED.

ON THURSDAY, THE JUDGE ACCUSED THE
GOVERNMENT OF "EVADING
ITS OBLIGATIONS," SAYING THEIR
RESPONSE HAD BEEN "WOEFULLY
INSUFFICIENT." AND DURING A
HEARING ON FRIDAY, HE PUT IT
LIKE THIS, "THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT
BEING TERRIBLY COOPERATIVE AT
THIS POINT." NO KIDDING. AND HE
ALSO VOWED TO GET TO THE BOTTOM
OF WHETHER THEY VIOLATED HIS
ORDER, AND WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE.

THIS ISN'T JUST A SQUABBLE WITH
THE JUDGE. THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION IS CLAIMING OUT
LOUD, BY THE WAY, THAT THEY'RE
WILLING TO DEFY A CO-EQUAL
BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.
>> "WE'RE NOT STOPPING. I DON'T
>> CARE WHAT THE JUDGES THINK. I
DON'T CARE
>> WHAT THE LEFT THINKS. WE'RE
COMING.
>> THIS JUDGE HAS NO RIGHT
>> TO ASK
>> THOSE QUESTIONS.
>> YOU HAVE ONE
>> UNELECTED FEDERAL JUDGE
TRYING TO CONTROL FOREIGN
POLICIES, TRYING TO CONTROL THE
ALIEN ENEMIES
>> ACT, WHICH THEY HAVE NO
BUSINESS PRESIDING OVER. THE
JUDGE HAD NO BUSINES,
>> NO POWER
>> TO DO WHAT HE DID.
>> THIS JUDGE.
>> HAD NO RIGHT TO DO THAT."

>> OF COURSE, THE JUDGE
>> HAD EVERY RIGHT
>> TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS HE
WANTED. BY THE WAY, THAT'S HOW
THE SYSTEM WORKS. THIS IS THE
SOUND THAT WE JUST HEARD: ONE
BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT BASICALLY
GIVING THE MIDDLE FINGER TO
ANOTHER BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HEARING. TRUMP
AND HIS ADMINISTRATION ARE
TRYING TO OVERTAKE THE COURTS.
THEY'RE TRYING TO BECOME THE
ARBITERS OF THE LAW SO THEY
DON'T HAVE TO ABIDE BY IT.
THEY'RE TRYING TO UPEND THE
SEPARATION OF POWERS THAT HAVE
BEEN SEPARATE FOR HUNDREDS OF
YEARS FOR A REASON. AND THIS
ISN'T ONE OF THOSE TIMES WHEN
BUCKING TRADITION AND BREAKING
NORMS IS A GOOD THING -- SOMETIMES
IT IS -- BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY
DANGEROUS. THREATS AGAINST
JUDGES ARE ON THE RISE IN THE
FORM OF, THIS IS HOW IT WAS
DESCRIBED IN THE NEW YORK TIMES,
"BOMB THREATS, ANONYMOUS CALLS TO
DISPATCH POLICE, SWAT TEAMS TO
HOME ADDRESSES, EVEN THE
DELIVERY OF PIZZAS, WHICH IS A
SEEMINGLY INNOCUOUS PRANK, BUT
ONE THAT CARRIES A PRETTY CLEAR
MESSAGE. "THEY KNOW WHERE YOU AND
YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS LIVE."

AND THE ADMINISTRATION HAS NOW
TURNED TO TARGETING TOURISTS, AND
LEGAL IMMIGRANTS, WHO HAVE
EXPRESSED VIEWS THAT THE
GOVERNMENT BELIEVES TO THREATEN
NATIONAL SECURITY AND UNDERMINE
FOREIGN POLICY. THAT'S THEIR
ARGUMENT. THAT'S THE KIND OF
THING THAT WILL KEEP HAPPENING
AS TRUMP TRIES TO WIPE A BRANCH
OF GOVERNMENT THAT IS THE LAST
LINE OF DEFENSE.

SO WE CAN SEE THERE'S A PROBLEM HERE, TO STATE
THE OBVIOUS, AND WE'RE FACED
WITH SOME TOUGH QUESTIONS. I
MEAN, WHAT IS THE SOLUTION, AND
WHAT IS OUR SYSTEM ABLE TO DO?
AND AGAIN, THOSE ARE TRICKY
QUESTIONS TO ANSWER BECAUSE
HISTORY, AS I'VE NOTED HERE,
DOESN'T EXACTLY SERVE AS A
GUIDE.

JOINING ME NOW IS
CONGRESSMAN JAMIE RASKIN OF
MARYLAND. HE'S THE TOP DEMOCRAT
ON THE HOUSE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE. HE IS THE PERFECT
PERSON TO TALK TO ABOUT
HISTORICAL PRECEDENT. SO
LET ME JUST START WITH KIND OF
WHERE I ENDED THERE. I MEAN, YOU
SAID THERE'S AN ATTACK ON THE
CONSTITUTION THAT FEELS VERY
CLEAR HERE. I THINK A QUESTION A
LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE IS WHAT CAN
BE DONE TO STOP IT?

[JAMIE RASKIN] WE GOT 125 CASES THAT HAVE
BEEN FILED ACROSS THE COUNTRY,
AND 50 FEDERAL COURTS HAVE
ALREADY ENTERED
>> TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
>> ORDERS OR
>> PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS
>> AGAINST TRUMP. SO LET'S START
WITH THE POSITIVE NEWS THAT THE
COURTS ARE WORKING.
>> THEY'RE DOING THEIR JOB.
>> THAT'S WHY THEY'RE TALKING
>> ABOUT IMPEACHING
>> ALL THESE
>> FEDERAL JUDGES.
>> THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ATTACKING
JUDGE BOASBERG FOR INSISTING
>> ON ANSWERS.
>> BECAUSE YOU CAN'T DISOBEY AN
ORDER OF A FEDERAL COURT.
>> AS CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS
EMPHASIZED,
>> THIS WEEK,
>> THE PROPER RESPONSE
>> TO DISAGREEMENT
>> WITH THE SUBSTANCE
>> OF A
>> JUDICIAL OPINION,
>> IS TO
>> APPEAL THE OPINION.
>> NOT TO TRY TO IMPEACH THE
JUDGE. AND CERTAINLY NOT FOR PEOPLE
TO GO OUT AND VISIT THREATS UPON
THE JUDGE AND THE JUDGE'S
FAMILY. AND SO WE'VE GOT TO PLAY
THESE CASES OUT IN COURT.
>> THE TRUMP. ADMINISTRATION
HAS JUST THROWN.
>> CAUTION TO THE WINDS.
>> I MEAN, THE
>> THE GREAT EXAMPLE OF THIS, OF
COURSE, IS THE BIRTHRIGHT
CITIZENSHIP EXECUTIVE ORDER. THE
FIRST SENTENCE OF
>> THE 14TH AMENDMENT
>> SAYS, "ALL PERSONS BORN OR
NATURALIZED IN THE UNITED STATES
AND SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION
THEREOF, ARE CITIZENS OF THE
UNITED STATES." IT IS JUST AS
PLAIN AS DAY. AND WE HAVE OBAMA
JUDGES, BIDEN JUDGES, REAGAN
JUDGES, TRUMP JUDGES, ALL
>> STRIKING DOWN
>> WHAT TRUMP DID.
>> IN FACT, THE
>> REAGAN JUDGE SAID IT WAS THE
EASIEST CASE HE'D EVER DECIDED
IN HIS LIFE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO
BE A LAWYER TO KNOW WHAT'S WRONG
WITH IT. YOU JUST
>> HAVE TO KNOW
>> HOW TO READ. AND IN CASE
AFTER CASE, THEY SAY YOU HAVE
JUST TOTALLY BLOWN PAST
>> THE CONSTITUTION.
>> SO WE'VE GOT TO STAND UP
FOR
>> THE INDEPENDENCE
>> OF THE JUDICIARY.
>> AND WE SEE THIS HAPPENING
>> ALL OVER THE WORLD.
WHEN COURTS BLOCK AN AUTOCRATIC
EXECUTIVE ,OR SOMEONE WITH
DICTATORIAL AMBITIONS,
>> THEY BEGIN TO ATTACK THE
JUDGES, THEY ATTACK THE LAWYERS,
THEY ATTACK THE LAW FIRMS.
THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING IN
AMERICA RIGHT NOW. AND SO THE WHOLE COUNTRY HAS GOT TO STAND UP FOR THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY AND FOR THE RULE OF LAW.

[admin]

Trump Regime ATTACKS Judge for SOCIAL SECURITY Ruling
by Michael Popok
MeidasTouch
Mar 23, 2025

The Trump Administration in another act of open defiance is threatening to shut down the Social Security Administration and cut off computer access for ALL employees by intentionally defying a new Federal judge’s temporary restraining order to cut off DOGE/MUSK access to personal and private social security data. Michael Popok examines Judge Hollander’s order, and how Trump is secretly trying to cut Social Security and medicare benefits by blaming the recipients and forcing them to show up weekly at the few remaining field offices at the same time.



Transcript

The Trump administration is threatening
to shut down the Social Security
Administration in response to a
temporary restraining order issued by a
federal judge in Maryland that denies
Elon Musk and Doge and his affiliates
from accessing personal financial and
medical information in social security
servers and computers unless it's
anonymous and randomized. She has denied
them continued access to our most
sensitive private and personal
information, as a major invasion of
privacy. And the response from Donald
Trump and his administration is, "We're just
going to shut down the Social Security
administration," which is what they're
effectively trying to do anyway, since
they're also at the same time trying to
"root out fraud," which is
less than 1% of the budget of Social
Security, by forcing people to go on a
weekly or monthly basis, with an
application and a piece of ID in hand, to
their local Social Security office to
prove their identity.

I'm Michael Popok. Let's talk about
what's really going on here, on the Meidas
Touch Network and on Legal AF.

Judge Hollander, appointed by Barack Obama, sits
in Maryland in the federal court
there, or sits in Baltimore, Maryland in
the federal court there, and she's ruled
in a scathing -- I mean this is how many
times we have to use the word "scathing," a
scathing rebuke of the Trump
administration that they have
provided absolutely no rationale why
Elon Musk and Doge, and people in Doge
who want to apparently remain anonymous
to protect their own privacy, an irony
that was pointed out by the judge: "So you
want to protect your own privacy, but you
want to destroy the privacy, and have no
regard for the privacy of millions of
other Americans?
And are accessing data directly, with
personal identifiable information, their
records, for what purpose? None is
provided at all." And the judge said, "Look
if you need this information for some
sort of government efficiency review, or
survey or 'fraud rooting out,' then you
can do it with anonymous data and
information. But you don't need actual
personal identifying information at this
juncture, and you haven't showed me why
you need it." The judge went further and
said, "You've developed a sledgehammer to
kill a fly," and hoisting the Trump
administration up on its own petard, "in
order to distract from their failing policies. And the fact that
the economy is circling the drain, they
release things about every two weeks
that nobody cares about, as a shiny
object that MAGA media can then chase
after. First it was the Jeffrey Epstein
files, which we've all seen those files
already they've come out through the
criminal prosecution of Jazain Maxwell
who worked for him and helped him obtain
the young girls to rape then it was
JFK the JFK files the JF who voted for
Donald Trump wanting the JFK files
released i don't know rfk Jr well then
it make a foyer request why are we
wasting time and money because it's
destructive because it it it it tries to
grab and stamp on the news cycle while
Donald Trump's having a bad news day but
in the R sorry the JFK files presumably
about his assassination again with data
we already had there were 400 pieces of
personal in identifying information
including social security numbers of
congressional staffers back in the 1960s
and people were upset about that and a
lot of those people are long gone and
dead and so the American people's
reaction to wait a minute they leaked
the actual they took the black tape off
the names and the personal social
security information of people from the
60s so The judge said in her ruling, that
went over about 130 pages, she said, "Look
how upset people were about 60y old data.
What do you think's happening? What do
you think the American people are going
to feel when they know that Doge is
rooting around in the drawers of
the Social Security administration?" Now
this is also consistent with the with
what Trump's trying to do he's trying to
cut off Social Security and Medicare
without telling people that he's cutting
off Social Security and Medicare because
in order to to get their couple of
trillion dollars in savings they've got
to look to Social Security Medicare
Medicaid Veterans Benefits and the rest
they've already attacked vet veterans
benefits thinking that they won't notice
um come the midterms or the next
presidential election donald Trump
doesn't care about the next presidential
election because he's long gone he's
probably long gone after the midterms so
the way that they're quietly quietly
eliminating social security where 70
million people meaning voters rely on
social security as their primary income
source and the way he's eliminating it
is well there's a very small amount of
fraud less than 1% i got an idea and it
totals about $70 billion i mean not
nothing i wouldn't want it sucked out of
my bank account i think I'd notice but
in but it's not given the total trillion
dollars of budget for the Social
Security Administration it's a
relatively small problem i mean if a
store in your local mall or shopping
center lost 1% of its goods off the
floor in shrinkage they'd be thrilled
because they're losing much more than
that so I'm not saying ignore it but his
solution for that is to try to again
make it harder on the disabled and
elderly people and seniors who are maybe
not great with technology making it
harder on them to get the benefits to
which they are entitled so he's making
people who can't do online ID
identification to to verify their IDs
come into one of the local field offices
now look has anybody gone to a local
social security field office i have both
for my mother and for my wife to get her
her first social security card you
thought that your local Department of
Motor Vehicle was bad okay the people
that got fired from the Department of
Motor Vehicle I think are working at
Social Security but I just I'm kidding
for those that are working hard as civil
servants you know I appreciate you but
you don't it's not a fun experience it's
not a great experience and you better
have a day you know of time to
kill and waste waiting around for them
to call your number. And on top of that he's closing
more than 40 field offices -- 40. So he's
making less field offices, he's
cutting the staff at the social security,
and he's forcing millions of people to
come in on a weekly or monthly basis to
identify and reidentify their
identity. What does that tell you? That
tells you the Trump administration wants
to cut people off of their social
security, and then blame them, a user error,
for doing it, and not claim that he's
hitting entitlements or social security
and Medicare. Wake up seniors and those
that rely on Social Security and
Medicare. Your checks that you
rely on, your direct deposits, are under
attack. and for Donald Trump's acting
administrator for the Social Security
Administration Lee Dudick to then say
which is the the standard callous line
of the Republicans all right I'm going
to follow this order to it to a tea and
I feel in my interpretation that we've
got to cut off all access for all
employees of the Social Security
Administration not just Doge because I
interpret it even though it's not plain
English the his interpretation I
interpret it to mean that everybody's a
Doge and Musk affiliate including my
regular employees so I'm going to cut my
regular employees off from uh from the
servers and from financial data
effectively shutting the Social Security
Administration you know and that's all
because of the leftist radical judge all
right first of all that is a insane and
and bad faith interpretation of the
judge's temporary restraining order and
it's just another way for them to delay
and be able to have the talking point
that a single federal judge in a single
district is standing away of Donald
Trump's policies yes his insane policies
to hurt America especially and
particularly in red states and rural
areas where do people think the 70
million uh Americans that rely primarily
in Social Security Medicare Medicaid and
veterans benefits where do they think
they primarily live in Trump country
where they voted for him you know making
it entirely a bitter pill to swallow for
th for those people in the electorate
now you have multiple ways that the
Trump administration is uh disobeying or
openly defying federal judges orders
he's either actually doing that missing
deadlines not making people available
even though the judges have ordered them
for deposition or for testimony in court
um attacking them not in the courtroom
because they're cowards not to their
face but behind the scenes or in the
public with the press secretary with
Elon Musk with members of Congress with
the paid social media influencers who
work for the White House you know uh
calling for their impeachment saying
that they're radical that they're
lunatic that they're corrupt
just because you don't like the decision
based on an examination of law and the
constitution doesn't make them
lunatics never did before you notice
none of the lawyers are doing this
except maybe Pam Bondi uh you see none
of the lawyers in their briefing are
calling the judge lunatics um unhinged
corrupt it's only outside the courtroom
trying to influence what's going on
inside the courtroom and and so that's
one level of disobedience and open
defiance and the other one is to have
people that in the administration the
acting social security administrator Lee
Dudick look everybody in the eye and lie
to the American people i I can't
understand the temporary restraining
order i don't understand what it means
so I'm going to interpret it this way
i'm going to shut down the Social
Security Administration and let and let
a judge run the government yeah and
which which by the way he's acting
Social Security Administration head
eventually he's gonna have to go for a
confirmation hearing and he's gonna have
to answer as to why he's defying federal
judges federal judges are under attack
something that that um Chief Justice
Roberts predicted at the beginning of
the year in his state of the judges and
state of the the court address and
report and it and it's happened and him
stepping in and trying to get Donald
Trump to back off with statements like
you really shouldn't call for
impeachments of judges you should only
appeal it was sort of weak tea don't you
think given what these judges are up
against including death
threats.

So what I expect Judge
Hollander to do is she's going to get
this motion to clarify, she's going to
say, "Which part of the English language
of my order do you not understand? I did
not tell you to shut down the
Social Security Administration, then try to blame me."
So she'll use these statements being made
in the press against them again, and
she'll reinforce her
temporary restraining order, which lasts
another 14 days, to allow the sides to
properly brief the issues up to a
preliminary injunction. And if the
Trump administration doesn't like it,
they can follow the lead of the Chief
Justice of the United States that told
them to take it up to the Fourth
Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers
Maryland, go get a three judge panel to
rule in your favor just like everybody
else. And if you don't like the results
there, then try to take it to the United
States Supreme Court on an emergency
writ. That's the way it's done.
and all this other you know BS and all
this other extrajudicial outside the
courthouse courtroom attacks that are
being done to to be distractive to be uh
diversionary tactics um so that people
don't notice the failing Trump
administration we see the failing Trump
administration we talk about it all the
time right here on the Meidas Touch
Network and on Legal AF

***************************

Trump official threatens to shut down Social Security if DOGE can’t access private data
by Matt Durr; [email protected]
michiganlive
Published: Mar. 21, 2025, 10:50 a.m.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2025/03/trum ... -data.html

The acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration says he wants to “turn off” the agency’s IT systems following a court ruling issued Thursday. According to Bloomberg, the warning came following a judge’s ruling that forbid the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing any non-anonymized data collected by the SSA.

Interim Social Security Commissioner Lee Dudek criticized the decision by U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, saying the order is too broad as it applies to DOGE affiliates.Dudek said his agency could use DOGE affiliates in anti-fraud efforts and in IT systems.

“As it stands, I will follow it exactly and terminate access by all SSA employees to our IT systems,” Dudek said, before also adding “Really, I want to turn it off and let the courts figure out how they want to run a federal agency.”

It is unclear if the decision will impact the agency’s ability to issue Social Security benefits; approximately 72.5 million Americans receive monthly benefits from the SSA.

Dudek said building and laptop access for DOGE team members were revoked following the order. DOGE employees were also ordered to delete or purge any previously obtained SSA data.

The ruling does allow for DOGE team members to access redacted or anonymized information. Team members can also gain access to the full data if they receive the same standard training that federal employees who access Social Security data systems currently receive.

President Donald Trump created DOGE via an executive order signed in January. Billionaire Elon Musk has been tasked with running the agency and has already made major cuts to several government agencies. In an interview earlier this month, Musk called Social Security “the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time.”

Hollander’s ruling is the latest court decision that has restricted DOGE’s efforts to access the private data of Americans collected by various government agencies. DOGE has previously been denied access to data systems used by the Treasury, the Department of Education and more. However, ongoing lawsuits may overturn those rulings.

*********************

Ex-Social Security leader sounds alarm: DOGE staff cuts will lead to ‘total collapse’ of systems
by Matt Durr | [email protected]
Updated: Mar. 03, 2025, 7:15 p.m.| Published: Mar. 03, 2025, 11:15 a.m.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2025/03/ex-s ... stems.html

WASHINGTON -- The former head of the Social Security Administration is warning Americans of possible benefit interruptions following newly announced cuts at the agency.

“People should start saving now,” said former SSA Commissioner Martin O’Malley in an interview with CNBC.

O’Malley’s comments come in response to planned cuts taking place at the SSA. Last week, the agency issued a press release saying it aims to cut the workforce from approximately 57,000 employees to 50,000.

“The agency plans to reduce the size of its bloated workforce and organizational structure, with a significant focus on functions and employees who do not directly provide mission critical services,” reads a portion of a press release from the SSA confirming cuts are coming.

However, the Associated Press reported the number of cuts could be as high as 50% of employees. The SSA has denied that half the workforce could be cut.

Regardless, O’Malley -- who served as the SSA Commissioner from 2023 to 2024 -- says cutting that much staff will result in major problems. According to O’Malley, the agency is already understaffed and operates on old technology.

“This is going to lead to total system collapse,” O’Malley told The Baltimore Sun. “It’s a very old, fragile computer system in (COBOL) language, which isn’t even in schools anymore.”

In a social media post made Friday, O’Malley went on to say he expects benefit interruptions to start soon.

“Seniors and people on disabilities should start putting away what money they can now,” O’Malley wrote. “The actions being taken by the Trump/Musk Administration to gut customer service and drive employees out of this greatly under-staffed agency will break Social Security as we have known it for 90 years. Benefit check interruptions coming soon.”

An estimated 72.5 million people in the U.S. receive Social Security benefits.

The cuts to SSA are coming as part of President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) agenda. That agency has been tasked with reducing government spending and the overall size of the government. Since Trump established DOGE in January through executive order, the agency has made significant cuts to numerous other government agencies.

The cuts have been made through the cancelling of grants, contracts, leases and workforce reductions.

The SSA says some employees will be offered a chance to voluntarily retire or resign through a pair of programs. Others will be eligible to receive Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments. Those offers will require the employee to separate from the agency by a specific date.

Other workforce cuts will be made “from reduction-in-force (RIF) actions that could include abolishment of organizations and positions. RIF also can include directed reassignments from one position to another position in the agency,” the SSA said.

[admin]

The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans. U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat about upcoming military strikes in Yemen. I didn’t think it could be real. Then the bombs started falling.
by Jeffrey Goldberg
The Atlantic
March 24, 2025, 12:06 PM ET
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... hsiSZ2YMi_

The world found out shortly before 2 p.m. eastern time on March 15 that the United States was bombing Houthi targets across Yemen.

I, however, knew two hours before the first bombs exploded that the attack might be coming. The reason I knew this is that Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, had texted me the war plan at 11:44 a.m. The plan included precise information about weapons packages, targets, and timing.

This is going to require some explaining.

The story technically begins shortly after the Hamas invasion of southern Israel, in October 2023. The Houthis—an Iran-backed terrorist organization whose motto is “God is great, death to America, death to Israel, curse on the Jews, victory to Islam”—soon launched attacks on Israel and on international shipping, creating havoc for global trade. Throughout 2024, the Biden administration was ineffective in countering these Houthi attacks; the incoming Trump administration promised a tougher response.

This is where Pete Hegseth and I come in.

On Tuesday, March 11, I received a connection request on Signal from a user identified as Michael Waltz. Signal is an open-source encrypted messaging service popular with journalists and others who seek more privacy than other text-messaging services are capable of delivering. I assumed that the Michael Waltz in question was President Donald Trump’s national security adviser. I did not assume, however, that the request was from the actual Michael Waltz. I have met him in the past, and though I didn’t find it particularly strange that he might be reaching out to me, I did think it somewhat unusual, given the Trump administration’s contentious relationship with journalists—and Trump’s periodic fixation on me specifically. It immediately crossed my mind that someone could be masquerading as Waltz in order to somehow entrap me. It is not at all uncommon these days for nefarious actors to try to induce journalists to share information that could be used against them.

I accepted the connection request, hoping that this was the actual national security adviser, and that he wanted to chat about Ukraine, or Iran, or some other important matter.

Two days later—Thursday—at 4:28 p.m., I received a notice that I was to be included in a Signal chat group. It was called the “Houthi PC small group.”

A message to the group, from “Michael Waltz,” read as follows: “Team – establishing a principles [sic] group for coordination on Houthis, particularly for over the next 72 hours. My deputy Alex Wong is pulling together a tiger team at deputies/agency Chief of Staff level following up from the meeting in the Sit Room this morning for action items and will be sending that out later this evening.”

The message continued, “Pls provide the best staff POC from your team for us to coordinate with over the next couple days and over the weekend. Thx.”

The term principals committee generally refers to a group of the senior-most national-security officials, including the secretaries of defense, state, and the treasury, as well as the director of the CIA. It should go without saying—but I’ll say it anyway—that I have never been invited to a White House principals-committee meeting, and that, in my many years of reporting on national-security matters, I had never heard of one being convened over a commercial messaging app.

One minute later, a person identified only as “MAR”—the secretary of state is Marco Antonio Rubio—wrote, “Mike Needham for State,” apparently designating the current counselor of the State Department as his representative. At that same moment, a Signal user identified as “JD Vance” wrote, “Andy baker for VP.” One minute after that, “TG” (presumably Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, or someone masquerading as her) wrote, “Joe Kent for DNI.” Nine minutes later, “Scott B”—apparently Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, or someone spoofing his identity, wrote, “Dan Katz for Treasury.” At 4:53 p.m., a user called “Pete Hegseth” wrote, “Dan Caldwell for DoD.” And at 6:34 p.m., “Brian” wrote “Brian McCormack for NSC.” One more person responded: “John Ratcliffe” wrote at 5:24 p.m. with the name of a CIA official to be included in the group. I am not publishing that name, because that person is an active intelligence officer.

The principals had apparently assembled. In all, 18 individuals were listed as members of this group, including various National Security Council officials; Steve Witkoff, President Trump’s Middle East and Ukraine negotiator; Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff; and someone identified only as “S M,” which I took to stand for Stephen Miller. I appeared on my own screen only as “JG.”

That was the end of the Thursday text chain.

After receiving the Waltz text related to the “Houthi PC small group,” I consulted a number of colleagues. We discussed the possibility that these texts were part of a disinformation campaign, initiated by either a foreign intelligence service or, more likely, a media-gadfly organization, the sort of group that attempts to place journalists in embarrassing positions, and sometimes succeeds. I had very strong doubts that this text group was real, because I could not believe that the national-security leadership of the United States would communicate on Signal about imminent war plans. I also could not believe that the national security adviser to the president would be so reckless as to include the editor in chief of The Atlantic in such discussions with senior U.S. officials, up to and including the vice president.

The next day, things got even stranger.

At 8:05 a.m. on Friday, March 14, “Michael Waltz” texted the group: “Team, you should have a statement of conclusions with taskings per the Presidents guidance this morning in your high side inboxes.” (High side, in government parlance, refers to classified computer and communications systems.) “State and DOD, we developed suggested notification lists for regional Allies and partners. Joint Staff is sending this am a more specific sequence of events in the coming days and we will work w DOD to ensure COS, OVP and POTUS are briefed.”

At this point, a fascinating policy discussion commenced. The account labeled “JD Vance” responded at 8:16: “Team, I am out for the day doing an economic event in Michigan. But I think we are making a mistake.” (Vance was indeed in Michigan that day.) The Vance account goes on to state, “3 percent of US trade runs through the suez. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. The strongest reason to do this is, as POTUS said, to send a message.”

The Vance account then goes on to make a noteworthy statement, considering that the vice president has not deviated publicly from Trump’s position on virtually any issue. “I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now. There’s a further risk that we see a moderate to severe spike in oil prices. I am willing to support the consensus of the team and keep these concerns to myself. But there is a strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc.”

A person identified in Signal as “Joe Kent” (Trump’s nominee to run the National Counterterrorism Center is named Joe Kent) wrote at 8:22, “There is nothing time sensitive driving the time line. We’ll have the exact same options in a month.”

Then, at 8:26 a.m., a message landed in my Signal app from the user “John Ratcliffe.” The message contained information that might be interpreted as related to actual and current intelligence operations.

At 8:27, a message arrived from the “Pete Hegseth” account. “VP: I understand your concerns – and fully support you raising w/ POTUS. Important considerations, most of which are tough to know how they play out (economy, Ukraine peace, Gaza, etc). I think messaging is going to be tough no matter what – nobody knows who the Houthis are – which is why we would need to stay focused on: 1) Biden failed & 2) Iran funded.”

The Hegseth message goes on to state, “Waiting a few weeks or a month does not fundamentally change the calculus. 2 immediate risks on waiting: 1) this leaks, and we look indecisive; 2) Israel takes an action first – or Gaza cease fire falls apart – and we don’t get to start this on our own terms. We can manage both. We are prepared to execute, and if I had final go or no go vote, I believe we should. This [is] not about the Houthis. I see it as two things: 1) Restoring Freedom of Navigation, a core national interest; and 2) Reestablish deterrence, which Biden cratered. But, we can easily pause. And if we do, I will do all we can to enforce 100% OPSEC”—operations security. “I welcome other thoughts.”

A few minutes later, the “Michael Waltz” account posted a lengthy note about trade figures, and the limited capabilities of European navies. “Whether it’s now or several weeks from now, it will have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes. Per the president’s request we are working with DOD and State to determine how to compile the cost associated and levy them on the Europeans.”

The account identified as “JD Vance” addressed a message at 8:45 to @Pete Hegseth: “if you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.” (The administration has argued that America’s European allies benefit economically from the U.S. Navy’s protection of international shipping lanes.)

The user identified as Hegseth responded three minutes later: “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC. But Mike is correct, we are the only ones on the planet (on our side of the ledger) who can do this. Nobody else even close. Question is timing. I feel like now is as good a time as any, given POTUS directive to reopen shipping lanes. I think we should go; but POTUS still retains 24 hours of decision space.”

At this point, the previously silent “S M” joined the conversation. “As I heard it, the president was clear: green light, but we soon make clear to Egypt and Europe what we expect in return. We also need to figure out how to enforce such a requirement. EG, if Europe doesn’t remunerate, then what? If the US successfully restores freedom of navigation at great cost there needs to be some further economic gain extracted in return.”

A screenshot from the Signal group shows debate over the president’s views ahead of the attack.

That message from “S M”—presumably President Trump’s confidant Stephen Miller, the deputy White House chief of staff, or someone playing Stephen Miller—effectively shut down the conversation. The last text of the day came from “Pete Hegseth,” who wrote at 9:46 a.m., “Agree.”

After reading this chain, I recognized that this conversation possessed a high degree of verisimilitude. The texts, in their word choice and arguments, sounded as if they were written by the people who purportedly sent them, or by a particularly adept AI text generator. I was still concerned that this could be a disinformation operation, or a simulation of some sort. And I remained mystified that no one in the group seemed to have noticed my presence. But if it was a hoax, the quality of mimicry and the level of foreign-policy insight were impressive.

It was the next morning, Saturday, March 15, when this story became truly bizarre.

At 11:44 a.m., the account labeled “Pete Hegseth” posted in Signal a “TEAM UPDATE.” I will not quote from this update, or from certain other subsequent texts. The information contained in them, if they had been read by an adversary of the United States, could conceivably have been used to harm American military and intelligence personnel, particularly in the broader Middle East, Central Command’s area of responsibility. What I will say, in order to illustrate the shocking recklessness of this Signal conversation, is that the Hegseth post contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing.

The only person to reply to the update from Hegseth was the person identified as the vice president. “I will say a prayer for victory,” Vance wrote. (Two other users subsequently added prayer emoji.)

According to the lengthy Hegseth text, the first detonations in Yemen would be felt two hours hence, at 1:45 p.m. eastern time. So I waited in my car in a supermarket parking lot. If this Signal chat was real, I reasoned, Houthi targets would soon be bombed. At about 1:55, I checked X and searched Yemen. Explosions were then being heard across Sanaa, the capital city.

I went back to the Signal channel. At 1:48, “Michael Waltz” had provided the group an update. Again, I won’t quote from this text, except to note that he described the operation as an “amazing job.” A few minutes later, “John Ratcliffe” wrote, “A good start.” Not long after, Waltz responded with three emoji: a fist, an American flag, and fire. Others soon joined in, including “MAR,” who wrote, “Good Job Pete and your team!!,” and “Susie Wiles,” who texted, “Kudos to all – most particularly those in theater and CENTCOM! Really great. God bless.” “Steve Witkoff” responded with five emoji: two hands-praying, a flexed bicep, and two American flags. “TG” responded, “Great work and effects!” The after-action discussion included assessments of damage done, including the likely death of a specific individual. The Houthi-run Yemeni health ministry reported that at least 53 people were killed in the strikes, a number that has not been independently verified.

A screenshot from the Signal group shows reactions to the strikes.

On Sunday, Waltz appeared on ABC’s This Week and contrasted the strikes with the Biden administration’s more hesitant approach. “These were not kind of pinprick, back-and-forth—what ultimately proved to be feckless attacks,” he said. “This was an overwhelming response that actually targeted multiple Houthi leaders and took them out.”

The Signal chat group, I concluded, was almost certainly real. Having come to this realization, one that seemed nearly impossible only hours before, I removed myself from the Signal group, understanding that this would trigger an automatic notification to the group’s creator, “Michael Waltz,” that I had left. No one in the chat had seemed to notice that I was there. And I received no subsequent questions about why I left—or, more to the point, who I was.

Earlier today, I emailed Waltz and sent him a message on his Signal account. I also wrote to Pete Hegseth, John Ratcliffe, Tulsi Gabbard, and other officials. In an email, I outlined some of my questions: Is the “Houthi PC small group” a genuine Signal thread? Did they know that I was included in this group? Was I (on the off chance) included on purpose? If not, who did they think I was? Did anyone realize who I was when I was added, or when I removed myself from the group? Do senior Trump-administration officials use Signal regularly for sensitive discussions? Do the officials believe that the use of such a channel could endanger American personnel?

Brian Hughes, the spokesman for the National Security Council, responded two hours later, confirming the veracity of the Signal group. “This appears to be an authentic message chain, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain,” Hughes wrote. “The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security.”

William Martin, a spokesperson for Vance, said that despite the impression created by the texts, the vice president is fully aligned with the president. “The Vice President’s first priority is always making sure that the President’s advisers are adequately briefing him on the substance of their internal deliberations,” he said. “Vice President Vance unequivocally supports this administration’s foreign policy. The President and the Vice President have had subsequent conversations about this matter and are in complete agreement.”

I have never seen a breach quite like this. It is not uncommon for national-security officials to communicate on Signal. But the app is used primarily for meeting planning and other logistical matters—not for detailed and highly confidential discussions of a pending military action. And, of course, I’ve never heard of an instance in which a journalist has been invited to such a discussion.

Conceivably, Waltz, by coordinating a national-security-related action over Signal, may have violated several provisions of the Espionage Act, which governs the handling of “national defense” information, according to several national-security lawyers interviewed by my colleague Shane Harris for this story. Harris asked them to consider a hypothetical scenario in which a senior U.S. official creates a Signal thread for the express purpose of sharing information with Cabinet officials about an active military operation. He did not show them the actual Signal messages or tell them specifically what had occurred.

All of these lawyers said that a U.S. official should not establish a Signal thread in the first place. Information about an active operation would presumably fit the law’s definition of “national defense” information. The Signal app is not approved by the government for sharing classified information. The government has its own systems for that purpose. If officials want to discuss military activity, they should go into a specially designed space known as a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF—most Cabinet-level national-security officials have one installed in their home—or communicate only on approved government equipment, the lawyers said. Normally, cellphones are not permitted inside a SCIF, which suggests that as these officials were sharing information about an active military operation, they could have been moving around in public. Had they lost their phones, or had they been stolen, the potential risk to national security would have been severe.

Hegseth, Ratcliffe, and other Cabinet-level officials presumably would have the authority to declassify information, and several of the national-security lawyers noted that the hypothetical officials on the Signal chain might claim that they had declassified the information they shared. But this argument rings hollow, they cautioned, because Signal is not an authorized venue for sharing information of such a sensitive nature, regardless of whether it has been stamped “top secret” or not.

There was another potential problem: Waltz set some of the messages in the Signal group to disappear after one week, and some after four. That raises questions about whether the officials may have violated federal records law: Text messages about official acts are considered records that should be preserved.

“Under the records laws applicable to the White House and federal agencies, all government employees are prohibited from using electronic-messaging applications such as Signal for official business, unless those messages are promptly forwarded or copied to an official government account,” Jason R. Baron, a professor at the University of Maryland and the former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, told Harris.

“Intentional violations of these requirements are a basis for disciplinary action. Additionally, agencies such as the Department of Defense restrict electronic messaging containing classified information to classified government networks and/or networks with government-approved encrypted features,” Baron said.

Several former U.S. officials told Harris and me that they had used Signal to share unclassified information and to discuss routine matters, particularly when traveling overseas without access to U.S. government systems. But they knew never to share classified or sensitive information on the app, because their phones could have been hacked by a foreign intelligence service, which would have been able to read the messages on the devices. It is worth noting that Donald Trump, as a candidate for president (and as president), repeatedly and vociferously demanded that Hillary Clinton be imprisoned for using a private email server for official business when she was secretary of state. (It is also worth noting that Trump was indicted in 2023 for mishandling classified documents, but the charges were dropped after his election.)

Waltz and the other Cabinet-level officials were already potentially violating government policy and the law simply by texting one another about the operation. But when Waltz added a journalist—presumably by mistake—to his principals committee, he created new security and legal issues. Now the group was transmitting information to someone not authorized to receive it. That is the classic definition of a leak, even if it was unintentional, and even if the recipient of the leak did not actually believe it was a leak until Yemen came under American attack.

All along, members of the Signal group were aware of the need for secrecy and operations security. In his text detailing aspects of the forthcoming attack on Houthi targets, Hegseth wrote to the group—which, at the time, included me—“We are currently clean on OPSEC.”

Shane Harris contributed reporting.

About the Author, Jeffrey Goldberg. Jeffrey Goldberg is the editor in chief of The Atlantic and the moderator of Washington Week With The Atlantic.

****************************

[admin]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... aul-weiss/

https://www.federalregister.gov/documen ... s-coie-llp


https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69 ... ce-of-the/

[admin]

ACLU Reacts to President Trump’s Executive Order Targeting Jenner & Block
by ACLU
Press Release
March 25, 2025 9:00 pm
Media Contact
[email protected]
(212) 549-2666
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
United States

WASHINGTON — In response to President Trump issuing an Executive Order today attacking the legal profession, Cecillia Wang, National Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union, issued the following statement:

“Today, President Trump issued his sixth directive in four weeks targeting law firms and individual lawyers for sanctions, because they have represented clients or brought litigation Trump dislikes, or he perceives them to be political enemies. This is part of a larger effort to knock out the pillars of a free society—journalists, universities, the legal profession and the courts.

“Not long ago, no American would have entertained the notion that a U.S. president would issue fiats, left and right, to quell disfavored viewpoints—this is despotic, unpresidential behavior.

“The president is carrying out a fear campaign, but good lawyers are brave. We will continue to provide zealous and ethical representation to our clients, and we will speak our minds.”

*********************

Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Addresses Risks from Jenner & Block
by The White House
March 25, 2025

SUSPENDING SECURITY CLEARENCES TO PROTECT THE NATIONAL INTEREST: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to suspend security clearances held by individuals at Jenner & Block LLP (Jenner) pending a review of whether such clearances are consistent with the national interest.

• Security clearances held by Jenner employees will be immediately suspended, pending a review of whether their access to sensitive information is consistent with the national interest.

o The Federal Government will halt all material and services, including sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) access provided to Jenner and restrict its employees’ access to government buildings.

o Federal Agencies will also refrain from hiring Jenner employees unless specifically authorized.

• To ensure taxpayer dollars no longer go to contractors whose earnings subsidize activities not aligned with American interests, the Federal Government will terminate contracts that involve Jenner.

• The practices of Jenner will be reviewed under Title VII to ensure compliance with civil rights laws against racial bias.

ADDRESSING ROGUE LAW FIRMS: President Trump believes that lawyers and law firms that engage in conduct detrimental to critical American interests should not be subsidized by American taxpayers or have access to our Nation’s secrets.

• Jenner pursues partisan goals, supports attacks against women and children based on the denial of the biological reality of sex, and backs the obstruction of efforts to prevent illegal aliens from committing horrific crimes and trafficking deadly drugs within our borders.

• Jenner has been accused of discriminating against its own employees on the basis of race and other categories prohibited by civil rights laws, including through the use of race-based “targets.”

• Jenner was also “thrilled” to re-hire Andrew Weissmann, a prosecutor known for his unethical behavior, including his role in engaging in partisan prosecution as part of Robert Mueller’s entirely unjustified investigation.

o Weissmann’s career has been rooted in weaponized government and abuse of power, including devastating tens of thousands of American families who worked for the now defunct Arthur Andersen LLP, only to have his unlawfully aggressive prosecution overturned by the Supreme Court.

o The numerous reports of Weissman’s dishonesty, including pursuit of nonexistent crimes, bribery to foreign nationals, and overt demand that the federal government pursue a political agenda against President Trump, is a concerning indictment of Jenner’s values and priorities.

A RETURN TO ACCOUNTABILITY: President Trump is delivering on his promise to end the weaponization of government and protect the nation from partisan and bad faith actors who exploit their influence.

• In addition to Jenner, President Trump has also taken action to hold other major law firms accountable.

• This Executive Order aligns with President Trump’s priority on refocusing government operations to serve the citizens of the United States.

• It builds on President Trump’s previous actions, such as signing an Executive Order on his first day in office to end the weaponization of the Federal government and ensure accountability for past misconduct.

• It follows his revocation of security clearances held by intelligence officials who falsely claimed Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation during the 2020 election.

***********************

Trump targets Jenner & Block in latest executive order aimed at law firms
by Mike Scarcella and David Thomas
The Guardian
March 25, 20254:39 PM MDT Updated a day ago

• Firm involved in cases challenging Trump on transgender, asylum curbs
• Trump faults film's past employment of prosecutor Andrew Weissmann
• Order follows White House deal with Paul Weiss firm

WASHINGTON, March 25 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump expanded his attacks on major U.S. law firms on Tuesday as he signed an executive order targeting Jenner & Block, which represents clients challenging some of his major policies and formerly employed a prosecutor involved in a special counsel investigation of his 2016 campaign.

The order resembled ones that Trump previously issued against prominent firms Perkins Coie and Paul Weiss. The orders suspended security clearances for their lawyers and restricted their access to government buildings, officials and federal contracting work.

The Republican president cited Jenner & Block's past employment of Andrew Weissmann, a top federal prosecutor involved in former U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation that detailed Russian contacts with Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump, who faced criminal charges in four separate cases after his first term as president, has complained that large law firms worked with Democrats against him and his allies. White House Staff Secretary Will Scharf, in explaining Trump's action, accused Jenner & Block of "weaponization of the legal system against American principles and values."

Jenner & Block said in a statement that the executive order resembled one that "has already been declared unconstitutional" by a federal judge.

"We remain focused on serving and safeguarding our clients’ interests with the dedication, integrity, and expertise that has defined our firm for more than one hundred years and will pursue all appropriate remedies,” Jenner & Block said.

In all, Trump has signed executive orders targeting four major U.S. law firms. Paul Weiss subsequently made a deal with Trump to escape the executive order. The order "could easily have destroyed our firm," Paul Weiss Chairman Brad Karp said in a letter to its lawyers and staff on Sunday defending the agreement.

Jenner & Block has been involved in litigation challenging policies pursued by Trump since he returned to office in January.

In one case, Jenner & Block and other firms won a court ruling that blocked enforcement of a Trump executive order halting federal funding to healthcare providers that offer gender transition treatments to people under 19. In another, the firm is on the legal team representing immigrant-rights groups challenging Trump's efforts to curb asylum rights.

Jenner & Block also is representing an environmental group in a lawsuit accusing Trump's Environmental Protection Agency of illegally freezing grant money.

The firm employs several former officials from the administrations of Democratic Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, as well as lawyers who previously worked with the U.S. House of Representatives committee that investigated the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump's supporters.

Weissmann was at the firm from 2006 to 2011, and returned there in 2020 after serving on Mueller's prosecution team. Weissmann did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Perkins Coie sued the administration this month, accusing Trump of exceeding his powers.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in Washington on March 12 temporarily blocked parts of Trump's order against Perkins Coie, finding the firm's lawsuit was likely to succeed.

"I am sure many in the legal profession are watching in horror about what Perkins Coie is going through here," Howell said.

Trump on Friday directed the Justice Department to recommend similar moves against lawyers and law firms that handle immigration cases or that sued the government over the past eight years - a group that includes many of the largest U.S. firms.

Bar associations and legal experts said this month that Trump's targeting of law firms could cast a chill over the freedom held by lawyers to represent clients of their choice.

Reporting by Steve Holland, Nandita Bose and Mike Scarcella in Washington and David Thomas in Chicago; Editing by David Bario, Deepa Babington, Daniel Wallis and Matthew Lewis

[admin]

https://www.spiegel.de/international/wo ... b705521fb7

Zum Inhalt springen
International
Abonnement
Anmelden

Menü
Startseite
International
World
Donald Trump
Hegseth, Waltz, Gabbard: Private Data and Passwords of Senior U.S. Security Officials Found Online
Suche öffnen
Hegseth, Waltz, Gabbard
Private Data and Passwords of Senior U.S. Security Officials Found Online
Donald Trump's most important security advisers used Signal to discuss an imminent military strike. Now, reporting by DER SPIEGEL has found that the contact data of some of those officials, including mobile phone numbers, is freely accessible on the internet.
By Patrick Beuth, Jörg Diehl, Roman Höfner, Roman Lehberger, Friederike Röhreke und Fidelius Schmid
26.03.2025, 21.20 Uhr
Zur Merkliste hinzufügen
X.com
Facebook
E-Mail
Link kopieren
U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: His contact info could be found using a commercial people finder.

Bild vergrößern
U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: His contact info could be found using a commercial people finder. Foto: Annabelle Gordon / AFP
Private contact details of the most important security advisers to U.S. President Donald Trump can be found on the internet. DER SPIEGEL reporters were able to find mobile phone numbers, email addresses and even some passwords belonging to the top officials.

To do so, the reporters used commercial people search engines along with hacked customer data that has been published on the web. Those affected by the leaks include National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

Most of these numbers and email addresses are apparently still in use, with some of them linked to profiles on social media platforms like Instagram and LinkedIn. They were used to create Dropbox accounts and profiles in apps that track running data. There are also WhatsApp profiles for the respective phone numbers and even Signal accounts in some cases.

As such, the reporting has revealed an additional grave, previously unknown security breach at the highest levels in Washington. Hostile intelligence services could use this publicly available data to hack the communications of those affected by installing spyware on their devices. It is thus conceivable that foreign agents were privy to the Signal chat group in which Gabbard, Waltz and Hegseth discussed a military strike.

Numbers Linked to Signal Accounts
It remains unclear, however, whether this extremely problematic chat was conducted using Signal accounts linked to the private telephone numbers of the officials involved. Tulsi Gabbard has declined to comment. DER SPIEGEL reporting has demonstrated, though, that privately used and publicly accessible telephone numbers belonging to her and Waltz are, in fact, linked to Signal accounts.

The U.S. newsmagazine The Atlantic revealed on Monday that Gabbard, Waltz and Hegseth, along with CIA Director John Ratcliffe and additional officials, discussed an imminent military strike against the Houthi militia in Yemen in a Signal chat. The information shared among the participants included intelligence information and precise attack plans. According to the Atlantic, Waltz added the editor-in-chief of the magazine, Jeffrey Goldberg, to the chat group. Precisely why he did so remains unclear.

The White House confirmed the scandal after the fact. Trump insisted that it did not include classified content, a question that is of particular relevance since members of the U.S. government are not permitted to share such information over Signal. The U.S. special envoy for Ukraine and the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, was even in Russia while participating in the chat group.

Pete Hegseth's WhatsApp profile photo

Bild vergrößern
Pete Hegseth's WhatsApp profile photo Foto: Screenshot / DER SPIEGEL
DER SPIEGEL was able to find some of the contact information for Gabbard, Hegseth and Waltz in commercial databases, while other information was in so-called password leaks, which are hardly a rarity on the internet. One example is the 2019 discovery by Troy Hunt, who found 773 million email addresses and more than 21 million passwords in a hacker forum.

Since then, there have been numerous additional leaks. Criminals are constantly compiling new collections from hacks, usually to sell them on forums.

It was particularly easy for DER SPIEGEL reporters to discover Hegseth’s mobile number and email address. They turned to a commercial provider of contact information that is primarily used by companies for sales, marketing and recruitment.

DER SPIEGEL sent the provider a link to Hegseth’s LinkedIn profile and received a Gmail address and a mobile phone number in return, in addition to other information. A search of leaked user data revealed that the email address and, in some cases, even the password associated with it, could be found in over 20 publicly accessible leaks. Using publicly available information, it was possible to verify that the email address was used just a few days ago.

The mobile number provided, meanwhile, led to a WhatsApp account that Hegseth apparently only recently deleted. The profile photo showed a shirtless Hegseth in a baseball cap and necklace. Comparisons with other photos of the U.S. secretary of defense using facial recognition software were able to confirm that the photo on the WhatsApp profile was indeed Hegseth.

Several Passwords in Leaked Database
U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz: Mobile number and email address found using a commercial people finder.

Bild vergrößern
U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz: Mobile number and email address found using a commercial people finder. Foto: Mandel Ngan / AFP
Waltz’s mobile number and email address could be found using the same service provider. The mobile phone number could even be found using a people search engine popular in the U.S. DER SPIEGEL reporters were also able to find several passwords for Waltz’s email address in leaked databases. The information also led to Waltz’s profiles for Microsoft Teams, LinkedIn, WhatsApp and Signal.

National Intelligence Director Gabbard was seemingly more careful with her data than her two male colleagues. She apparently had her own data blocked in the commercial contact search engines that contained the data of Hegseth and Waltz. But her email address was to be found on WikiLeaks and Reddit.

Gabbard’s email address is available in more than 10 leaks. One of those also contains a partial telephone number, which, when completed, leads to an active WhatsApp account and a Signal profile.

"Exposed data from top politicians can be used by hackers to launch convincing phishing attacks and gain access to devices and various services such as email, chat tools and PayPal,” says Donald Ortmann, a specialist in information security, information procurement and social engineering. He supports companies and authorities following cyberattacks.

"In addition, deepfake attacks using images and sound available online can be launched to participate in virtual meetings,” says Ortmann. Compromised accounts also enable hackers to "install malware, monitor communications and attempt political blackmail.”

No Response
To protect the private contact information of the U.S. politicians, DER SPIEGEL is not publishing the telephone numbers, email addresses and passwords it found. Furthermore, no tests were performed to determine if the passwords for the email addresses are still active. DER SPIEGEL informed Gabbard, Hegseth and Waltz of its findings.

DER SPIEGEL also sought comment from the Defense Department, the National Security Council and the office of the national intelligence director. Thus far, no response has been received.

Personal inquiries sent to Tulsi Gabbard and Michael Waltz via WhatsApp and Signal were delivered, according to the confirmation function. But they have thus far remained

Cover: SPIEGEL GESCHICHTE
SPIEGEL GESCHICHTE
Cover: SPIEGEL SPEZIAL
SPIEGEL SPEZIAL
Cover: SPIEGEL COACHING
SPIEGEL COACHING
Cover: Dein SPIEGEL
Dein SPIEGEL
Cover: SPIEGEL CHRONIK
SPIEGEL CHRONIK
Cover: S-Magazin
S-Magazin
Cover: SPIEGEL BESTSELLER
SPIEGEL BESTSELLER
Cover: SPIEGEL WISSEN
SPIEGEL WISSEN
SPIEGEL Gruppe
Abo Abo kündigen Shop manager magazin Harvard Business manager 11FREUNDE Werbung Jobs MANUFAKTUR SPIEGEL Akademie SPIEGEL Ed
Impressum Datenschutz Nutzungsbedingungen Teilnahmebedingungen Cookies & Tracking Newsletter Kontakt Hilfe & Service Text- & Nutzungsrechte
Facebook
Instagram
Wo Sie uns noch folgen können




https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -passwords

[admin]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... dates.html

https://apnews.com/article/vance-greenl ... 06d030b60f

[admin]

https://apnews.com/article/vance-greenl ... 06d030b60f

[admin]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mThYMBfOa ... FIAg%3D%3D


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UhH1RhLrWP0

[admin]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XScVpgdmU ... RheQ%3D%3D