New attorney general moves to align Justice Department with Trump's priorities: Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi have both argued the Justice Department under Biden unfairly targeted conservatives, most notably Trump himself. by Ryan Lucas Houston Public Media: A Service of the University of Houston February 5, 2025, 8:36 PM
On her first day in charge at the Justice Department, Attorney General Pam Bondi on Wednesday issued a series of directives aimed at aligning the department with President Trump and his agenda, including establishing a task force to examine the alleged weaponization of the justice system and reviving the federal death penalty.
The Senate confirmed Bondi on Tuesday evening and she was sworn in Wednesday in a ceremony at the White House. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas administered the oath of office for Bondi, whose husband and mother were by her side.
She takes over at a time of tumult at the Justice Department, where the Trump administration has pushed out several senior career officials over the past few weeks as the new leadership looks to assert control over the department and implement the president's agenda.
Justice Department changes rattle current and former agency veterans
In little more than a week, the Trump administration has fired people who prosecuted the president and reassigned other career officials.
On her first day on the job, Bondi signed 14 memos addressed to all Justice Department employees. Some of the directives roll back guidelines put in place under the Biden administration, while others strike new ground. Many appear to offer details to implement executive orders President Trump signed, including on the weaponization of the federal government and on combatting antisemitism.
One of the memos, for example, establishes the "Weaponization Working Group," which is tasked with reviewing "the activities of all department and agencies exercising civil or criminal enforcement authority of the United States over the last four years."
Trump and Bondi have both argued that the department under the Biden administration unfairly targeted conservatives, most notably Trump himself. Trump was charged in two federal cases: for election interference in 2020 and for hoarding classified documents. Both cases were dropped after he won election to a second term.
The department's previous leadership rejected the allegation of political motivations, and pointed to multiple criminal cases against prominent Democrats during the Biden administration.
Focus on "improper aims"
According to the Bondi memo, the new working group will "identify instances where a department's or agency's conduct appears to have been designed to achieve political objectives or other improper aims rather than pursuing justice of legitimate governmental objectives."
It mentions several specific things that it will examine, including "weaponization" by former special counsel Jack Smith, the prosecutors and the investigators who took part in the "unprecedented raid on President Trump's home." FBI agents searched Trump's Mar-a-Lago club and his residence as part of its classified documents case.
It also will examine "federal cooperation with the weaponization" by the Manhattan district attorney and the New York state attorney general "to target President Trump, his family and his businesses." The Manhattan district attorney brought state criminal charges against Trump for falsifying business records to conceal a payment to an adult film star.
The Jan. 6 Capitol riot will also come under review, it says. The working group will look at "the pursuit of improper investigative tactics and unethical prosecutions" related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack. Trump granted clemency to every defendant accused of committing crimes that day in one of his first acts after returning to the White House.
The memo says the Justice Department will provide quarterly reports to the White House on the review's progress.
Another memo sets up a Joint Task Force for Oct. 7 to "prioritize seeking justice for victims" of the Hamas-led attacks on Israel. The task force also aims to address the "ongoing threat posed by Hamas and its affiliates" and to combat "antisemitic acts of terrorism and civil rights violations in the homeland."
Two other memos relate to the federal death penalty.
One lifts the moratorium on federal executions, and instructs federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty in cases involving the murder of a law enforcement official and capital crimes "committed by aliens who are illegally present in the United States."
The other relates to President Biden's decision in his waning days in office to commute the death sentences of 37 people on federal death row to life in prison. The Bondi memo directs the Justice Department to, among other things assist local prosecutors in pursuing death sentences under state law against the 37 individuals who received commutations.
Bondi also signed a memo that puts department attorneys on notice that they are expected to "zealously" defend, advance and protect the interests of the United States—interests that are set by the president.
It says that when DOJ attorneys "refuse to advance good-faith arguments by declining to appear in court or sign briefs, if undermines the constitutional order and deprives the President of the benefit of his lawyers."
It goes on to say that any department attorney who "because of their personal views or judgments declines to sign a brief or appear in court, refuses to advance good-faith arguments on behalf of the Administration, or otherwise delays or impedes the Department's mission will be subject to discipline and potentially termination."
***********************
New Attorney General Vows to Have DOJ Go After Trump Foes by Glenn Kirschner Justice Matters Feb 6, 2025 All the "King's" Men: Trump's lackeys and their disservice to America
Shortly after being sworn in, Attorney General Pam Bondi published a memo regarding "ending the weaponization of the federal government."
The problem is, the priorities in this memo signal the death of the independence of the Department of Justice. DOJ's priorities will shift from focusing on crimes that impact the American people to seeking revenge against Donald Trump's foes.
The Bondi memo promises to pursue "Special Counsel Jack Smith and his staff," "Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (and) New York Attorney General Letitia James, and their respective staffs," and those who investigated and prosecuted the crimes committed at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
This obscene pervasion of the rule of law and the independence of the Department of Justice constitutes ACTUAL weaponization of the DOJ.
This video discusses the new reporting and the rule-of-law--busting Bondi memo.
Transcript
[Glenn Kirschner] So friends, today is a sad and somber day, because today we are mourning the death of an independent Department of Justice. Please join me in a moment of silence. Thank you. Let's talk about that, because Justice matters.
Hey all. Glenn Kirschner here. So friends, upon being sworn in as attorney general Pam Bondi issued a memo a bunch of memos actually but we're going to focus on one in particular because it signals the death of an independent Department of Justice and the birth of a department of justice that protects Donald Trump and pursues his enemies rather than remaining loyal to the rule of law and protecting the American people let's start with the new report reporting this from USA Today headline AG Pam Bondi sworn in vows to end weaponization of justice department and that article begins moving swiftly to align the justice department with Donald Trump's agenda attorney general Pam Bondi on Wednesday issued a flurry of directives including the creation of a weaponization working group to investigate Federal and local prosecutions of trump that she said were overly politicized so she won't be focusing on making America safe for the people of the United States rather she'll be focusing on making America unsafe if not a living hell for anybody who dared cross Donald Trump anybody who DED to investigate or prosecute the obvious crimes Donald Trump committed all my editorial addition the article continues although the department historically has insisted on remaining independent of the White House Bondi made clear that she was working to overhaul a doj that Trump had insisted is both biased against him and against political conservatives in general the weaponization working group will look at everything from the investigations into Trump's actions before during and after his first term in office cases brought against him by Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg and New York attorney general Leticia James it will also look at doj's investigations into crimes we saw committed with our own eyes the January 6 2021 assault on the US Capital by a violent mob of trump supporters the moves came on the same day Bondi was sworn in as the nation's top law enforcement officer in a ceremony at the White House by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas at that ceremony Trump lavished Praise on Bondi his former criminal defense attorney who was also a two-term Florida attorney general and fr have a gander at this picture here Pam Bondi showing her independence of Donald Trump and the independence of the department she is now leading the Department of Justice how did she show that independence by sprinting over to the White House entering the Oval Office and being sworn in by Justice Clarence Thomas now let's have a quick look at select portions of Attorney General bondi's weap ionization memo memorandum for all Department employees from the attorney general subject restoring the integrity and credibility of the Department of Justice the Department of Justice must take immediate and overdue steps to restore the integrity and credibility with the public that we are charged with protecting and to ensure that the Department's Personnel are ready and willing to Faithfully implement the policy agenda of the duly elected president of the United States sorry I was just looking for the part where the Attorney General said that she and the employees of the Department of Justice would support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic but no it's just pretty much supporting and defending Donald Trump these steps are required because as president Trump pointed out following his second inauguration the prior Administration and allies throughout the country engaged in an unprecedented third world weaponization of prosecutorial power to upend the Democratic process sounds more like a 2 A.M rambling Donald Trump social media post doesn't it thus the American people have witnessed the previous administration engage in a systematic campaign against its perceived political opponents weaponizing the legal force of numerous federal law enforcement agencies and the intelligence Community against those perceived political opponents in the form of Investigations prosecutions civil enforcement actions and other related actions and so the Attorney General I guess thinks that the way to remedy the evil of using the Department of Justice to go after one's political enemies is to use the Department of Justice to go after one's political enemies the reconciliation and restoration of the department of Justice's core values can only be accomplished through review and accountability the department has already started this process but much more work is required.
No one who has acted with a righteous spirit and just intentions has any cause for concern about efforts to root out corruption and weaponization.
Okay, color me cynical, but I don't believe the Attorney General when she says no one who has acted with a righteous spirit and just intentions will have any cause for concern. Why don't I believe that? Well, because FBI agents who followed the evidence regarding the January 6 crimes at the Capitol, crimes we all saw with our own eyes, have already been forced out of government, retaliated against, and 25-30 federal prosecutors who followed the facts and applied the law to the January 6th cases have been fired. So if attorney general Bondi is speaking the truth, I very much look forward to those FBI officials and those Federal prosecutors being reinstated to their jobs.
I hereby establish the weaponization working group which will be led by the Office of the Attorney General and supported by the office of the Deputy attorney general the office of legal policy the Civil Rights division the US attorney's office for the District of Colombia and other personnel as necessary to achieve the objectives set forth here in in other words we are are all in to protect Donald Trump and punish his foes and we will be going after special counsel Jack Smith and his staff Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg and his staff New York attorney general Leticia James and her staff and anybody who prosecuted the criminal cases at the United States capital on January 6th 202.
[Crumples up Memorandum]
So friends, let's finish with this. Rest in peace independent Department of Justice, date of birth July 1st 1870 and date of death February 5th 2025.
You know friends when we write the American ship and we will I look forward to seeing what Rises Up From the Ashes of a once proud once independent Department of Justice because Justice matters friends as always please stay safe please stay tuned and I look forward to talking with you all again tomorrow [Music]
Judge issues nationwide injunction blocking Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship: The judge heard arguments from lawyers for five pregnant undocumented women. by Selina Wang, Laura Romero, and Peter Charalambous abcnews February 5, 2025, 9:17 AM https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-future- ... =118460936
A federal judge in Maryland has issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship.
U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman heard arguments Wednesday over a request by five pregnant undocumented women to block Trump's Day-1 executive order seeking to redefine the meaning of the 14th Amendment to exclude the children of undocumented immigrants from birthright citizenship.
"The denial of the precious right to citizenship will cause irreparable harm," Judge Boardman said in handing down her order. "It has been said the right to U.S. citizenship is a right no less precious than life or liberty. If the court does not enjoin enforcement of the executive order, children subject to the order will be denied the rights and benefits of U.S. citizenship and their parents will face instability."
"A nationwide injunction is appropriate and necessary because it concerns citizenship," Judge Boardman said.
The ruling comes two weeks after a federal judge in Seattle criticized the Department of Justice for attempting to defend what he called a "blatantly unconstitutional" order and issued a temporary restraining order.
In her ruling, Judge Boardman said Trump's executive order "conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment."
"The U.S. Supreme court has resoundingly rejected the president's interpretation of the citizenship clause," Boardman said. "In fact, no court has endorsed the president's interpretation, and this court will not be the first."
She added that the plaintiffs would "very likely" succeed on the merits in their case against Trump's order.
During the hearing, plaintiffs' attorney Joseph Mead called the DOJ's argument a "reimagination of the 14th Amendment phrase 'subject jurisdiction.'"
"The executive order's departure from settled law is so abrupt ... it is such a departure from what we've been doing for over a century," Mead argued. "Being a citizen is the foundation for so many rights."
The five women, along with two nonprofits, filed the lawsuit against the Trump administration last month, arguing that Trump's executive order violated the constitution and multiple federal laws.
"If allowed to go into effect, the Executive Order would throw into doubt the citizenship status of thousands of children across the country, including the children of Individual Plaintiffs and Members," the lawsuit said.
Lawyers for the Department of Justice have claimed that Trump's executive order attempts to resolve "prior misimpressions" of the 14th Amendment, arguing that birthright citizenship creates a "perverse incentive for illegal immigration." If permitted, Trump's executive order would preclude U.S. citizenship from the children of undocumented immigrants or immigrants whose presence in the United States is lawful but temporary.
"Text, history, and precedent support what common sense compels: the Constitution does not harbor a windfall clause granting American citizenship to, inter alia: the children of those who have circumvented (or outright defied) federal immigration laws," DOJ lawyers argued.
The executive order had already been put on hold by U.S. District Judge John Coughenour in Seattle.
"I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar can state unequivocally that this is a constitutional order. It boggles my mind," said Coughenour last month when he issued his temporary restraining order. "Where were the lawyers when this decision was being made?"
Because Judge Coughenour's order only blocked the executive order temporarily, Judge Boardman had been asked to consider a longer-lasting preliminary injunction against the executive order.
With Trump vowing to appeal a ruling that finds his executive order unconstitutional, Wednesday's preliminary injunction could be his first opportunity to appeal to a higher court.
Members of the Trump administration spent months crafting this executive order with the understanding that it would inevitably be challenged and potentially blocked by lower courts, according to sources familiar with their planning.
While the lawsuit challenging the executive order in Seattle was brought by four state attorneys general, the five pregnant undocumented women who filed the Maryland case argued that they would be uniquely harmed by the order. With individual states and undocumented women suffering different harms under the order, the cases could present different reasons to justify blocking the order.
Monica -- a medical doctor from Venezuela with temporary protected status who joined the lawsuit under a pseudonym -- said she joined the suit because she fears her future child will become stateless, with her home country facing an ongoing humanitarian, political and economic crisis.
"I'm 12 weeks pregnant. I should be worried about the health of my child. I should be thinking about that primarily, and instead my husband and I are stressed, we're anxious and we're depressed about the reality that my child may not be able to become a U.S. citizen," she said.
*************************
Trump LOSES BIG in Court as JUDGE HITS HIM HARD by Michael Popok Legal AF Podcast MeidasTouch Feb 6, 2025
In breaking news, we have our FIRST preliminary injunction (nationwide) entered against the Trump Administration to block Trump’s executive order denying birthright citizenship to those born on US Soil. Michael Popok reports on why this is so important, how it shows the strategy of suing Trump 2-3x a day in Federal Court is working, with 32 suits, 4 TROs, and 1 Preliminary Injunction in the first 15 days of his administration, and what it means for future wins to support the rule of law.
Transcript
we got breaking news on day 15 of the Trump Administration the first Nationwide preliminary injunction has been entered by a federal judge against Donald Trump's Administration for their depraved unconstitutional Birthright citizenship executive order denying babies born on us soil US citizenship guaranteed them by the US Constitution that's a big no and a big unconstitutional for judge Deborah Borman out of the District of Maryland I want to break it down for you I want to compare it to the other four temporary restraining orders against different executive orders uh for Donald Trump so let's just do the math 32 cases have been filed against the Trump Administration that he's obtained against him four separate temporary restraining orders and one preliminary injunction by federal judges and a lot of them are the Biden federal judges so isn't that isn't that Poetic Justice isn't that Cosmic Justice I'll break it down right now I'm Michael Popo you're here on mest touch and on legal AF preliminary injunctions in my world as a lawyer are big deals and they are uh bigger batter Bolder than temporary restraining orders when you're looking at the level of types of orders that a federal judge can can issue there's like an administrative stay which is for hours sometimes days while the judge gets their mind around the briefing and the evidence for a matter that's been put before them that's on the the bottom of it right the next level up is a Full temporary restraining order which is the judge taking a Peak at the uh underlying facts and evidence as presented in a very short amount of time and saying well it looks like it's more likely than not the other party's got a very good argument here there is a constitutional violation a statutory violation a violation of something so I'm going to put a pin in this I'm going to hold the status quo now to allow for full briefing and full evidence and an evidentiary hearing and a record presentation at some later time in the very very near future that's the temporary restraining orders that we've been talking about a lot on legal a and the Midas Dutch Network the temporary restraining order about Birthright citizenships executive order stopping it in its place that was issued by judge kenor in Seattle Washington the temporary restraining order that was obtained against by two judges issued against the Trump Administration by two judges McConnell in um in Rhode Island and Ali Khan in the District of Columbia against his attempts to cut off Federal funding to all not for-profits and States those have been temporarily restrained subject to a future hearing on preliminary injunction that brings us to judge bourman who issued From the Bench it's going to be in writing soon we'll get her hands on it but she read out loud her tempor her per sorry her preliminary injunction against the Trump Administration for trying to continue to enforce the birthright citizenship executive order denying children babies born on us soil their citizenship and let me listen let me tell you what she basically said and I'm going to read to you from her her ruling her oral ruling subject to we're going to get it in writing she said the argument by the Trump Administration has been rejected by every judge that's ever looked at it that it runs counter to our nation's 250 years of history of citizenship by birth it runs counter to um aund 125 years of Supreme Court president everything about the 14th Amendment and no court has ever found that that kind of executive order uh is going to be constitutional or has adopted the interpretation of the 14th amendment by the Trump Administration and she wasn't going to be the first let me tell you a little bit about Borman before I read you from the language of her order that she read out loud what it means as a nationwide injunction and then and then also some comments made by some of the plaintiffs including pregnant women from Trinidad and other places that will just Will Make You Weep about the real life impact IRL as they say of what these depraved positions taken by the Department of Justice for Donald Trump what it means in the real world first let me tell you a little bit about judge bourman judge bourman is one of the um uh Biden appointees got confirmed by the Senate who started out as a federal public defender it's very rare she's one of very few all put on by Biden who weren't prosecutors who weren't you know Elite lawyers at some big law firms or corporations or right-wing public interest firms she she was a federal public defender and I know Federal public defenders first day on the job you get a 100 files those are your clients who are indigenous who can't afford private representation and they're looking at drug charges and immigration charges and other and other and other types of charges and she was a federal public defender doing doing God's work there she then became a Magistrate Judge which is not an article 3 confirmed by Senate judge but a judge just below that who handles a lot of the day-to-day in federal practice so she served in that role for a few years and then Biden elevated her to full-blown confirmed article 3 judge and boy she couldn't have come along quick enough for me let me read to you from her actual words so you know where this is coming from in a nationwide injunction this is what she had to say and then I want to talk to you about the back and forth she had with the Trump lawyers who lost all credibility in her courtroom I mean they've lost all credibility in all courtrooms at this point with their ridiculous ludicrous intellectually dis honest position taking with no case law and and no nothing just Donald Trump's talking points she said um she said that it was very likely that the that the plaintiff's here would succeed on the merits she said no court in the country has ever endorsed the president Trump's interpretation and this court will not be the first um particularly she said that um she looked at the 14th Amendment which was ratified in 1868 which provides automatic citizenship to those born on us soil who are subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government and which has traditionally applied to nearly everyone other than children of foreign diplomats um the lawyer for the Department of Justice for Trump said oh we don't think the framers of the 14th Amendment meant to create a loophole to give people with uncertain status or undocumented status citizenship really where does it say that everybody that came here was undocumented originally you know the people that came over on the Mayflower you know were were they documented no as a kid I loved eating cereal but as an adult I don't want all that sugar and most cereals don't give me the protein I need then I found magic spoon a nostalgically delicious cereal that tastes just like my childhood favorites but without the sugar and with a ton of protein and if you're already a magic spoon fan I've got big news magic spoon has turned their super popular cereal into high protein treats that are light crispy and taste just like those classic crunchy cereal bars magic spoons brand new treats are so delicious and have already become my favorite before or after gym snack magic spoon has literally changed the way we view our pantry in my family now when my wife and I are looking for a quick high protein snack that makes us instantly nostalgic with that warm and fuzzy comfort food feeling we reach for magic spoon new cereal bars every fre serving of magic spoon cereal has 13 g of protein 0 g of sugar and 4 G of net carbs so you can feel good about what you're eating the most popular flavors are fruity and cocoa and there's so many more magic spoon brand new treats are Crispy Crunchy Airy and an easy way to get 12 grams of protein on the go and for the first time ever magic spoon treats are available in grocery stores with delicious flavors like marshmallow and chocolatey peanut butter magic spoon Treats have replaced all my other bars just the right balance of delicious flavor great mouth feel and texture and the best part they are high in protein and low in carbs don't tell my wife but after a long day of legal AF video recording and research magic spoon has become my occasional midnight snack treat honey we're out of magic spoon again a common refrain in my household get $5 off your next order at magpole or look for magic spoon on Amazon or in your nearest grocery store that's magpole for $5 off magic spoon hold on to the dream the Justice uh sorry Boardman had to say this about it Boardman said I am not going to be the first judge to take away somebody's constitutional rights there is no she turned to the lawyer for the Department of Justice she said cite for me one case one case that is cided with your interpretation of the 14th Amendment of course there aren't any she then turned to judge kenor who is her colleague but in the Seattle branch of the federal uh court system and said judge cenor was right this is blatantly unconstitutional now his was a temporary restraining order that held the ring until we got here he's going to issue his preliminary injunction too as I've said before I've done Federal practice for 35 years I've I think one time in my entire career I ever had a temporary restraining order that didn't convert into a preliminary injunction at some point so that preliminary injunction now on full briefing and with the order that'll be coming out will give the Trump Administration the right to take an appeal that appeal because she sits in Maryland I think it's going to go to the third or fourth I think it's the fourth the fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and then based on the rulings there and I'm expecting a loss for the Trump Administration it'll go to the United States Supreme Court that's the pathway here that's why it was filed in Maryland to get a favorable appell court and a fast track over the United States Supreme Court but in the meantime this is a preliminary injunction this is a big deal uh let me let me take a moment and show you the the personal impact of these types of depraved positions by the um Trump Administration this is a um a pregnant plf in the case identified only by her pseudonym and the judge allowed Janee doe and John do because of fear of Retribution in the listing on the case said and she's from Trinidad she said quote all I have wanted is to focus on my baby being born healthy and safe but instead even though my baby will be born in the US because she's here residing in the US I have been worried that they will be denied a right that has guaranteed them under the Constitution the right to be a US citizen this ruling will give mothers like me a bit of temporary relief as we navigate pregnancy and the uncertain future of our babies I agree with her agree with her wholeheartedly um so what does it mean it means that the blueprint for how the Democrats and progressives and public interest groups and Attorneys General are handling these cases is working is winning we are winning in the right courts filed by in front of the right judges on the right arguments the arguments are constitutional violations 14th Amendment violations due process violations First Amendment violations depending upon the case administrative procedures act violation I mean Donald Trump can issue an executive order that doesn't violate one aspect of congressional law or the Constitution and that's where we got him and that's where we got him so watching somebody try to rule by Fiat and by executive order and floundering and doing so is actually an advantage to the Democrats and progressives and those in favor of the rule of law because I know we lost a lot of confidence in our federal court system not in individual judges but in the court system overall but at least particularly at the Supreme Court level about the criminal matters of Donald Trump but forget that we're not in the criminal matters of Donald Trump anymore this is the Revenge of the Biden judges this is the Revenge of the DC judges who are handling most of these cases I mean out of 32 cases filed against the Trump Administration uh 15 were filed in the District of Columbia for a reason and these judges are ready right um they were shocked uh they were shocked and horrified by what they heard during the trials of the Jan 6 Insurrection is shocked and horrified by what saw with the United States Supreme Court in letting Donald Trump off the hook shocked and horrified during the sentencing process for these people and shocked and horrified When Donald Trump let them all out of jail now it's their turn and that's what we're watching here on on legal AF and on the mest touch Network so big headline here 15 days in first preliminary injunction trust the process the process is working you don't get to day 15 with four temporary restraining orders and four different judges on three different matters and a preliminary injunction if you don't know what you're doing trust the process trust the public interest groups trust the NAACP the ACLU democracy forward democracy Now Court accountability action the Attorneys General in 22 States they know what they're doing they know where to file they know how to file this is not their first rodeo they beat Donald Trump 80% of the time in a thousand cases in the first Administration so if Donald Trump we're gonna have triple now we're going to have 3,000 cases I've said it before we're already up to two plus cases a day and that will only continue that's why you got to keep track with the headlines here and our banners here about which case I'm talking about I'm going to talk about so many Jane Doe and John Doe cases against some aspect of Donald Trump you'll think didn't poac already give us that analysis no these are different cases we're keeping them straight for you here at the intersection of Law and politics
Conway Explains: Here’s How We STOP This Psycho George Conway Explains It All (To Sarah Longwell) The Bulwark Feb 6, 2025
We are on the edge of a dark precipice where the rule of law doesn't exist at least at the federal level I mean we're talking about psychopaths here. We're talking about sociopaths here. We're talking about people with no morals, no conscience, no nothing. Why are they going to obey a court order? And that to me is the scariest aspect of all.
-- George Conway
Sarah Longwell and George Conway take on Trump 2.0's grim vision of a government stripped of legal limits. Agencies dismantled, courts defied, and the Constitution in jeopardy. When no one enforces the law, will chaos prevail?
Transcript
[George Conway] We are on the edge of a dark precipice where the rule of law doesn't exist at least at the federal level I mean we're talking about psychopaths here. We're talking about sociopaths here. We're talking about people with no morals, no conscience, no nothing. Why are they going to obey a court order? And that to me is the scariest aspect of all.
[Sarah Longwell] Hello everyone, and welcome to George Conway explains it all to Sarah. I'm Sarah Longwell, publisher of the Bulwark. And because I'm not a lawyer, I've asked my good friend George Conway, from the society for the rule of law, to explain the illegal news to me, because that's all we got, George. We got illegal news. It is just a Festivus of illegality that we have here in the United States of America, and I don't think I can explain it all. I think I'm going to be completely stumped, because I don't think you can possibly catch up to all the things that are happening as they happen, which is by design, right? I mean this is how it's supposed to go. We're supposed to be overwhelm with this stuff.
[George Conway] I think that's right. I always hesitate when anybody ever associates the name Donald Trump with the word "strategy." I don't think he's strategic in his thinking. I do think that the people around him, to some extent, I don't think they're the brightest people in the world. All of them do have a strategy of just overwhelming everybody, and they have an advantage. Not that they're smart, it's that they're evil. And they have an advantage in that normally, if you or I took over the government and wanted to turn it around in some fashion suitable to our beliefs and desires, we'd be sitting around figuring out carefully what the plan is, what are the side effects of the plan, what what harm could it do, would our plan work? And we'd be consulting with lawyers to figure out whether the plan is legal, and what authorizations does it require; which parts of the United States Code impact it. And that's a process that takes a while.
They don't believe in any of that. They don't care about the side effects of anything they're doing. They're not doing it necessarily because they have hard and fast beliefs on what a good world should be, a better world should be, they're doing it out of desires for revenge, and just outright nihilism, and they certainly do not care about legality. And that's the advantage they have. That's the reason why they can proceed so quickly.
And then the other aspect of it is and again this isn't you know even Trump can understand that it's not strategy as such it's bullies act in an unrestrained fashion to intimidate okay and that's that's what the instinctual source of all of this is with Trump you intimidate and the way you intimidate is by you just com at everybody all at once and you know it's that basically what we have in America today is I've heard the you know I've heard all sorts of phrases to describe trumpism as fascistic or want to be fascists or fascist or authoritarian or autocratic um the word that one word that I've heard in the past is ocracy is what is what we were have been headed for what we had during the first Trump Administration which I have now taken to call [ __ ] show one I think it's even more specific than PA pathocracy which is a word that somebody I don't know who coined what what is this word pathocracy pathocracy in other words it's pathological it's a pathological form of government I mean there lots of other words you have kakistocracy for the government by the worst is that a real world or did you just invent that word no I did not invent pathocracy I'm about to tell you the word that I did invent I think I because I see no trace of it ever in any dictionary or writing and I probably should save it because I want to write something about but I'm gonna I'll for the for Bart viewers so since they pay so much money do they pay money no this is free this is free we giving meow for free I mean no advertisers are on it they gotta watch ads okay psychopath psychopathy yeah rolls off the tongue I can see how this could be is if you take all the characteristics that I was talking about last year about Psychopaths malignant narcissists narcissistic sociopaths whatever phrase you want to use to describe them because all of those phrases are like overlapping circles in a V diagram you you have a government that is psychopathic because it is being run by Psychopaths for Psychopathic ends um and Psychopaths seek destruction this is what they are seeking and you know I I that's where we are today and it's a really really I don't think people are starting to catch on to it a few days late a few years l um but that's where we are uh okay I Che it's cheerful yeah I do want to kind of I'm TR I have been trying in this way that just sort of overwhelms the senses like part of what's difficult is that you're trying to pull apart like you're right if if we were if both of us who I think have would have Ambitions if you gave us magic wands we were running the government we would have Ambitions around po IDE not all of them be work but yeah yeah to how you constrain the government how you limit uh the government perhaps how you how you shrink the government a little bit um but you would also recognize that uh you had to do it in ways that were careful um ways that would likely have blowback and so like rather than rather than stressing themselves with learning about any of the functions of these things who might be harmed what do they actually do what is essential what is non-essential or what is less essential and making those careful judgments they're just he's got the Twitter Playbook and he's just like we're just going to fire everybody we're just stop up for work um now it it took a while for and it was funny not funny like haha but like he did it over the weekend too and he tweeted about this right I I gotta tell you yesterday he tweeted 200 times I don't know is ketamine does ketamine what does it do that allows you to tweet 200 times while you're dismantling the government um because it's a it's like a lot to do but they they went in over the weekend and started just like shutting down systems you know demanding sort of ke to all of the confidential things in the metime they managed to make a bunch of CIA uh Chinese CIA types like expose them just like out them um now like there there is collateral damage that's happening from this Beyond just what they're doing at these governments but I was like when is this is illegal Congress has appropriated money for these people we talked about this last week this is it is approved by Congress you can't just stop it all so it's it is illegal it's seems like on its face but I was like where why isn't anything happening but subsequently uh there's been a flurry of litigation pushing back against everything going on from birth rght citizenship to the establishment of uh Doge to disclosure of personal and financial information to Doge so is there any of the litigation that you're particularly hopeful about like is is this going to work are they going to be able to slow these guys down you well this is that you've asked the correct question great news in an Ordinary World yes because they're going to get you know they're going to win some the plaintiffs they're going to lose some that some some claims are not yet fully developed because they need Discovery but by and large these complaints do point out a SM a slew of illegalities I mean there are literally dozens of them I now and I can't it's hard to keep track of them all but here's the problem and this is why I've been very pessimistic over the last few days at least pessimistic in the short and medium anything but the long term maybe in the long term there'll be something positive out of all of this when it's all over Trump's gonna lose some of these cases no question they may even get Tred in the FBI agents case today what does trro mean means temp there's a tempor law you're right temporary restraining order what happens when you file a lawsuit that ultimately seeks relief to stop somebody from doing something like you know your neighbor wants to build a big uh you know uh something or other it's going to pollute onto your land you want to stop the government from doing something you seek a permanent injunction and you have to go through a trial to get that but in to prevent the harm before you get all the way to a trial you get temporary relief and one thing you can do is you can walk into a court and say Here's an affidavit look at the things that are going on and please give us a temporary restraining order so that there'll be something left for you to decide judge tomorrow and then you can have a quick hearing and have a preliminary injunction and then you go on to the full trial it's just a whole process of trying to protect the status quo so that ultimately fin or relief can be granted and then you'll take an appeal and so on so today there may be a trro granted in there at least three cases in the US District Court downtown here in DC that are attacking the you know the requests the basically the inquiries being made of FBI agents about whether they had anything to do with January 6 prosecutions and so on and the claim the principal claim as I understand it and I've only skimmed these complaints they were literally just filed within the last 48 hours um is that the the there there there about to be violations or have been violations of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Act is an act that protects your and my and government employees confidential information in other words between if an agency has you know data about Sarah Longwell it is prohibited from taking that personal data personal information and Publishing it on the internet also prohibited is the sending of such information from one agency to another absent your consent and so what the FBI agents claims are is that these the the the government is contemplating or engaging in massive violations of the Privacy Act because they want you know they want to compile a list of FBI agents who participated in some fashion in j January 6th prosecutions and investigations and they want to purge them and so you know you wouldn't be surprising to see that go over to the White House or whatever and and that's what's the allegation the problem with the the allegation is although it's probably true the defendants the government is saying well you don't really have any proof that's what's going on and which is true because it's just news it's it's there's a lot of speculation about what are they doing with this stuff it hasn't happened yet and so sometimes you know one one one defense it's not a crazy defense is this is all speculative on the other hand on a trro basis you don't have to you don't have to prove your case you just have to show look there's some something really bad going on here judge we don't know you know you may not we may not have it all figured out yet but you can see that you can see the outlines in the night here um but anyway to go to the main topic that I'd like to discuss is okay what happens when Trump loses some of these cases and he will lose some of these cases this is on my list to talk about I well this is the most important thing because basically we could be just days away from the complete abandonment of federal rule of law in this country and here's here's let me explain this and I know this sounds very alarmist um but we should be alarmed this guy doesn't care about laws psychopath the principal psychopath the elected psychopath doesn't care about laws and obeying rules and then the his his minion who is really exercising more power with than he is the guy running around the government hooking up to computer sites he doesn't care about rules either yeah what happens when somebody gets enjoined by a federal judge judge issues an order saying Thou shalt not do X okay so somebody gets enjoined and go and they say [ __ ] you I'm going to do X anyway well what the judge does next would be to basically have US Marshals go out and arrest person why who's doing X in violation of a court order and bring them in and hold them in contempt of court problem is all the mechanisms by which federal judges can do that go through the Executive Branch the United States Marshall service which goes out and executes warrants and would execute would be the person who would take some would be the people who would take somebody into contempt is part of United States Department of Justice and that United States Department of Justice reports to president Donald J Trump and so what happens when Trump decides I'm not we're not obeying that order and he tells Pam Bondi to tell the US Marshall service to stand down what good is a federal court order and once you get to that point yeah there is no law and you know why why are we pay you know and and it means why should anyone obey the law at this point the federal law why should you and I pay taxes the government's not going to comply by the law is the government going to come after us for not paying taxes who's going to do that they probably took they probably took elon's us I mean we are on the edge of a dark precipice where the rule of law doesn't exist at least at the federal level and that I don't think people fully understand that yet but I don't I've been gaining this out in my head and what makes anyone believe that a court order is going to be enforceable now I don't I don't know I I don't see why the you know I mean we're talking about psychopathy here we're talking about soci here we're talking about people with no morals no conscience no nothing why are they going to obey a court order and that to me is the scariest aspect of all this all right so some you know I mean it's there's all sorts of terrible things that can happen that the the federal government cannot you know I mean these specific line items that were appropriated may not get spent that's illegal absolutely that's nothing compared to what happens if courts cannot enforce their orders and if we are I don't think we're that far away from this okay so let me ask you this because I so I I was this is the rub of what I want to talk about although it was sort of a different example so I was on Nicole yesterday and John hman was on and it was like he'd had JVL on his podcast and JVL sort of laid out this doomsday scenario but we were talking about birth right citizenship and I naively you know was like well here's the thing here's what it says like here's the express language of the cons couldn't be clearer like I was like this isn't a public opinion question it's not even barely a legal question it's a constitutional question the Constitution is like just completely straightforward I like read it out loud on live TV to be like this is what it says and John hman said okay Sarah well here's the thing I I've got I've had JVL on my podcast and I was like oh no here we go darkest time line uh and he's like but but what happens if the Supreme Court because it'll go up to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court upholds it because the letter like obviously there's two supreme court justices that might not do it anyway because they're Clarence Thomas And Justice Alo but like Amy Cony Barrett does and Kavanagh does because it's just about having reading comprehension which I still think most of the people in the Supreme Court have y um and then Trump says I don't care we're going to stop issuing birth certificates cuz here's the thing once he does it in one area you do it in all the areas correct right what happens the point that I was just making no I know it is I know it is but I guess like it's if he just defies the Supreme Court like I could see them trying to overrun lower level courts or I don't know like acting until it got but like if he just says like dares the Supreme Court to stop him like what happens next look I don't think there's a difference actually I don't think there's a practical difference between defying the Supreme Court and defying the lower courts and here's why because at the end of the day if the Supreme Court rules against the government in a Birthright citizenship case as as you pause it and I think they will I think the Supreme Court's never going to uphold the crazy theory of of that the government is pushing the case gets sent back to the district court the district court is the court that is charged with enforcing what the law is okay they're at the front lines and how do they enforce it just give granularly again no they get what I describe the process basically let's say the government stops issuing birth certificates to people who are entitled to birth certificates on the cookie Theory Supreme Court says Kookie Theory um uh we're affirming The District Court decision which probably will have already been defied by the government um and so it goes back to The District Court District Court says You must issue these birth certificates and the head of in says no and what would normally happen would be that person would be held in contempt and that person could be fined and that person could be hauled off by the US Marshals and held in civil contempt until he complies and usually it doesn't get to that because nobody wants to be held in civil contempt until they comply and the person underneath them doesn't want that too so they will obey they'll obey the court order even if president United States that's what normally would happen but as I said who's going to take these people off to jail for civil for for to be held in civil contempt and you're saying that the marshals themselves the US Marshal Service enforces if if I violate a federal court order and I'm held in contempt because contempt is the way civil contempt is the way you enforce you viol an order the judge and you refuse to obey the order the judge says you need to obey the order and you you defy them you get held in civil contempt the judge will then the GU judge can find you or the judge can you know basically keep finding you until you comply or the judge can basically send the US Marshall service out at you that's what and then right okay so but then like so you're a marshall let's just this Marshall's name is Joe and Joe Joe Marshall is like all right well the told me to go do this that's what I normally do who then who stops Joe does Trump call Joe and say Joe don't do this Joe Joe will get have gotten a memo from his superiors saying you shall not do this or you will be fired and does the court then go to the superior and give them a similar none of these people report to the court that's the point this Marshall reports to some supervisor who ultimately reports to the head of US Marshall service who reports to Pam to to the probably associate or Deputy attorney general I don't know and then who then reports to Pam Bondi who then reports to pus okay if Trump it's I'm not saying this any of this is legal because none of this is legal but Trump can basically take out the mechanisms by which court orders can be enforced and you know he'll enjoy that you know what he thinks of the courts he has nothing but contempt for courts l i mean I don't mean that in the legal sense but he has nothing but contempt this will you know the courts have done bad things to him okay so here's why I think look here's where I think we are or we possibly could end up courts will not be able to enforce their orders against Trump because Trump will disobey them and will basically Wipe Out the mechanism by which I I hope this isn't true but I don't just doing the math and extrapolating and conducting the experiment in my head with these sociopaths who really don't have any limiting you know they're not limited by law or conscience or anything this is where this is happening so he can he will not obey court orders so the law cannot be enforced and at the same time he's going to try to enforce his will upon people legally or illegally by you know firing them or by Prosecuting them or by rounding them up or by having the calling out the National Guard or the military or whatever he's going to issue orders and I think those orders May well be disobeyed too because I do think government employees and soldiers and and people at some point are going to say I can't these are illegal orders I'm not going to obey them okay we're already we're we're going to see some of that and he won't have actually he will not have a way to enforce his orders not not not completely what we have so what I'm saying is we're going to have chaos there are going to be no rules there GNA be no laws at least at the federal level and that's what I think is terrifying I hope it doesn't happen but I just you know it just it's sort of like you know how I have scientist friends who will just cringe at this but it's sort of how they figured out what the where how the Big Bang occurred they just sort of logically traced the principles and the and the things that are affecting the system back to the very beginning well this is tracing the actors in their behavioral modes into the future I don't see them obeying the law I don't see a future for the rule of law right now in in in in under the Federal Constitution I I think we are that close to the precipice didn't get what you wanted for Christmas it's time to give yourself what you really wanted cooking is easy with hexclad whose one pan has both the performance of stainless steel and the convenience of nonstick their dishwashers safe and simple to wipe clean after use as well as oven safe handles heat up to 500° fah the patented hexagon design protects against scratches even when using metal utensils and hexclad isn't just about pots and pans their knives are made of 67 layers of Japanese Damascus steel for a Sharper Edge that stays sharp longer for effortless slicing Gordon Ramsey even uses hexclad in his restaurants and his home and he's the toughest critic on the planet I always see that guy yelling at people for a limited time only our listeners get 10% off your order with our exclusive link just head to hexclad decom ask George that's h eex c a d.com forward slash ask George guys I don't do a lot of cooking you know that I talk about this but I do make spaghetti for my kids that's like the one thing I can really make and every time I make spaghetti for my kids before with other pans I would always burn my hand on the pot it's one of the reasons that I keep like out of the kitchen because I'm always burning myself on the super hot handle when you take it off the stove these handles don't get hot it's like the greatest invention ever had uh in my life where it just it doesn't it's something about the way that this what did they call it the uh the Japanese Damascus steel or something like it doesn't doesn't get so hot that you burn yourself these are the best pots and pans we've ever had our family loves them you'll love them too so again our listeners get 10% off your order with our exclusive link head to hexclad dcom askgeorge support our show and check them out at heex a.com askgeorge make sure to let let them know we sent you bone Appetit let's eat with hexclad revolutionary cookware you know one of the things it's so alarming about you saying this is like I expect this from JVL JVL is always the darkest has The Darkest Timeline and take you usually kind of feel like you know the courts will function normally like even as we've watched every other back stop fall away you know you've always kind of had the courts uh and the law they going to lose some of these cases and but the thing is now is what we are seeing is inconsistent with anybody obeying the law yeah and unless somebody gets a spying real fast in the justice department or somewhere I mean we see this guy uh who who they accidentally I mean they're just so incompetent they accidentally put in charge of the FBI he kind of stood up to them a little but you know I don't see how this plays out without complete chaos okay well that's good great great stuff I mean this is this is how I see it right now I hope I'm I hope I'm rat of I hope I'm just insanely wrong but I just don't see you know I just I mean I mean they're crazy these people that were running the government are either crazy some of them are crazy others are just um craving look at look at let's take the Gaza thing okay it's it's almost it's so ridiculous you couldn't have made it up but Trump goes out there and basically says he wants to basically ethnically cleanse Gaza send the Palestinians to Jordan and Egypt or wherever and turn turn it into turn Gaza into the Riviera with probably with a Trump Hotel and everybody freaks out the entire planet freaks out because no one thinks this is possible no one thinks it's not immoral and illegal it violates basic international law violates the law it violate it's a war crime and it's a crime against humanity and it's just you know how are you going to actually physically do this without you know murdering 100 thousand people right this is completely insane on many levels and so the White House walks it back yesterday oh no no no blah blah blah you know they're with [ __ ] the way they always used to you know back in [ __ ] show one they used to always have to do this all the time although this one was really really insane um and what does he do at 5:00 this morning he puts out a true social post saying how wonderful it's going to be when we got all the Palestinians out of Gaza and it's a wonderful beautiful place to live let's talk about Gaza for a hot second but on my point is he's [ __ ] nuts no I know and there's nothing there's there's he's completely beyond control right now did you see Susie W's face when he's saying that that was not a thing they had discussed previously he just decided to throw it all out there you know what's interesting about both Elon I didn't find surprising because I know that's what he thinks no I know and Jared I saw clips of Jared saying this like years ago this like you know we're gonna make it you know we're you mean wrong in the sense that is that should be an idilic place on the Mediterranean if it weren't for the political issues and the history and everything like that I mean in terms of as a real estate play it ought to be good but these people are so psychotic they can't understand it well these are actually people who live there real people with lives and they may not behave the way you want them to behave but you can't just you just can't you know how are you going to get them all out how how what right do you have to do that like none of these things occur to these people because they are all so narcissistic and sociopathic well part of what's funny too is like he literally ran on an an anti- interventionist platform the America we are I mean are we going to be gritted as liberators uh like what is the the plan like the whole thing was like we are in too many forever Wars we're doing all this stuff we shouldn't do all this adventurism abroad and now what we're invading Canada we're invading Greenland we're gonna take over Gaza and the Panama Canal yeah just start is that's just the warm-up act but you know what listen it's like but you're using logic okay you canot I I know that that's I know that that's a mistake but here's another piece of logic let me just or or like what it seems like to me though is that Trump trump and Elon are both just doing the thing that they know like Trump like is like I'm president now so I'm going to develop I like want to go purchase other places and develop them because that's like what he is a developer at his core and Elon is like a person who dismantles he's just doing to the federal government exactly what he did to Twitter Twitter corre uh and so they're just like using the same oh they know in that sense they're both you know onetick ponies okay and you know I mean but I'll give Elon credit for zeroing it I mean this is the one everything else I am not surprised by right the one thing that I think is new that I would which is not on my bingo card was that Elon would zero in on the computer systems and take those over I mean it's sort of life but it makes sense now in hindsight because like you you know you're Dracula what do you do you go for the circulatory part and this is what and he's he's not wrong you can you can cut off the money you can shut down the government tomorrow of course you could also crash the national debt you could destroy the global economy I mean there are all sorts of collateral effects we may ought to be ought to be concerned by um but yeah I mean that's they're just sticking to I mean they have they have limited playbooks they you know and and there there's somebody wrote something yesterday I saw on on social media where um elon's very smart in a lot of ways but the so there was like the definition of idiot back in Roman or Greek times was somebody who didn't understand how they relate to the society around them okay what Elon thinks Elon thinks and and a lot of these Tech oligarchs brchs or whatever you want to call them they think that they exist solely because of their own Brilliance not because they existed within a legal and social structure that allowed them to prosper the rule of law for example you could not have you know I mean all this all the stuff that that has been done by Silicon Valley and silicon you know it's all basically because we have a rule of law where you can have intellectual property and those rights can be enforced and people can't just copy stuff and people can't just break contracts all of this stuff he's like we but none of this matters to these two to Trump and Elon but actually you just raised something that I was thinking about before when you were talking about it so if if let's just say Trump stops abiding by the law we are thrust into this constitutional crisis and you were saying we don't have laws anymore you know at least at the federal level does that apply to everyone like or like does everybody stop obeying the law like what's the or or or let me and sorry let me ask just a second part of this question and also let's say Trump wants to Trump trump is actively trying to litigate against other people right he's going after CBS he's going after so do the courts allow him to litigate against other people if he's refusing to abide by their rulings in other cases that's a very good question that's a very good question um I think they will probably try to act in the normal fashion and handle the cases if nothing else is going on um but that being said you know who's enforcing all these judgments that get issued I don't know maybe only maybe only judgments that Trump gets will be enforced I don't know um but I have to say one of the I mean what why do we all obey the law why don't we why don't we just go and walk down the street and kill somebody for their lunch money well there a bunch of different reasons one is we have moral consciences right another is we fear the impa We Fear prosecution right if you have a legal system that shows itself not to be able to enforce the law you lose one of those important constraints and if you have a government where basically nobody has the moral as moral constraints or is willing to act on moral constraints you know we don't have law we have absolute chaos and that is I mean that's where I'm afraid we're headed I'm just putting it another way and I hope I'm wrong I would love to be able to be wrong in two weeks two months two years well you're gonna forgive me but I I'm going to sit here and I'm going to keep trying to work up alternate scenarios of how you would put guard rails around this system as the guard rails collapse from the courts but like let's say Trump just okay so he does this thing you're saying thrust us into a constitutional crisis he's not obeying now I know that everything we've seen from Congress so far indicates that there is no limiting principle for them on like what they will tolerate from Trump if he just yes the Republicans if he just refuses to start to obey the courts will no Republicans do anything about that well what are they going to do well they could say something I know I know I know no I heard something that Tom Tillis I I I got to look it up but I saw some Tom Tillis who basically said well maybe all maybe this some of this stuff is legal but some of the stuff isn't it doesn't really matter sometimes you just have to do stuff I mean basically it was equ to that effect I don't think they have the spine and even if you have a few of them what are they gonna do Chuck Schumer is introducing a bill to say you can't do all the things that are illegal that they're doing Bill's never going to pass but so what so so let's make it you know something's illegal 50 times over what what what difference does it make if we say it's illegal for a 501st time in the Neco what what does what does Congress get us and there is an answer the answer is provided by the framers was if you have a president who is violating his oath of office which this guy is he's you know he's he's clearly basically that's what I mean like teritory if I can finish oh oh did I interrupt you oh I'm so sorry I'm so sorry I interrupted you I can't imagine how that works I know right um he's basically cast his legal and constitutional obligations to the win he's his he violates his oath of office almost every minute now yeah he has delegated executive power to somebody who's not even a permanent employee of the government let alone a prince officer I mean it's so it's IL and this person is usurping article one powers of the purse I mean you've got so much unconstitutionality here um I mean the answer would be impeachment right that should be the answer you should be impeached and removed from office and but here's the thing how's that GNA go okay but hold on hold on just one second if he was doing this McConnell if he's still up I mean this guy McConnell McConnell you know I mean M M Makowski Collins like you could How You Gonna what do they do they're not going to get to they're not gonna get you know we're they're not gonna get maybe if you got five or six house members you could get you could you could vote it through a bill of impeachment but I don't see that happening um but if it did are you gonna get this are you really gonna get 66 V 67 votes in the Senate it's got to get things got to get a lot worse before that happens yeah okay and at that point you think he's really going to leave office all right so here's my next all right next next possibility so this is and this was you know obviously I'm I'm kicking around these other things but I I see I mean I obviously see the futility of of trying to say like boy Congress could do something or maybe they're like at this point of just refusing to obey the law people in the streets is probably your last Bingo last option Bingo that's all we got at the end of the day that's what's going to have to come down to yes and he'll deploy the military against them it will be go back to the other point that I was making which is I don't know whether some people are GNA B obey those orders which is a good thing I don't know but this is you know no but but you're seeing the point I've been making is as you gain this stuff out you don't see a positive outcome you don't see anything but chaos and violence and I mean play Devil's Advocate where where if which logical step in this chain am I wrong I don't think it's wrong I mean I think because I think it's conceivable I think part of what is where where's it gonna where where it where's the what's the break in the chain that says it's not going to happen I can't figure that out yeah I mean the break in the chain would be that they would abide by the court ruling because I you know and maybe they will maybe maybe they will I don't see it though I think these people are that far gone I think there's not many people in government who will have the backbone to stand up to Trump and they will be removed hey let me ask you a different question so I see Trump's Complete embolden because the Supreme Court right gave him total immunity from these actions right so he gets out let's say one of the limiting again one of the fears is some point he's not in office and he spends his very last years in prison but he can't now because he's immune uh I mean I don't know if he's immune from all this stuff but elon's not immune elon's not immune yeah but Elon can be pardoned what What Fear Does Elon what about after though what about after they're out of power what do you mean when are they going to be out of power well so I mean I guess okay so so that's that in this scenario they don't they don't abide by the court rulings and they stop having elections well I mean maybe but how do we 2026 2026 right but so we have to get to 2026 and 2028 I'm worried we're not even going to get there but the bottom line is why should Elon Musk fear anything well we'll get there in the sense that those days will come but he will he's you know this is this is what Trump trump told people this in during [ __ ] show one just build a wall just do this do all that I will pardon you and all of these people have nothing to fear because they actually have potentially broader immunity than Trump has because Trump is why well because Trump is only immune from Criminal prosecution for his official ads which is why he could have been prosecuted and sent to jail for what he for shenanigans relating to the 2020 election because not everything he did was an official act or even could be characterized as an official act his pining of documents was not official his um what he did with his books and records in the stormmy Daniel case was not official conduct he's still subject to prosecution for those things um let's leave aart of the state and federal thing because that that's that's a little wrinkle on it but if you're Elon or your Kash or your pondi or pick somebody in the government and Trump pardons you he can pardon you for for for stealing money from a grandmother you know under federal law not under state law so basically but this scenario only works if Trump never leaves power well it doesn't matter he could he could issue a he could he could issue a pardon today for every crime that has been committed since the beginning of his administration or the beginning of time by all the people right so if he ever did leave office let's say it's at noon on January 20th 2029 he'd basically issue pardons to everybody who D did his bidding during his four years in office let's Assuming he's leaving office not you know and they would have B immunity than he would have he probably want a pardon himself too just to get see if he could get the benefit of that broader immunity because those people can be Pro you know pardon can cover unofficial acts so if if if somebody if one of these Doge kids decides to hey let's use the payment system to send me a billion dollars to my Swiss bank account that kid could be pardoned yeah okay okay I'm I'm I'm extremely depressed uh and I didn't mean to be depressed no no no no no no no no I think it's this is I don't even mean it's not about it's not about being depressed this is this is clarifying in ways I and I wanted to to get into this I want to ask you one other question that I've been kicking around which is um and and maybe I mean in your previous scenario like if everything's Lawless then the answer to my questions all of my questions about like can this be done is like well technically no but nobody's abiding by it so it's all Lawless but like can without Congress can the president just dissolve usaid um yes probably because again I'm I'm not a bureaucratic expert or expert in any of this stuff but my understanding is usaid is not a statutory creation of Congress what it does is it does dispense money that has been appropriated by Congress So to that extent whether or not usaid exists they cannot basically just say we're not spending money for these purposes that Congress provided that we spend the money for but my understanding is that USA ID was created by an executive order President Kennedy and it was it's not a statutory creation and and you know well Congress no in 1998 Congress established USA ID as its own agency oh did it okay okay all right well then they can't they can't disestablish it then if that's true I mean they just so moving into the state department like I guess I'm wondering like is that move legal it may not be again I'd have to I'd have to see what this what the statute did not know that they had been that the usid has had been created as a separate agency I thought it was something that sort of existed and that Congress you know once it's like the EPA for a long time was not a statutorily created agency it was basically a President Nixon repurposed some you know office in the EOB and then you know it basically created this agency by executive order that to enforce all the en environmental mandates that had been passed by Congress which made sense so you know president has the power to create structures to carry out congress's you know instructions even if they don't actually create the department so he has he has some res residual authority to do that well then let's just take one that we where it's not even a question um which is like Ed Department of Education can he cannot dissolve the Department of Education and he he cannot refuse to spend the money that has been appropriated to be spent through the Department of Education correct absolutely that would be profoundly illegal you know what's crazy to me about all this stuff with the they could just pass a new budget like like I I like if if they instead of they're they're gonna they're going to pass a budget soon like the budget stuff is so like why not just do this through the normal budgetary process and cut everything because they don't have the votes because even republicans in Congress won't give it to them right well you know we we don't have I mean if this stuff all this we have been marching in the fields of the right for decades you and I okay um at least until [ __ ] show one there are always people who wanted to basically dismantle the government sure from you know I mean like uh like Grover NorQuest who basically said he wants to make the government so small he could strangle it in the bathtu drown it in the bathtub drown it in the bathtub that old famous thing and the reason why that never happened or anything close to it never happened is because there just isn't political support for it and that's what they you know the ultimate reason why this all of this is anti-democratic apart from the fact that you know they're just running rough shod over statutes and constitutional restrictions is that we've never had the will as a people people to vote in legislators to do these things okay because it's you know basically dissolve the entire that's crazy right nobody everybody has their little their little things in the government some of us like some stuff some of us like don't like other stuff okay and we all have different preferences and what the democratic system what our constitutional system does is it provides a mechanism by which we work that out so I have to take I have to accept some stuff I don't like in order to accept the things that I like and they don't want to play by that anymore and that's where we are they are doing things they could not possibly have the political support to do or they are trying to do things that they don't have the political support to do because if they had the political support to done it they would have been done they would would have been done during [ __ ] show one would have been done during the Reagan Administration right and you know one of the things have to accept living in a constitutional democracy is you don't get everything you want yeah I guess the only push back I would have to this is that if if you think every Republican would give him right they've got this tiny majority in Congress uh and if you think every Republican would be on his side about everything else every all the Lawless stuff but they would stand up to him on funding on the budget like why well I you know I never has happened before right they've never actually you know when the Republicans have had control of both the presidency and Congress we've never seen serious fiscal restraint on there I mean we see a little bit on the margins for some things I but if Trump was like past this budget where I cut the hell out of all this stuff why wouldn't they do it they take his if they're taking his marching orders on everything else well they don't want to do it because they don't want to accept political responsibility for it you think the one thing that still exists for them is the incentive of keeping their positions that's all they care about so they're afraid they're afraid of him because he can create a backlash and have get them primary but they're also afraid of the backlash if they take responsibility for anything so they basically sit on their hands and they do nothing I mean this is why this is how Trump survives committing all these um High crimes and misdemeanors they didn't want they knew he was guilty like I mean how many times do we have to listen to Mitch mcon say that the criminal law was a you know he he knew what what this guy did was criminal but he didn't want to take the political responsibility for taking him out right so these people are just gonna be ciphers and maybe one or two of them will show some courage maybe three or four but it's not enough because the only mechanism that Congress has to control an executive that is completely out of control and completely define the constitution and his oath of office is impeachment and removal yeah and at the end of the day if he doesn't go who's gonna who's who who takes him out of the White House who's there to order that to happen and so yeah so the only listen everything everything comes down to as you pointed out and I've been saying online the streets yeah man you look distressed and I I don't blame you well yeah what what do we what do we have to go leave a protest now in the streets and yeah we're all gonna believe me we're all gonna be out there we we we have to be out there because this is where it's you know unless somebody decides all of a sudden Donald Trump grows a conscience and and Elon and all of these people decide to put their loyalty to this one guy aside and honor the Constitution and the laws of the United States unless enough people do that all at once in the in the executive branch we are going to see essentially the dissolution of the federal rule of law I I just don't you know I just I I keep running this in my head and I can't think of the scenario where that happens where all of a sudden these people decide oh my gosh we've gone too far we have to obey the law even if we don't like it I don't see that happening and and as as as I point out Congress can't do anything unless the only mechanism Congress Congress has is impeachment and removal and we know where that goes yeah so you know what I'm describing here is essentially the potential destruction in a matter of weeks and again I I it's I mean we used to say stuff like this during the 2024 campaign during 2020 campaign during the during [ __ ] show one that you know we run the risk of the complete Devolution of the rule of law in America nobody knew what that meant yeah and it sounded crazy right it sounds crazy because things are you go out walk out on the street it's all fine everything's fine stre everybody's going to work I'm gonna go to the Super Bowl this weekend everything's gonna be fun but where I you know when you actually talk is through we are at very close to that point where all of these things all these nightmare scenarios could come to pass and people don't fully appreciate that yet including the media is starting to catch up a little bit but you know I mean it's like Oliver garcy who writes this amazing column every day for his basically he used to work at CNN as a as a media critic and now he has his own not substack it's a competitor of substack but basically says you know the the the on the ground reporting is explaining this reasonably well after kind of a being thrown for a loop for a couple days but we're not seeing screaming headlines like you know crisis in America people don't we have become numb to what's happening here and how pathological and destructive it is and how close we are to the precipice I don't think I I don't think anyone who doesn't walk carefully in and try to thinks it doesn't think about these issues can fully appreciate it but when you actually try to focus on well where where's the stopping point it's hard to reach to to to it's hard not to reach the conclusion that there is none yeah which is why you're listening to me all depressed and you're not even saying George I don't I don't think it's that bad I mean I I've been I've been I've been saying this for the last two or three days over the weekend to some very very smart people professors of political scientists other Boyers and I say tell me I'm wrong and they can't well you know I'm with JVL if JBL agrees is that if that's what JVL is saying then I thoroughly agree with JBL yeah it's always The Darkest Timeline um that's what we walk through today but it is it is real um we are really confronting right that people haven't caught up I'm not I'm not apocalyptic and I'm not I'm usually you're the opposite you're like no here's how he's gonna go down right and and you see that completely gone because now it's like we're stri down to the last defense and I don't there's nobody there basically there's a gap in our lines the last defense is the American people the last defense is basically all these people coming up and basically throwing their bodies in front of the tanks like the like the Mia tianan Square this is where we this is where we possibly are okay throwing your bodies in front of Tanks that's where we're going to leave you guys this week um Good Luck America as JVL says uh thanks George for talking us through that I it is something I've been trying to think through so I appreciate the conversation we'll see you guys next week um I usually say a closing but right now I'm all whatever and so uh let's see uh thanks George Conway for explaining it all thanks to all of you for listening to another episode don't forget to subscribe listen to us on Apple podcast do all the subscribing let's all be in this together way he's a man with plan got to sit down with s long will take a stand explain all the legal problems they're piling high with Donald Trump oh my oh my oh my he said Sarah let me break it down for you there's destruction Justice corruption to the legal Tangles and troubles the growing fast it's a storm that's going to last and last oh can't way tell on well all about it those legal problems can't live without it from the m to the Russian ties oh Sarah listen close
During a press conference Friday, Trump was asked about the Department of Government Efficiency’s unfettered access to trillion-dollar payment systems such as the U.S. Treasury Department, as well as the personal information of millions of Americans, including their Social Security numbers, home addresses, and bank account numbers.
[Reporter] “Why does DOGE need all of that?” asked one reporter.
[Donald Trump] “Well, it doesn't, but they get it very easily. I mean, we don't have very good security in our country. And they get it very easily. And what we're doing, if you look at what has just taken place with respect to some of their investments that have been made on another Agency that people have been talking about for years, but nobody did anything about, it's absolutely obscene, dangerous, bad, very costly. I mean, virtually every investment made is a con job. There's nothing of value to anybody, unless there's a kickback scheme going on, which is possible. And we're going to be doing more and more of that. We're going to be looking at the Department of Education; we're going to be looking at even our military; we're going to be looking at tremendous amounts of money, Peter, being spent on things that bear no relationship to anything, and have no value. We're talking about trillions of dollars. It will be, in the end, trillions of dollars being absolutely wasted, and perhaps illegally. I would say certainly, in many cases, illegally, but perhaps illegally overall. And I'm very proud of the job that this group of young people -- generally young people, but very smart people -- they're doing. They’re doing it at at my insistence. It would be a lot easier not to do it, but we have to take some of these things apart to find the corruption. We found tremendous corruption.
Donald Trump doesn’t care that Elon Musk and his nerd squad have access to the private information of millions of Americans.
During a press conference Friday, Trump was asked about the Department of Government Efficiency’s unfettered access to trillion-dollar payment systems such as the U.S. Treasury Department, as well as the personal information of millions of Americans, including their Social Security numbers, home addresses, and bank account numbers.
“Why does DOGE need all of that?” asked one reporter.
“Well, it doesn’t, but they get it very easily,” Trump admitted. “I mean, we don’t have very good security in our country, and they get it very easily.”
Trump appeared completely unbothered by the massive intrusion on the privacy of U.S. citizens—in fact, he seemed to suggest it was the fault of government agencies for not better concealing this information from Musk’s goons.
Trump rambled on, describing how DOGE needed to audit certain investments the government had made because they were “obscene, dangerous, bad, very costly.”
The Bulwark @BulwarkOnline
Reporter: "DOGE engineers have access to treasury payment systems...social security numbers, home addresses, bank accounts. Why does DOGE need all of that?"
Trump: "Well, it doesn't, but they get it very easily. We don't have very good security in our country."
Concerns over DOGE’s “insider threat” have only grown in recent days, as they take over agency after agency, acquiring access to more troves of sensitive information. Trump has already said he couldn’t care less about Musk’s conflicts of interest, and the White House said that the DOGE czar would self-determine what projects were appropriate for him to work on.
As DOGE continues to extend its reach, members of Musk’s team are simultaneously being revealed to be a group of twenty-something failsons.
Musk announced Friday that he would be rehiring the DOGE employee who was fired over a range of racist posts because, as he wrote, “to err is human, to forgive divine.” Still, on X, Musk waged war against the journalist who reported on the posts in the first place, so it’s considerably more likely that, to him, there was nothing to forgive.
Additionally, Bloomberg reported Friday that another one of the 19-year-old wards on Musk’s DOGE team had been fired from an internship after he was accused of sharing company secrets with a competitor. Seems like the perfect person to have access to a trove of sensitive information, right?
This article provides evidence for the first time of a systematic policy of direct collusion between the Time Inc. media empire and the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
The OPS [Office of Public Safety] originated in the Public Safety program under the International Cooperation Administration (ICA) in 1954. In 1962, when the ICA was replaced by the USAID, the program was reorganised under the new title of 'Office of Public Safety', consolidating various disparate overseas police training and assistance projects across the globe. Its director, CIA operative and police reformer Byron Engle, served from 1962 until his retirement in 1973....
International development programs could present the modernisation and expansion of security infrastructure as growing stability and preventing crime in these nations, without the bad optics of the CIA or the military...
The OPS operated in at least fifty-two countries in Asia, Africa and the Americas. One of its main functions was counterinsurgency, aiding governments in the suppression of communist groups. In total, it provided over $200M of USAID and CIA funds to recipient countries in weaponry, communications equipment and tactical equipment. Its other functions were to facilitate the planting of CIA operatives within police forces of at-risk regions, and to find suitable candidates within these foreign forces to enrol in the CIA.
The standoff at 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue was not much of a spectacle. On the first day of February, a handful of men working for Elon Musk had come to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a few blocks from the White House, demanding full access to its headquarters. The agency’s staff refused. No guns were drawn. No punches thrown. Nobody involved the police. But in these early days of the Trump Administration, perhaps no other scene revealed more clearly the forces reshaping America’s government.
On one side stood an institution with a 64-year history, a $35 billion budget, and a mission enshrined in federal law. On the other stood Musk’s political wrecking crew. They identified themselves as members of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a collection of temporary staffers with no charter, no website, and no clear legal authority. Its power derives from Musk, the wealthiest person on the planet, who has been deputized to dismantle vast swaths of the federal bureaucracy—slashing budgets, gutting the civil service, and stripping independent agencies of the ability to impede the President’s objectives.
USAID leadership had allowed Musk’s team, a group of his young and eager followers, to spend several days inside their headquarters at the end of January. “The DOGE kids,” as some of the staffers called them in private, walked the halls with clipboards in their hands, examining desks and questioning managers, according to several USAID officials who described the events to TIME. But as the weekend arrived, their demands—including access to sensitive facilities designed to store classified information—went too far for the agency’s heads of security. The men from DOGE threatened to call the U.S. Marshals and have them clear the building. They also informed Musk about the problem. “USAID is a criminal organization,” Musk wrote to his 215 million followers on his social media platform, X, soon after. “Time for it to die.”
The cause of Musk’s crusade remained unclear. But regardless of the reason, by the following morning, an agency that annually disburses tens of billions of dollars across the globe, fighting famine and disease and bringing clean water to millions, had mostly ceased to function. Within a week, nearly all its staff were placed on leave, its offices around the world shut down.
Photo-Illustration by TIME (Source Photos: Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images; Anna Moneymaker—Getty Images)
Every other government bureau got the message loud and clear. No single private citizen, certainly not one whose wealth and web of businesses are directly subject to the oversight of federal authorities, has wielded such power over the machinery of the U.S. government. So far, Musk appears accountable to no one but President Trump, who handed his campaign benefactor a sweeping mandate to bring the government in line with his agenda. DOGE directed all of TIME’s questions about its work to the White House, which declined to comment.
Already, the DOGE team has taken over the U.S. Digital Service and established a beachhead within the federal human-resources department, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The Education Department is on edge, fearing a self-decapitation mandate is in the offing. Few agencies seem safe. Musk has shown that he will tolerate no opposition, no matter how justified. Days before the drama at USAID, a Treasury official refused DOGE access to the U.S. federal payment system. The official was forced to retire, and the newly appointed Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, gave DOGE the access it demanded. The Administration agreed on Feb. 5 to restrict that access, at least temporarily, after a group of past and present employees sued.
These are just the first ripples in a massive antigovernment wave. Budgets will be hacked. Valuable programs will be eliminated. Career civil servants will be purged, replaced with political appointees whose primary qualification is apparent fealty to the President. This is the course the electorate chose. And to many, the idea of one of the world’s most accomplished entrepreneurs attacking a sprawling, sclerotic federal bureaucracy with the same velocity and determination he brought to his car startup or rocket company is cause for celebration, not alarm. “The federal government is so big that there are surely significant opportunities for saving and efficiency,” says Robert Doar, president of the American Enterprise Institute, a center-right think tank. “The fact that the President and his team is giving this a lot of attention is a good thing.”
But a public backlash may be growing to Musk’s mission, and far more is at stake than the size of the federal balance sheet, the head count at agencies inside the Beltway, or the dangers of one unelected man possessing such unconstrained power. Soon Americans are going to learn where they interact with the federal government in ways they didn’t realize or took for granted. Companies that export tech products to China may no longer have State or Commerce Department employees available to explain, for free, how to avoid violating criminal law. Farmers in the Midwest may soon find USAID-funded buyers no longer paying for sacks of flour to send to refugee camps. Around the world, millions of people who depend on the U.S. for food, medicine, and shelter are suddenly on their own.
For now, millions of government workers find themselves at Musk’s mercy. One described her team at the Department of Homeland Security assuming a “defensive crouch” as they awaited a visit from the DOGE. For an inkling of their fate, she added, her colleagues had turned to a book called Character Limit, which chronicles the way Musk took over Twitter two years ago and fired 80% of its staff, often with chaotic and lasting results.
The similarities to his assault on the bureaucracy have been uncanny. On Jan. 28, millions of civil servants across government received an email offering them eight months’ pay in exchange for their resignation. Musk had proposed much the same deal to Twitter’s employees two years earlier. He even used the same subject line: “Fork in the road.”
None of this came without warning. Among Musk’s friends in Silicon Valley, many understood his takeover of Twitter as preparation for a greater cause. “The mood is that hopefully Musk can do the same thing with the U.S. government,” one told TIME in November. Veterans of Trump’s first Administration likewise laid out their plans long before the elections, publishing a 900-page report known as Project 2025. One of its lead authors, Russell Vought, said in a speech two years ago that he wanted civil servants to be “traumatically affected” by the purge he envisioned. “We want their funding to be shut,” he said. “We want to put them in trauma.”
Russell Vought, Trump’s pick to lead the Office of Management and Budget, at a confirmation hearing on Jan. 15.Andrew Harnik—Getty Images
On the campaign trail, Trump swore he had nothing to do with the plan. “It was inappropriate that they would come out with a document like that,” he told TIME in November. “Some things I vehemently disagreed with.” But once in office, he picked Vought to be in charge of the White House Office of Management and Budget, which now works closely with Musk to enact crucial parts of Project 2025. So far, the frenetic opening moves of the Trump presidency have tracked nearly two-thirds of its prescriptions, according to a TIME analysis.
Musk never hid his intentions. Two weeks after the election, he co-wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal that promised DOGE would help Trump “hire a lean team of small-government crusaders,” who would work to bring “mass head-count reductions across the federal bureaucracy.” That recruitment drive began soon after the elections, drawing from Musk’s acolytes in Silicon Valley, some barely out of college, and priming them to fan out across Washington.
The man Musk put in charge of staffing at DOGE was an aerospace engineer named Steve Davis, who previously led his cost-cutting efforts at Twitter. In late December, as the presidential transition unfolded inside the White House, Davis took part in a series of meetings with members of the Biden Administration. The Democratic staffers noted his fixation with an obscure branch of the White House called the U.S. Digital Service. Davis wanted to know how it operated, who it reported to, and what it could access.
Created in 2014, the USDS works with federal agencies to improve computer systems and databases. It houses a map of the government’s technology infrastructure and has contact points for the technology officer at nearly every federal agency. That made it the perfect place to host the DOGE. If Musk wanted to wither the limbs of the federal government, the USDS provided the veins that would let the poison flow.
The empowerment of USDS started on Inauguration Day. One of Trump’s first Executive Orders renamed it “the United States DOGE Service,” neatly preserving the office’s acronym. The order also ensured that the new entity would report directly to the White House chief of staff. Since then, the office has set up shop inside the Departments of State and Treasury. It began accessing personnel computer systems, firing contractors, and blocking payments on their contracts.
Musk also sent a team to OPM. The office holds records on 2.1 million workers, the email address for nearly every federal employee, and tracks $59 billion per year in federal health care premiums and $88 billion per year in payments to federal retirees. The mass buyout offer to government employees originated from within Musk’s team at OPM, according to a source familiar with those actions. (Both DOGE and the White House declined to comment.)
Next, the DOGE team set to starving OPM itself. Brian Bjelde, who recently worked as vice president of human resources at Musk’s aerospace firm, told career supervisors at OPM that the “target” was to slash 70% of its staff, a move that would hobble its health care benefits and retirement-planning teams, says a current OPM official. Some senior leaders at OPM have been locked out of key databases, the official says, and political appointees have access to systems, including the Enterprise Human Resources Integration, without standard safeguard procedures designed to keep such information private. That system includes information like pay grades, length of service, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, and home addresses.
Days after Trump took office, the White House ordered a freeze on federal spending—from foreign aid to public-health programs, and everything in between. It would be lifted, the Administration said, as agencies fell in line with the President’s agenda: cracking down on immigration, ending diversity efforts, and stopping investments that reduce the impact of fossil fuels on the environment. Facing a court’s action, the White House rolled back the order.
A protest outside the U.S. Treasury building in Washington, D.C., on Feb 4.Stefani Reynolds—Bloomberg/Getty Images
Musk’s downsizing pressed ahead, and Trump continued to give his blessing. “Elon can’t do—and won’t do—anything without our approval,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Feb. 4. “We’ll give him the approval where appropriate,” he added. “Where not appropriate, we won’t.” Some took it as a sign that Trump might rein in his attack dog. But civil servants are not waiting around for that to happen. In Northern Virginia, home to tens of thousands of workers on the federal payroll and military service members, the typical town-hall meeting in the town of Leesburg attracts a few dozen people. Hundreds gathered on the night Musk shut down USAID. “We’re hearing bizarre stories,” says Representative Suhas Subramanyam, the local Democratic Congressman who spoke at the event. His office has been flooded with workers describing DOGE’s takeover, and he instructed his staff to log their testimony and assist whistle-blowers. Much of what they witnessed is “simply illegal,” Subramanyam insists to TIME. “We’re almost being tested and dared to sue or investigate.”
Read More: Across Pennsylvania, Musk Deploys His Fame and Fortune For Trump.
Some lawsuits have worked. The White House complied with court orders blocking its attempt to freeze trillions of dollars in federal spending. A judge’s ruling on Feb. 6 delayed the deadline for the buyout offer to government employees. Unions have filed suits related to DOGE on behalf of federal workers. Even Musk’s usual admirers have warned he is overreaching. “The lawsuits are already flying,” a Feb. 4 Wall Street Journal editorial noted, “and courts will derail Mr. Musk’s project before it even gets off the ground if he isn’t careful.”
On Capitol Hill, Musk’s assault on the bureaucracy has set up a battle with Democrats that could determine the future of the government and the balance of power within it. “We don’t have a fourth branch of government called Elon Musk,” Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin told a crowd outside USAID on the afternoon of Feb. 3, while the men from DOGE tried to impose their demands inside.
Raskin was right. But the agency staffers listening to him on Pennsylvania Avenue, unsure of whether they still had a job, could not tell how much power Musk had acquired, and whether he would bend the other branches of government to his will. One staffer seemed especially skeptical. Yes, she told TIME, the Constitution grants Congress the power of the purse. But Musk had shown his power to yank it away.
“There’s only so much Democrats can do,” she said, not wanting to give her name lest it attract more attention from DOGE. Her official email account had been shut down, and she could no longer access her desk at the agency. Like thousands of her colleagues, and millions of Americans, she was left to watch Musk’s moves play out, wondering how far he would go, and what, if anything, could stop him.
—With reporting by Eric Cortellessa, Philip Elliott, Nik Popli, and Tessa Berenson Rogers/Washington
After Testifying "There Will Be No Enemies List at DOJ,"' AG Bondi Releases Enemies List On Day One! by Glenn Kirschner Justice Matters Feb 7, 2025 All the "King's" Men: Trump's lackeys and their disservice to America
Donald Trump is forever whining and complaining about his enemies: Jack Smith, Alvin Bragg, Leticia James, and the FBI agents and federal prosecutors who investigated Trump's crimes.
Trump's former criminal defense attorney, Pam Bondi, testified during her Senate confirmation hearing that there will be no enemies list at the Department of Justice if she is confirmed as Attorney General.
Once confirmed, AG Bondi issue a memo announcing the DOJ will be investigating Trump's enemies: Jack Smith, Alvin Bragg, Leticia James, and the FBI agents and federal prosecutors who investigated Trump's crimes.
Transcript
So friends remember, how Pam Bondi promised Senators that there would be no enemies list at the Department of Justice if she was confirmed as attorney general? Well, on day one as attorney general, Pam Bondi drafted and released -- you guessed it -- an enemy's list. Let's talk about that because justice matters.
Hey all. Glenn Kirschner here.
So friends, you remember this bit of theater: this forceful testimony from Donald Trump's former criminal defense attorney Pam Bondi at her Senate confirmation hearing? She said the Justice department will never have an enemies' list.
Well, on day one, after being confirmed as attorney general, Pam Bondi announced the Department of Justice will be going after Trump's enemies. Here's the new reporting this from NPR.
New attorney general moves to align Justice Department with Trump's priorities by Ryan Lucas NPR Published February 5, 2025 at 5:36 PM PST
On her first day in charge at the Justice Department, Attorney General Pam Bondi on Wednesday issued a series of directives aimed at aligning the department with President Trump and his agenda, including establishing a task force to examine the alleged weaponization of the justice system and reviving the federal death penalty.
The Senate confirmed Bondi on Tuesday evening and she was sworn in Wednesday in a ceremony at the White House. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas administered the oath of office for Bondi, whose husband and mother were by her side.
She takes over at a time of tumult at the Justice Department, where the Trump administration has pushed out several senior career officials over the past few weeks as the new leadership looks to assert control over the department and implement the president's agenda.
On her first day on the job, Bondi signed 14 memos addressed to all Justice Department employees. Some of the directives roll back guidelines put in place under the Biden administration, while others strike new ground. Many appear to offer details to implement executive orders President Trump signed, including on the weaponization of the federal government and on combatting antisemitism.
One of the memos, for example, establishes the "Weaponization Working Group," which is tasked with reviewing "the activities of all department and agencies exercising civil or criminal enforcement authority of the United States over the last four years."
Trump and Bondi have both argued that the department under the Biden administration unfairly targeted conservatives, most notably Trump himself. Trump was charged in two federal cases: for election interference in 2020 and for hoarding classified documents. Both cases were dropped after he won election to a second term.
The department's previous leadership rejected the allegation of political motivations, and pointed to multiple criminal cases against prominent Democrats during the Biden administration.
Focus on "improper aims"
According to the Bondi memo, the new working group will "identify instances where a department's or agency's conduct appears to have been designed to achieve political objectives or other improper aims rather than pursuing justice of legitimate governmental objectives."
It mentions several specific things that it will examine, including "weaponization" by former special counsel Jack Smith, the prosecutors and the investigators who took part in the "unprecedented raid on President Trump's home." FBI agents searched Trump's Mar-a-Lago club and his residence as part of its classified documents case.
It also will examine "federal cooperation with the weaponization" by the Manhattan district attorney and the New York state attorney general "to target President Trump, his family and his businesses." The Manhattan district attorney brought state criminal charges against Trump for falsifying business records to conceal a payment to an adult film star.
The Jan. 6 Capitol riot will also come under review, it says. The working group will look at "the pursuit of improper investigative tactics and unethical prosecutions" related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack. Trump granted clemency to every defendant accused of committing crimes that day in one of his first acts after returning to the White House.
The memo says the Justice Department will provide quarterly reports to the White House on the review's progress.
Another memo sets up a Joint Task Force for Oct. 7 to "prioritize seeking justice for victims" of the Hamas-led attacks on Israel. The task force also aims to address the "ongoing threat posed by Hamas and its affiliates" and to combat "antisemitic acts of terrorism and civil rights violations in the homeland."
Two other memos relate to the federal death penalty.
One lifts the moratorium on federal executions, and instructs federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty in cases involving the murder of a law enforcement official and capital crimes "committed by aliens who are illegally present in the United States."
The other relates to President Biden's decision in his waning days in office to commute the death sentences of 37 people on federal death row to life in prison. The Bondi memo directs the Justice Department to, among other things assist local prosecutors in pursuing death sentences under state law against the 37 individuals who received commutations.
Bondi also signed a memo that puts department attorneys on notice that they are expected to "zealously" defend, advance and protect the interests of the United States—interests that are set by the president.
It says that when DOJ attorneys "refuse to advance good-faith arguments by declining to appear in court or sign briefs, if undermines the constitutional order and deprives the President of the benefit of his lawyers."
It goes on to say that any department attorney who "because of their personal views or judgments declines to sign a brief or appear in court, refuses to advance good-faith arguments on behalf of the Administration, or otherwise delays or impedes the Department's mission will be subject to discipline and potentially termination."
Copyright 2025 NPR
New attorney general moves to align justice department with Trump's priorities and there she is obviously showing her independence from the White House and the president
On her first day in charge at the Justice Department, Attorney General Pam Bondi on Wednesday issued a series of directives aimed at aligning the department with President Trump and his agenda, including establishing a task force to examine the alleged weaponization of the justice system and reviving the federal death penalty.
The Senate confirmed Bondi on Tuesday evening and she was sworn in Wednesday in a ceremony at the White House. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas administered the oath of office for Bondi, whose husband and mother were by her side.
She takes over at a time of tumult at the Justice Department, where the Trump administration has pushed out several senior career officials over the past few weeks as the new leadership looks to assert control over the department and implement the president's agenda.
On her first day on the job, Bondi signed 14 memos addressed to all Justice Department employees. Some of the directives roll back guidelines put in place under the Biden administration, while others strike new ground. Many appear to offer details to implement executive orders President Trump signed, including on the weaponization of the federal government and on combatting antisemitism.
One of the memos, for example, establishes the "Weaponization Working Group," which is tasked with reviewing "the activities of all department and agencies exercising civil or criminal enforcement authority of the United States over the last four years."
Trump and Bondi have both argued that the department under the Biden administration unfairly targeted conservatives, most notably Trump himself. Trump was charged in two federal cases: for election interference in 2020 and for hoarding classified documents. Both cases were dropped after he won election to a second term.
The department's previous leadership rejected the allegation of political motivations, and pointed to multiple criminal cases against prominent Democrats during the Biden administration.
Focus on "improper aims"
According to the Bondi memo, the new working group will "identify instances where a department's or agency's conduct appears to have been designed to achieve political objectives or other improper aims rather than pursuing justice of legitimate governmental objectives."
It mentions several specific things that it will examine, including "weaponization" by former special counsel Jack Smith, the prosecutors and the investigators who took part in the "unprecedented raid on President Trump's home." FBI agents searched Trump's Mar-a-Lago club and his residence as part of its classified documents case.
So friends, from Donald Trump's incessant whining and complaining we know that he views as his enemies Jack Smith Alvin Bragg Leticia James the FBI investigators and federal prosecutors who worked January 6th cases and so as attorney general who did Pam Bondi vow to go after Jack Smith Alvin Bragg Leticia James the FBI investigators and federal prosecutors who handled January 6th cases maybe it's just a coincidence you know friends I know Pam Bondi has never worked at the United States Department of Justice so maybe she doesn't know that we don't talk about investigations we don't publish lists of people we intend to investigate we don't even decide who we should investigate unless there is what's called adequate predication enough evidence that someone has engaged in criminal activity before we even open an investigation never mind announce that we will be opening investigations none of this is the way a responsible law abiding Department of Justice is supposed to work and friends let's finish with this let me take on just one absurdity one obscene perversion of the mission of the Department of Justice remember when we just read that Pam Bondi said the Department of Justice will be going after the prosecutors and investigators who took part in the unprecedented raid on President Trump's home when FBI agents searched Trump's maralago club and his residence as part of its classified documents case let's be fact-based for just one minute let's return to reality Donald Trump took classified documents National Defense information some of our nation's most closely guarded Secrets he took them some might even say stole them he took them from the White House from the federal government without Authority without permission without any lawful basis when he left the presidency and he shipped them down to his social club in Florida he was then unlawfully retaining them and the federal government went about trying to negotiate the return of documents he had no right to have you know basically he held them hostage this was like a hostage negotiation for the return of our nation's classified information and Trump said I'm not giving them back and we negotiated and negotiated and negotiated and nothing came of it we would not have negotiated like that if if anybody else had been unlawfully retaining our national security secrets you can bet but we negotiated endlessly to no avail so then a grand jury issued a subpoena which has the the force of a court order saying turn the damn documents over give them back you are hereby compelled by the law to return them and Donald Trump didn't not only did he not return them he had one of his attorneys you know write an affidavit certifying they'd all been returned problem solved but they hadn't been returned and the federal government the Department of Justice the FBI had ample evidence that they hadn't been returned they were hidden they were moved around in what turned out to be a conspiracy that Trump was in with some of his workers at Mara Lago so what happened all of this evidence was presented to a federal judge in a sworn affidavit and the federal judge said oh you bet there's probable cause to believe that crimes have been committed and evidence of those crimes is presently being held retained concealed at maral Lago and the judge issued a search warrant this is not some un lawful raid on maral Lago it is the exact opposite it is our nation our law enforcement agency our department of justice doing the responsible thing trying to claw back from someone who was violating the law our national security information and lo and behold contrary to Trump's lawyer certifying they'd all been turned over there were tons of classified documents being unlawfully retained at Marl Lago and that is why Donald Trump was criminally indicted by a grand jury for unlawfully retaining those documents for obstructing justice by intentionally and knowingly violating that grand jury subpoena and for violating our nation's Espionage laws because of the sensitivity the volatility indeed the danger to our national security represented by the information Trump was unlawfully retaining and somehow law enforcement the FBI the Department of Justice they're all the bad guys because they sought to enforce the law and they did it while remaining loyal to the Constitution and Pam Bondi said for that they will pay they went after dear leader Donald Trump and we will try to make them pay I guess they believe that political leaders can commit all of the damn crimes they want and if you try to hold them accountable you are wrong FBI Federal prosecutors Department of Justice you are wrong for trying to hold powerful people accountable for their crimes this is the the legal upside down this is George Orwell's 1984 this is not a fact based Department of Justice that we will now have to suffer suffer for a while but we won't give up we won't give in because Justice matters midterms friends midterms as always please stay safe please stay tuned and I look forward to talking with you all again tomorrow
Judge pauses Trump plan to put USAID staff on leave by Kevin Breuninger @KevinWilliamB CNBC Published Fri, Feb 7 2025 4:43 PM EST Updated 4 Hours Ago
The OPS [Office of Public Safety] originated in the Public Safety program under the International Cooperation Administration (ICA) in 1954. In 1962, when the ICA was replaced by the USAID, the program was reorganised under the new title of 'Office of Public Safety', consolidating various disparate overseas police training and assistance projects across the globe. Its director, CIA operative and police reformer Byron Engle, served from 1962 until his retirement in 1973....
International development programs could present the modernisation and expansion of security infrastructure as growing stability and preventing crime in these nations, without the bad optics of the CIA or the military...
The OPS operated in at least fifty-two countries in Asia, Africa and the Americas. One of its main functions was counterinsurgency, aiding governments in the suppression of communist groups. In total, it provided over $200M of USAID and CIA funds to recipient countries in weaponry, communications equipment and tactical equipment. Its other functions were to facilitate the planting of CIA operatives within police forces of at-risk regions, and to find suitable candidates within these foreign forces to enrol in the CIA.
-- Office of Public Safety, by Wikipedia, Accessed: 2/7/25
This article provides evidence for the first time of a systematic policy of direct collusion between the Time Inc. media empire and the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
• A federal judge on Friday paused the Trump administration from carrying out its plan to place thousands of workers at the U.S. Agency for International Development on administrative leave. • The American Foreign Service Association and the American Federation of Government Employees, had asked the judge to order the Trump administration to halt its efforts to “shut down” USAID.
A worker removes the U.S. Agency for International Development sign on their headquarters on Feb. 7, 2025 in Washington, DC., by Kayla Bartkowski | Getty Images
A federal judge on Friday said he would temporarily pause the Trump administration’s plan to place thousands of workers at the U.S. Agency for International Development on administrative leave.
About 2,200 USAID employees were set to be placed on leave Friday night at 11:59 p.m. ET, as part of President Donald Trump’s efforts to shut down the independent government agency.
Five hundred USAID workers are already on administrative leave, a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice said in court.
Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, delivered the ruling after hearing arguments from the Trump administration and two groups representing federal workers in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.
The workers’ groups, the American Foreign Service Association and the American Federation of Government Employees, had asked Nichols to order the Trump administration “to immediately cease actions to shut down USAID’s operations.”
They had argued a court filing earlier Friday that USAID “is suffering an onslaught of unconstitutional and illegal attacks, leaving its workers, contractors, grantees, and beneficiaries deserted in the wreckage and a global humanitarian crisis in the wake.”
The Trump administration has “deliberately dismantled USAID’s infrastructure” and is “poised for a near-final killing blow,” they wrote.
Nichols said Friday afternoon that he would be entering a “very limited” temporary restraining order before midnight directed at the 2,200 at-risk USAID workers.
The judge said he has yet to decide if his ruling will rescind the Trump administration’s take-leave order for the 500 employees who have already received it.
During the hearing, Nichols questioned DOJ attorney Brett Shumate about why the Trump administration needed to place 2,200 USAID workers on leave so quickly.
“What is the urgency of this?” the judge asked.
“The President has decided there is corruption and fraud at USAID,” Shumate replied.
USAID was established in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy following the passage of the Foreign Assistance Act. It administers foreign aid and conducts a variety of other field missions around the world.
Foreign aid in recent years has comprised about 1% of the federal budget and less than 0.33% of GDP, according to a Brookings Institution report from September.
But USAID has nevertheless become a major target of Trump and Elon Musk, who have accused the agency of being an unaccountable magnet for fraud and corruption.
“THE CORRUPTION IS AT LEVELS RARELY SEEN BEFORE. CLOSE IT DOWN!” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Friday morning.
Musk, who is leading a sweeping effort to slash the size of government through the White House’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, has taken credit for dismantling USAID.
“We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper,” Musk wrote on his social media platform X.
Elon Musk @elonmusk
We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper.
Could gone to some great parties.
Did that instead.
Mike Benz @MikeBenzCyber
it ain’t dead yet, but already, and for the very first time, a hole has been put in the Terror Titanic
Kash Patel Took $25,000 From Russia-Linked Firm to Appear on an Anti-FBI TV Series: The documentary was produced by a filmmaker tied to Russian propaganda efforts. by David Corn & Dan Friedman Mother jones February 7, 2025 https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... ine-putin/
Last year, Kash Patel, the MAGA provocateur whom Donald Trump has nominated to head the FBI, received $25,000 from a Russia-linked production company to participate in a documentary in which he assailed the FBI and called for closing its headquarters.
In November, Tucker Carlson’s online network released a six-part series called All the President’s Men: The Conspiracy Against Trump that purported to chronicle the familiar MAGA conspiracy theory that a Deep State plotted against Donald Trump while he was a presidential candidate in 2016 and when he was president. The fourth episode focused on Patel and his years-long crusade to depict the Trump-Russia scandal—Moscow’s attack on the 2016 election and Donald Trump’s efforts to cover up its existence—as nothing but a total hoax orchestrated by nefarious Democrats and rogue government operatives.
In this film—which credits Patel as an executive producer—he offers a blistering attack on the FBI. He calls it a “corrupt” enterprise and claims it has been on the Democratic Party’s “payroll.” He says, “I’m the guy that’s going to tell you they need major reforms. I’m going to tell you to shut down the FBI headquarters building and open it up as a museum of the Deep State the next day. Seriously, you need 50 guys in Washington running the FBI.” He pushes the false claim that the FBI launched its Russia investigation in 2016 on the basis of the infamous and unconfirmed Steele memos. And he insists that the FBI and the rest of the US intelligence community that investigated Russian interference in the 2016 election “knew it didn’t exist.” He also asserts that “globalists” have been working with Al Qaeda to make a profit.
The series was produced for Carlson, who is featured in the final episode, by Global Tree Pictures, a Los Angeles-based firm run by Ukrainian-American-Russian filmmaker Igor Lopatonok. He and Russian-born film director Vera Tomilova, the chief financial officer of Global Tree Pictures, who holds a US green card, are listed in the film’s credits as its producers. Global Tree raised the financing for the series, according to a contract filed in Rudy Giuliani’s bankruptcy proceedings. (Giuliani also starred in the documentary.)
Lopatonok has ties to Russian propaganda and disinformation efforts.
In recent years, he has helped lead a Kremlin-financed effort to persuade Westerners to move to Russia. In 2023, he chaired a competition dubbed “To Russia With Love” that invited bloggers to produce content that would show the “most appealing side of Russia” and encourage people to emigrate there. This project was funded by the Presidential Foundation for Cultural Initiatives, a state entity that Putin created in 2021 to “support projects in the field of culture, art and the creative industries.”
One of Lopatonok’s colleagues in this project was John Mark Dougan, a former deputy sheriff in Palm Beach County, Florida, who received political asylum in Russia and who has been a key player in Russia’s disinformation operations against the West. In May, the New York Times reported, “Dougan has built an ever-growing network of more than 160 fake websites that mimic news outlets in the United States, Britain and France.” Dougan was listed on material as a member of the “Expert Council” of the “To Russia with Love” project and as a “mentor” for the winners.
Lopatonok has worked with famed director Oliver Stone on two documentaries on Ukraine that were widely described as pro-Kremlin, One of these films, titled Revealing Ukraine and released in 2019, was apparently financed in part by Ukrainian oligarch and pro-Kremlin politician Viktor Medvedchuk, according to the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project and Vlast.kz, an independent media outlet in Kazakhstan. The film prominently featured Medvedchuk, a long-time ally of Vladimir Putin who was sanctioned by the United States in 2014 in response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea. (Medvedchuk was arrested in Ukraine in 2021 and charged with treason; he was later traded to Russia in a prisoner swap.)
So, according to Patel’s own financial disclosure statement, he pocketed $25,000 from a production company operated by a filmmaker associated with a Kremlin-subsidized propaganda project, a pro-Putin oligarch, and a pro-Kremlin disinformation agent.
Lopatonok also appears to have been doing business—or trying to do business— in Russia. Last year, he and Tomilova set up a company there called Global 3 Pictures, according to Russian corporate records. This is the same name as a corporation they established in California in 2011. The Russian firm, according to the records, intended to produce films and television shows. The corporate listings note that the firm maintained a bank account at state-owned VTB, a bank subject to US sanctions. The records also note that Global 3 Pictures failed to submit a tax return.
Mother Jones sent Lopatonok and Patel each a list of questions and a request for comment. Neither responded.
The All The President’s Men series was loaded with Russian connections. Its director, Sean Stone, a son of Oliver Stone, hosted a show on RT America, the Russian state-funded network until it was shut down in 2022 after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. For this docuseries, Stone conducted the on-air interviews with Simona Mangiante, the wife of George Papadopoulos, a Trump foreign policy adviser who pleaded guilty to making false statements to FBI agents during the Russia investigation and served 12 days in federal prison.
In another Global Tree Picture film released last year, Hunter’s Laptop—Requiem for Ukraine, a documentary about alleged Biden corruption in Ukraine, Mangiante interviewed Andrii Derkach, whom the US Treasury Department sanctioned in 2020 for serving as a “Russian agent” and spreading disinformation to influence the American election that year—that is, disseminating false stories about then-candidate Joe Biden. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence later noted that Putin “had purview over” Derkach’s activities, meaning Moscow was running an operation to discredit Biden and help Trump. With this film, Lopatonok and Mangiante amplified the phony assertions peddled by an identified Russian agent.
The scriptwriting team for All the President’s Men included Lopatonok, Tomilova, and George Eliason, an editor at a website called Intelligencer that posts conservative and Putin-friendly material. Lopatonok and Tomilova are on its editorial board.
All the President’s Men featured the usual assortment of Trump champions who have for years pushed the Deep-State-is-after-Trump conspiracy tale, including Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and Papadopoulos. It’s full of paranoia and debunked claims.
Despite Carlson’s backing, Lopatonok and Tomilova’s series didn’t register much on the media landscape. But it has one intriguing piece of information: Patel’s financial relationship with a production company tied to Russian propaganda and disinformation activity. That is hardly a reassuring credential for an FBI chief.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
STATE OF NEW YORK; STATE OF ARIZONA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF COLORADO, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, STATE OF DELAWARE, STATE OF HAWAII, STATE OF ILLINOIS, STATE OF MAINE, STATE OF MARYLAND, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, STATE OF MINNESOTA, STATE OF NEVADA, STATE OF NEW JERSEY, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, STATE OF OREGON, STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, STATE OF VERMONT, and STATE OF WISCONSIN,
Plaintiffs,
-v-
DONALD J. TRUMP, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY; and SCOTT BESSENT, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY,
Defendants.
25 Civ. 1144 (JAV)
ORDER
PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, District Judge:
This Court, sitting in its Part I capacity, this evening received an application for a temporary restraining order filed by the Attorneys General of the 19 States identified as plaintiffs above. The States’ lawsuit challenges a new policy by the United States Department of the Treasury, at the direction of the President and the Secretary of the Treasury, which, as alleged, expands access to the payment systems of the Bureau of Fiscal Services (BFS) to political appointees and “special government employees.” The States contend that this policy, inter alia, violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq., in multiple respects; exceeds the statutory authority of the Department of the Treasury; violates the separation of powers doctrine; and violates the Take Care Clause of the United States Constitution. The States seek declaratory and injunctive relief. Later this evening, upon the States’ successful filing of their submissions, this matter was assigned on a permanent basis to the Hon. Jeannette A. Vargas, United States District Judge.
The Court has reviewed the affirmation of Colleen K. Faherty, dated February 7, 2025, in support of the States’ motion for a temporary restraining order, the States’ memorandum of law in support of that motion, the States’ motion for a temporary restraining order, dated February 7, 2025, and the Complaint. The Court’s firm assessment is that, for the reasons stated by the States, they will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief. See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). That is both because of the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking. The Court’s further assessment is that, again for the reasons given by the States, the States have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims, with the States’ statutory claims presenting as particularly strong. The Court’s further assessment is that the balance of the equities, for the reasons stated by the States, favors the entry of emergency relief.
The Court accordingly:
ORDERS that the defendants show cause before the Hon. Jeannette A. Vargas, at Courtroom 14C, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York, at 2 p.m. on Friday, February 14, 2025, why an order should not be issued pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure preliminarily enjoining the defendants during the pendency of this action from granting to political appointees, special government employees, and any government employee detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department access to Treasury Department payment systems or any other data maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information; and further
ORDERS that, sufficient reason having been shown therefor, pending the hearing of the States’ application for a preliminary injunction, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the defendants are (i) restrained from granting access to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees, other than to civil servants with a need for access to perform their job duties within the Bureau of Fiscal Services who have passed all background checks and security clearances and taken all information security training called for in federal statutes and Treasury Department regulations; (ii) restrained from granting access to all political appointees, special government employees, and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department, to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees; and (iii) ordered to direct any person prohibited above from having access to such information, records and systems but who has had access to such information, records, and systems since January 20, 2025, toimmediately destroy any and all copies of material downloaded from the Treasury Department’s records and systems, if any; and further
ORDERS that any opposition submission by defendants be filed by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, February 11, 2025; and that any reply by the States be filed by 5 p.m. on Thursday, February 13, 2025; and further
ORDERS that personal service of a copy of this order and the States’ above-described affidavit, memorandum of law, and Complaint, be filed upon the defendants or their counsel on or before February 8, 2025, by 12 noon; and that the States forthwith serve these materials by email on Government counsel Bradley Humphreys and Jeffrey Oestericher, whom the Court understands have independently been emailed the States’ filings; and further
ORDERS that plaintiffs post security in the amount of $10,000 prior to Friday, February 14, 2025, at 2 p.m.
SO ORDERED.
PAUL A. ENGELMAYER United States District Judge, sitting in Part I Dated: February 8, 2025 New York, New York
*****************************
NY AG delivers MASSIVE BLOW to Trump in LATE NIGHT ORDER by Michael Popok MeidasTouch Feb 8, 2025
Michael Popok reports on a win by NY AG Letitia James after a federal judge in Manhattan temporarily blocked Trump and Elon Musk’s associates from accessing the U.S. Treasury Department’s payment system as a result of a multi-state legal challenge she led.
Transcript
got breaking news a New York federal judge on an emergency basis has blocked by issuing a temporary restraining order Elon Musk and others from rumaging around the treasury Department servers looking for our medical information our most Private Financial information in fact the judge has ordered that anyone including Elon Musk the quote world's richest man anyone who's already obtained such information over the last week or two has to destroy it until there's a subsequent hearing this was led by Leticia James the New York attorney general who already took down Donald Trump once for over $450 million in a civil fraud case she's back and she's joined with 18 other Attorneys General to bring Justice and to stop Donald Trump and Elon Musk dead in their tracks I'm Michael popok you're on the mest touch Network in legal AF let's dive into the New Order on an emergency basis by judge Paul Meer of the southern district of New York which means Manhattan on an emergency application filed by 19 different states led by Attorneys General uh attorney general Leticia James they argued that all of the access given to Elon Musk as special governmental employees by the treasury Department and Trump violated the violate the administrative procedures act and violate the take care Clause of the United States Constitution and they're seeking temporary relief because of how fast these things have already been moving the judge was concerned that before they could even have a full-blown hearing on the temporary restraining order which he has assigned already to judge Janette Vargas um on to take place on the 14th of February on Friday he needed to put an administrative temporary restraining order in place now because of the nature of the uh harm that's being presented here and the likelihood of success on the merits so here is the actual order the court on this emergency application orders that the defendants show cause and the defendants here of course are the Donald Trump in His official capacity as the President of the United States Scott bassent uh for the treasury Department and the treasury Department so all of those defendants have to appear before judge Vargas on Friday to show cause why a preliminary injunction that's one step up from a temporary restraining order should not be issued so it's on they have the burden to show why it shouldn't be issued um during the pendency of this action concerning political appointees special government employees employees and any government employee detailed from an agency outside the treasury Department why they should not be stopped from accessing the treasury Department payment systems or any other data maintained by the treasury Department containing personal identifiable information the judge also ordered that there has been sufficient cause being shown that pending the the hearing of the state's application for a preliminary injunction on Friday that the defendants Trump musk bent are restrained from granting to any Treasury Department payment record they're restrained from granting access to any Treasury Department payment record payment system or any other Data Systems maintained by the treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and or confidential financial information of pay payes other than to civil servants with a need for access to perform their job within the Bureau of fiscal Services who have passed background checks and security clearances and taken all information security trading uh called for in federal statutes and Treasury Department regulations that means not you Elon Musk they are restrained from granting access to all political appointees special government employees and government employees detailed from an agency outside the treasury Department that's Doge that's musk um giving them access to any payment record payment system or any other data maintained by the treasury Department including personally identifiable information and confidential financial information of taxpayers and they are ordered to direct any person prohibited from above from having access to that information but who has already accessed that information records or systems since January 20th of 2025 to immediately destroy any and all copies of the material downloaded from the from the treasury Department's records and systems and then they got a then he said sets up a briefing schedule to get this whole thing set up in front of Judge Vargas for Friday and they'll have to post a bond U the states will post the bond for $10,000 to pay for some of this stuff so that's a um in a two cases now two uh injunctions that are now in place on the Doge access through the treasury Department of recordkeeping um I'm going to show you now a clip from attorney general uh Laticia James so you know how serious this all is is and here here's her post now
[Leticia James]
In the past week Elon Musk and his so-called Department of government efficiency have accessed the personal private information of tens of millions of Americans and sensitive data about public and private entities Social Security numbers addresses tax returns and more this unelected group led by the world's richest man is not authorized to have this information and they explicitly sought this unauthorized access to illegally blocked payments that millions of Americans rely on payments for Health Care Child Care and other essential programs today Democratic Attorneys General are taking action to keep Americans personal data secure to keep sensitive information about Americans private and to hold our constitution we have filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration for giving unauthorized individuals access to these immensely sensitive records in violation of the law president Trump does not have the power to give our private information away to whomever he wants and he does not have the power to cut federal spending that Congress approved much less to do so by giving the richest man in the world the keys to all Americans most sensitive information as Democratic Attorneys General we are suing to stop this unprecedented and unauthorized attack and to protect your personal information as I've said before no one is above the law and I will not hesitate to uphold the rule of law and protect New Yorkers. Thank you.
[Michael Popok] welcome back so um she takes it one step further she said this morning we want a court order blocking Elon Musk the world's richest man from accessing America's private data musk and his doge employees must destroy all records they've obtained I've said it before I'll say it again no one is above the law now Leticia James that's the one that there's people on the Maga side who literally said out loud during the campaign that they wanted to put her quote fat ass in jail she's back as I've said there are 22 at least Attorneys General around the country who are Democrats who are going to be going after Donald Trump twice a day three times a day every day twice on Sunday until his administration is over and they have an over 80% winning percentage from the first Trump Administration and right now they are collectively in these suits they are 9 and0 almost 10 and0 in these cases that Donald Trump hasn't won one of these Federal hearings nine different injunctions two preliminary injunctions already issued on various things now there's two competing court cases about Doge access of these servers by the treasury Department you're in my personal classified information financial information healthc care information and the rest think about all the things you've had to submit in order to get your benefits from the uh from the government it's all there um there's a case in front of Judge Kolar Catelli who's in the district of Colombia Federal bench she's forced the Department of Justice and the government to enter into a consent temporary restraining order that covers uh many of the same issues here but this new temporary restraining order by judge Angel Meer is even broader it's even broader and they can exist parallel to each other there was with some overlap this is what happens when you file multiple cases and multiple courts you want to do that because in case you get a bad ruling at least you've got three or four different judges all looking at the same thing right now the Attorneys General the civil liberty groups the the naacp's and ACLU of the world they don't have to worry about conflicting decisions because they're just winning it's just winning they're not tired of winning but it's all they're doing is winning got 11 separate court appearances they're 11 and0 Donald Trump has a one one and the Trump Department of Justice is in shreds and terms of its credibility in front of these judges so so that's where we are right now in New York but this is a effectively a nationwide bang it stops the Trump Administration from doing this now Steve bassent the treasury secretary I saw his comments on uh on Bloomberg recently where he he just said no no no no there's there's no bad stuff going on here with me giving complete and total access to a stranger who doesn't have a national security clearance or hasn't been confirmed by the Senate to go rooting around in your most personal information no no no he's going to do things about efficiency he's going to make this work more efficient does anybody believe this does anybody believe Scott Scott bent sorry our treasury secretary about about what he thinks the um that Elon Musk is doing there rooting around in our most private information here's the quote from bassent that almost I almost like fell out of my chair when I read it um he said must Doge isn't altering treasury data he said it's an operational review it's not an ideological review he told Bloomberg television the ability to change the system sits over at the Federal Reserve we don't we don't even run the system he said he said these are highly trained professionals do the Doge musk people this is not some roving ban running around doing things this is methodical and it's going to yield big savings um so I mean not according to this judge it's not and you're not going to allow you're not allowed to do it right now especially if it violates the administrative procedures act because the treasury Department is changing the way that it it secures data without telling the American people that they've done that so that's inappropriate and it's a improper delegation and savings clause or takings Clause under the uh under the um uh take care Clause sorry under the US Constitution we'll get to the bottom of it but only in federal courts and right here on Midas Touch and on legal AF continue to follow all of these stories we got 33 34 lawsuits that are out there right this is they're already 0 and 11 at the Trump Administration they haven't lost they haven't won yet because they're on the wrong side of the law on the wrong side of history in each one of these cases Elon mus shut down and congratulations to uh New York attorney general Laticia James she's going to be out there leading the way among these 22 I mean you know they're all kind of you know their own Attorneys General but look for her over and over and over again beating the Trump Administration with both ends of the stick and I I'm here for it and I know you are here too so until my next reporting I'm Michael popuk in collaboration with the midest touch Network we just launched the legal AF YouTube channel help us build this pro-democracy channel where I'll be curating the top stories the intersection of Law and politics go to YouTube now and free subscribe @ legal AF MTN that's @ legal l a fmtn [Music]
BREAKING: Trump loses EMERGENCY CASE in "BLOCKBUSTER" ruling Brian Tyler Cohen Feb 9, 2025 Democracy Watch with Marc Elias Democracy Watch episode 257: Marc Elias discusses Trump losing an emergency case.
... ORDERS that, sufficient reason having been shown therefor, pending the hearing of the States’ application for a preliminary injunction, pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the defendants are (i) restrained from granting access to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees, other than to civil servants with a need for access to perform their job duties within the Bureau of Fiscal Services who have passed all background checks and security clearances and taken all information security training called for in federal statutes and Treasury Department regulations; (ii) restrained from granting access to all political appointees, special government employees, and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department, to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees; and (iii) ordered to direct any person prohibited above from having access to such information, records and systems but who has had access to such information, records, and systems since January 20, 2025, to immediately destroy any and all copies of material downloaded from the Treasury Department’s records and systems, if any; and further
ORDERS that any opposition submission by defendants be filed by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, February 11, 2025; and that any reply by the States be filed by 5 p.m. on Thursday, February 13, 2025; and further
ORDERS that personal service of a copy of this order and the States’ above-described affidavit, memorandum of law, and Complaint, be filed upon the defendants or their counsel on or before February 8, 2025, by 12 noon; and that the States forthwith serve these materials by email on Government counsel Bradley Humphreys and Jeffrey Oestericher, whom the Court understands have independently been emailed the States’ filings; and further
ORDERS that plaintiffs post security in the amount of $10,000 prior to Friday, February 14, 2025, at 2 p.m.
This is democracy watch. Marc, we have major news on pretty much the biggest story in the country right now which is this idea that Elon musk's Doge commission has access to all Americans sensitive data, including Social Security numbers. For example, a federal judge has finally stepped in. Can you explain what just happened?
[Marc Elias] This is a blockbuster ruling from a federal judge in New York City who was asked on an emergency basis to block DOGE's access to these very sensitive databases at the US Treasury Department, not just to block Elon Musk's access, right? In some of the earlier cases we've talked about there has been this kind of parsing about whether Doge could still be in the treasury Department, but it was read only, and they couldn't write, or whether only the special government employees could have access to the information but not others. What this judge did is said nobody from Doge can have access to these databases, only career civil servants within the treasury Department can have access to these databases, and that any materials, or printouts, or downloads of any information from these databases, have to be destroyed by anyone associated with those who may have them. So this judge has really, at this point, put a complete halt on the exfiltration of data, the infiltration with personnel, the embedding of personnel into these databases that have personally identified information like people's Social Security numbers. This is a big bold order from a very good experienced federal judge in New York City. It's only a temporary hold until the case can be ultimately heard on the merits and decided. That is true about all these cases we're hearing about. And no one should worry about that. That's how the system works, right? First there's an emergency order, and there's sort of a status quo put in place. And then the case is decided from there.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] Marc, this might be the cynic in me coming out, but who is to say that they're actually going to comply with this order?
[Marc Elias] You sound like the comments that we've gotten at democracy docket when democracy docket reported this. And you sound like my Blue Sky feed of people who say great Marc, but they're not going to comply. And I understand the skepticism, Brian, because Mr Big Balls, the one guy, and I don't remember. Is he the one that's has sort of a Nazi problem?
[Brian Tyler Cohen] When we can't remember which one is big balls, and which one is the guy who wants to normalize Indian hate, I think that's when there's a general culture problem. I think that's a larger problem here .
[Marc Elias] Right, and of course the vice president, with no other official duties to do, decided to weigh in in favor of rehiring the guy in favor of Indian hate.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] While he has to go home to his indian-american wife and his three indian-american kids. But I guess that's the cost of loyalty to Donald Trump.
[Marc Elias] Right. So look, I understand the skepticism that people have here, but what I can tell you is that this federal judge, by issuing this order as quickly as he did -- I mean, the state of New York and the other states that brought this lawsuit, brought it on Friday, and by early in the morning on Saturday, this order was already in place. And like I said, it is a very sweeping order. You know, anyone who is caught with those materials, or where there is evidence that they did not destroy them, will be subject to contempt of court, which can be quite serious and the lawyers associated with it, they face problems if they don't make sure that their clients and the executive branch knows this. Other employees in the Department of Justice, or in the treasury Department, could face problems. But you know, this is in some sense the most sweeping action we have seen any judge take in any of the cases against Donald Trump and the whole dismantling of government since he became president.
[Brian Tyler Cohen] so this was with regard to treasury we have seen Doge um gain access into the Department of Labor Doge gain access into a a variety of other organizations so is a ruling like this going to apply to other agencies or do we just have to wait for those agencies to be harmed so that they have standing to go in and do the same thing but really by then we're just we're just kind of chasing after Doge as opposed to take any taking any um proactive action against something that we all know that they're going to do anyway so could this could this apply to other agencies even before Doge goes in or do we have to wait for Doge to kind of wreak havoc before we can do something about it look I I think you've hit the nail on the head so you know this order only applies to treasury but it speaks to a larger sort of norms and culture uh and expectations problem that we have which it it is good to see the judges are coming around on like so to be clear this is this is a big this this is a big deal this case in that Journey but let me explain it to you so normally when a federal judge is has a lawsuit against the United States against the president of the United States against you know cabinet officials you can understand why they are typically skeptical of private litigant coming in and saying we would like you to shut down the way in which the executive branch is operating in some key faction and when the Department of Justice lawyers show up in their courtrooms and say look your honor we're operating according to what the president wants and what the Secretary of Treasury wants and like this is all about board courts are normally predisposed to be like okay I've got the Department of Justice they speak on behalf of the you know the federal government I've got cabinet officials you know like in the normal course they are not inclined to think the worst of what is going on they they assume that all things being equal it is probably the private litigant who is on the wrong side not the government who's on the wrong side so what we have seen though over the course of just the last seven days is a real attitude shift right the first lawsuits that were filed the courts were entering orders that you and I talked about that were being easily evaded you know they were they it was like a game of cat and mouse they would issue an order and then the government would say oh well we only assumed it applied to these people and not those people and then we started to see the courts issue broader orders you know we saw that order from a judge in Washington DC about the OM memo who said look I don't care if it's an OM memo I don't care if it's a tweet from a press secretary like it's it applies my order prohibits you from defunding these grants in any fashion that was the first time we saw a federal judge really like the aha moment went on that deference to the federal government is not going to work here right you need to do these broader orders here we saw the judge do it off the back and said I'm going to apply this basically this order to everyone other than career civil servants if you are not a career civil servant if you are part of Doge you know hands off and you got to destroy it now I understand this is we are still on the journey that you are laying out you're you're like when can this just be prophylactic to the federal entire federal government we're not there would it surprise me if we start to get there next week no it would because I think these federal judges are getting tired about two things number one they are annoyed undoubtedly that they keep being told that there that there is an emergency that they have to rule on immediately judges have schedules like everybody else they don't like having to set everything aside and they definitely don't like having to set everything aside when it turns out that the government is consistently on the wrong side right which is that the government keeps losing these emergency hearings so what's happening is the judges are getting in their heads like I don't understand this other judge told them to cut it out and they're still doing it and now it's interfering my docket and so as this starts to snowball I think you're going to start to get judges more and more annoyed with these and start to issue broader orders the second part though Brian and this is what we have to be on the lookout for are we starting to see cracks in the lawyers in the Department of Justice or in these agencies you know I took note that in one of the hearings uh late last week it was actually a very senior supervisor who argued the case now that is highly unusual you don't usually have senior lawyers in a Department of Justice in a supervisory role having to show up in court and I'm starting to wonder not that it's a good thing if you start to see resignations not that it's a good thing if you start to see the good people you know uh uh uh leaving but I'm starting to see the early signs of the willingness of some government lawyers to fight these absurdly illegal fights I'm starting to see that crack and so I think a combination of those two things may come to a boiling point in the next you know in the next five days next seven days and I think you and I will then be doing an episode to talk about where we go from there because that would be Uncharted Territory well Mark isn't it true that for some of these lawyers who don't want to put their own jobs on the line I mean they they can be predisposed to uh to sanctions or even losing their law license if they're going to go in because they've been you know thrown to the Wolves by the Trump Administration who frankly could care l if if some disposable um lawyer loses his law license because there's going to be a line of other lawyers who are willing to take their place but aren't aren't some of these folks I guess deferring more to the longevity of their own career than than looking to do something illegal for Trump I think that some of them are doing that some of them are looking out for the longevity of their career I think some of them are also just dispirited by it you know I mean you know you could you could be a doj lawyer for five years and argue cases regularly and never lose you know let's be honest like the doj usually wins their cases because like I said I think their success rate is something like 98 or 99% and in fact we we we've spoken at length about the fact that if anything the doj is too timid to take on to take an aggressive posture on some of these cases because they are so predisposed to only taking cases that they're guaranteed to win and so when you have you know Donald Trump engaging in in the January 6 stuff or in the classified document case it takes so long because the natural predisposition is not to say yeah let's just let's just you know go for it even though it's it's it's not a home run no that's exactly right and I think that that you know a lot of the criticisms we had about mer Garland and and as you say in the January 6 prosecutions also in the voting Arena you know the place that I litigate most uh they were too timid uh for precisely the reasons you say but I think that that so part of it is I think these lawyers looking out for the longevity of their career but part of it is also they are just shell shocked at the prospect of continuously going to court and being scolded I mean you know these these lawyers are having a rough go of it in front of these these these these judges because the positions they are advocating I mean you know in a different case uh that you know involved usaid you know you had you had a trump appointed judge write an opinion that is like you know there's a difference between putting someone on leave in Bethesda Maryland than putting them on leave in Syria I mean that doesn't sound like a big deal maybe to your audience but that's a really biting and sharp retort for a career uh doj lawyer or any doj lawyer to hear from a federal judge no less one appointed uh by the by the by by Donald Trump uh so you know I I I just I think we may get to the point where where we get to an inflection point where the courts become very very irritated much more aggressive in the scope of their orders and the Department of Justice lawyers become just look themselves in the mirror and like what am I doing and and finally let's finish off with this I I'm cautiously feeling heartened about the prospect of the Court actually doing what what you for so long have said it would do which is to to serve as an effective Bull workk against the worst excesses of the Trump Administration does it look like in fact the court is able to stand up and and do what for example republicans in Congress won't do which is to to assert its Authority retain its autonomy and and and uphold the law so the answer is yes with an as okay so you and I have talked about this a lot and I've said you know the trial courts in this country the federal district courts in this country are are as good as they have been in a very long time Joe Biden appointed a lot of Judges some of the Trump judges as we've seen are not amused by these Antics um even a Ronald Reagan appointee in Washington state as you recall was you know uh sort of read the riot act to doj over Birthright citizenship right then you get to the courts of appeals right which we really haven't heard from yet we haven't yet heard the DC circuit or the second circuit or the first circuit or the fifth circuit or any of those we haven't heard them weigh in yet right that'll be the next thing and I and I kind of think they'll hold I think that you know when you look at where these cases have been filed they've been filed in Washington DC the DC circuit's pretty reasonable the ones in Massachusetts go to the first circuit that's a fairly um uh Progressive circuit the second circuit New York more mixed but but also very a very smart circuit um so I kind of think things will hold there but then the big wild card is what does the Supreme Court do at that point yeah you know and they have kind of three choices Brian one is they just say you know what not it like you know what we don't have to hear these cases the lower courts are flooded with them the lower courts are sorting them out they we don't we the Supreme Court don't at least not on an emergency basis have to get involved you know maybe we'll hear a case for next term you know in 20126 but we don't need to do anything now right it's already February our term ends in June we're just going to let be that's option one option two is they actually want to show solidarity with the lower courts and they actually just sarily affirm these Lower Court decisions I I I'm not you know I didn't fall off a turnup truck that is that is that is not the most likely outcome the third is that they that a conservative majority of the Supreme Court decides they want to dive in that would be as that would be such a terrible thing not just subsid on the law but also for the Court's credibility you know for the Chief Justice keeps talking about you know there are no Democratic judges and Republican judges or justices and you know their ethics are perfect and all of that there this is working itself through the lower courts just fine the Supreme Court doesn't need to be in a hurry to jump into these cases and that would be my advice to them if they were ever ask my advice which they're not um but that is of course going to be the first test and that will probably come in one of the birthright citizenship cases just because those are a little bit further ahead but you know my advice to Chief Jud is Rob Bert just tell his colleagues no one no one needs to hear quickly from the US Supreme Court in any of these cases well I know that you have been covering this relentlessly democracy docket is where I get all of my news in terms of what happens in the courts and these Court decisions these Monumental Court decisions being handed down so highly recommend for anybody watching not just to hear about this stuff as soon as it breaks but also to support Mark and his team which is um what we should be doing right now please make sure to sign up for democracy doet I'll put the link right here on the screen and also in the post description of this video I'm Brian teller Cohen I'm Mark Elias this is democracy watch.
