Emil Bove's weaponization of the Justice Department is leading to resignations, including of a former protégé; Pam Bondi's bark is worse than her bite; Alex Spiro is a good lawyer.
Maybe someone can enlighten me on this. Why to people resign, instead of making someone fire them? Like would there be any benefit in Sassoon saying "no, I won't write that order, and no, I'm not resigning?" If the order is unlawful, do you have to do it? I realize that this "fuck you, you don't have the balls to fire me" attitude could have a lot of personal consequences but I would have thought someone in all this would just said screw it, let's FAFO. thanks
From my non-legal progressive viewpoint, we are deep into the ending of our democracy. Your podcasts are less frantic about this possibility; you always start from the premise that 'laws will be followed and courts will uphold the law'. Are there specific events or actions that would, in your mind, point to the replacement of our democracy with an oligarchy or dictatorship?
Ken says Hagen Scotten has an impressive resume because he was awarded the bronze star and that he served in the army, but frankly it would be a lot more impressive if he was awarded a bronze star without having served in the military.
Two questions for you folks. First, riffing off of Doug's point a bit, the view from here (not far from DC, in the Baltimore suburbs) is that we are at best weeks away from seeing if the courts are going to have any power to check Trump and Musk. In other words, whether anyone in the US Marshalls decides to put their sworn duty to uphold the will of the courts over the orders of the DoJ, and whether they all just get fired until the only people left are the compliant. What's your thoughts on that?
Second: I'm 60 years old, and while I look a bit younger, I definitely look like the middle-aged white dude that I am. I have been repeatedly engaged by older white men who seem to expect that I'm also a Trump follower, and they're gobsmacked when they find out otherwise. (Two have tried playing the "I've served my country so you can't tell me shit" card, to which my response is "Do the words cavalry scout in the 82nd Airborne mean anything to you?")
In all these cases, these men (and it's always men) relate at some point that their primary source of information is Fox News, and if it's not the sole source, the others are outfits like OANN. And while I stand by my oath to uphold the Constitution and all the amendments, especially the first (I have done "Wall of Vets" like work in the past), I don't see a path to recovering our democracy while the conservative media ecosystem is permitted to exist in it's current form. What are your thoughts on how we can resolve this while still remaining true to our values?
any ideas on if Musk could be personally liable for firing of federal employees for “poor performance” when that is just a lie? I think I just really like the idea that he could be personally liable for any wrongful terminations by the DOGE?
Josh, I would like to commend you, a serious journalist, for consistently referring to the Administrative Procedure Act by its correct name. Could you please ask your colleague, the fancy-pants downtown lawyer with a Stanford degree why he insists on calling it the "Administrative Procedures Act?"
I was going to let it go after one episode. But this makes two in a row and I'm convinced you're just trying to troll us.
For the Eric Adam’s matter, would the state of NY or citizens of NYC have standing to sue the federal government for coercion of their official? Or could the NYC DA charge the mayor for taking a bribe?
For the issue of whether or not the executive will follow court orders, can the President pardon someone (Musk) for example from contempt of the court orders or contempt of congress? Is there real jeopardy there? He can (and presumably will) provide preemptive pardons for members of DOGE (as long as they continue to keep him happy). I wonder if they realize how much power over themselves they hand him by potentially committing crimes at his request without already having secured such pardons.
As someone from the media world, I appreciated the discussion of the AP in the White House, but let's remember that it shouldn't even get to the point where it's a legal issue. The other journos should be standing up for the AP the way they did for Fox under Obama. Disturbing that they're not.
I wonder why Ken did not sign the Open Letter to federal prosecutors that was signed by more than 900 former federal prosecutors to express his support to the remaining career staff under this new administration.
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."
I would also be remiss if I didn’t point out that federal courts can appoint special prosecutors in federal criminal contempt cases. This happened to Steve Donzinger when he ignored court orders prohibiting him from attempting to enforce his Ecuadorian judgment against Chevron which was the product of bribery (another example of taking notes on a criminal conspiracy. Don’t have a documentary crew following you around when you are criming)
Maybe someone can enlighten me on this. Why to people resign, instead of making someone fire them? Like would there be any benefit in Sassoon saying "no, I won't write that order, and no, I'm not resigning?" If the order is unlawful, do you have to do it? I realize that this "fuck you, you don't have the balls to fire me" attitude could have a lot of personal consequences but I would have thought someone in all this would just said screw it, let's FAFO. thanks
From my non-legal progressive viewpoint, we are deep into the ending of our democracy. Your podcasts are less frantic about this possibility; you always start from the premise that 'laws will be followed and courts will uphold the law'. Are there specific events or actions that would, in your mind, point to the replacement of our democracy with an oligarchy or dictatorship?
The transcript, which I need, is not (yet) available.
Ken says Hagen Scotten has an impressive resume because he was awarded the bronze star and that he served in the army, but frankly it would be a lot more impressive if he was awarded a bronze star without having served in the military.
Two questions for you folks. First, riffing off of Doug's point a bit, the view from here (not far from DC, in the Baltimore suburbs) is that we are at best weeks away from seeing if the courts are going to have any power to check Trump and Musk. In other words, whether anyone in the US Marshalls decides to put their sworn duty to uphold the will of the courts over the orders of the DoJ, and whether they all just get fired until the only people left are the compliant. What's your thoughts on that?
Second: I'm 60 years old, and while I look a bit younger, I definitely look like the middle-aged white dude that I am. I have been repeatedly engaged by older white men who seem to expect that I'm also a Trump follower, and they're gobsmacked when they find out otherwise. (Two have tried playing the "I've served my country so you can't tell me shit" card, to which my response is "Do the words cavalry scout in the 82nd Airborne mean anything to you?")
In all these cases, these men (and it's always men) relate at some point that their primary source of information is Fox News, and if it's not the sole source, the others are outfits like OANN. And while I stand by my oath to uphold the Constitution and all the amendments, especially the first (I have done "Wall of Vets" like work in the past), I don't see a path to recovering our democracy while the conservative media ecosystem is permitted to exist in it's current form. What are your thoughts on how we can resolve this while still remaining true to our values?
Please post a transcript.
any ideas on if Musk could be personally liable for firing of federal employees for “poor performance” when that is just a lie? I think I just really like the idea that he could be personally liable for any wrongful terminations by the DOGE?
Josh, I would like to commend you, a serious journalist, for consistently referring to the Administrative Procedure Act by its correct name. Could you please ask your colleague, the fancy-pants downtown lawyer with a Stanford degree why he insists on calling it the "Administrative Procedures Act?"
I was going to let it go after one episode. But this makes two in a row and I'm convinced you're just trying to troll us.
For the Eric Adam’s matter, would the state of NY or citizens of NYC have standing to sue the federal government for coercion of their official? Or could the NYC DA charge the mayor for taking a bribe?
For the issue of whether or not the executive will follow court orders, can the President pardon someone (Musk) for example from contempt of the court orders or contempt of congress? Is there real jeopardy there? He can (and presumably will) provide preemptive pardons for members of DOGE (as long as they continue to keep him happy). I wonder if they realize how much power over themselves they hand him by potentially committing crimes at his request without already having secured such pardons.
Waiting on your usually high quality trains crypt.
As someone from the media world, I appreciated the discussion of the AP in the White House, but let's remember that it shouldn't even get to the point where it's a legal issue. The other journos should be standing up for the AP the way they did for Fox under Obama. Disturbing that they're not.
I had forgotten about Bannon on the Boat. Never thought I’d miss those days.
I’m finding it harder to laugh about things these days, when all of us—and our country—are in serious trouble.
I wonder why Ken did not sign the Open Letter to federal prosecutors that was signed by more than 900 former federal prosecutors to express his support to the remaining career staff under this new administration.
He obviously must've burned all his bridges when he left and didn't want to make it awkward
I don't think Sassoon having taken an oath to the United States/Constitution precludes her from having also taken one to the President.
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."
I would also be remiss if I didn’t point out that federal courts can appoint special prosecutors in federal criminal contempt cases. This happened to Steve Donzinger when he ignored court orders prohibiting him from attempting to enforce his Ecuadorian judgment against Chevron which was the product of bribery (another example of taking notes on a criminal conspiracy. Don’t have a documentary crew following you around when you are criming)