As a managing AUSA, she received the Jack Smith report on January 16, 2025. Of some interest, the indictment (on which Todd Blanche’s name appears) claims that there was an pending criminal prosecution that day. There was; but it was of Walt Nauta. Aileen Cannon had already dismissed the case against Trump.

Judge Cannon issued an order prohibiting DOJ from sharing the report on January 21.

Lineburger is accused of two more actions:

1. On September 22, 2025: Saving electronic messages (seemingly not the Jack Smith Report) to a “Chocolate_Cake_Recipe.pdf” file and sending it from her DOJ account to a Hotmail account.
2. On December 1, 2025: Renaming the Report itself “Bundt_Cake_Recipe.pdf” and sending it to her Gmail account.

For those two acts, she is charged with:

18 USC 641: Stealing the Chocolate Cake PDF sent on September 22.

18 USC 1519: Obstructing the proper compliance with Judge Cannon’s January 21 order, apparently by renaming the Jack Smith Report, “Bundt Cake.”

18 USC 2071: Concealing a document deposited with a Clerk of the Court with the intent of taking it away, for her actions on December 1.

18 USC 641: Stealing the Bundt Cake PDF.

Now, there are likely defenses to all of these charges, not least that DOJ has stopped charging 641 (Josh Schulte got a 641 charge dismissed in his first trial). And obviously there will be some hilarious selective prosecution issues.

But for now, I have two main questions about this.

First, how did they find her? Did she send these documents to a journalist? Did the FBI find out about it as a reporter tried to report out the story? Has DOJ been scanning DOJ files for evidence of Trump’s crimes, to make sure none of that goes missing?

Relatedly, what led Lineburger to take the actions she did when she did? Notably, both the September 22 date and the December 1 came in the same period when DOJ was indicting (and trying to reindict) Jim Comey.

Keep in mind that the Jack Smith stolen documents report almost certain explains why the current FBI Director — the guy who accused Jim Comey of lying to Congress? — demanded immunity before fully testifying to a grand jury.

And there’s the possibility that Lineburger wasn’t trying to convert these documents to her own use at all. It’s possible she was trying to share it, legally, as a whistleblower, with Congress.

The post Former AUSA Accused of Being Marginally as Criminal as Trump Is appeared first on emptywheel.

It is intended to be, I’m fairly sure, a pardon for all federal crimes Trump had committed before yesterday.

I’ll do a follow-up that explains how we got here at more length. But as important background, consider the several kinds of legal jeopardy Trump is known to face:

• Tax crimes for refusing to pay his taxes, which may have been partly exposed by the leaked tax returns Charles Littlejohn liberated
• The January 6 and document theft crimes for which he was already charged (the latter would require successful appeals of Aileen Cannon’s order throwing the charges out); in recent days, John Solomon has been in a panic that the January 6 charges were dismissed without prejudice
• Any other crimes discovered as part of the January 6 investigation; significantly, Jack Smith investigated how Trump raised money in the guise of election integrity, then spent it on a slew of things that had nothing to do with election integrity
• Cryptocurrency fraud (for which Trump is currently being sued by Justin Sun; in response to which World Liberty has sued Sun)
• Bribery in plain sight
• Foreign influence peddling
• The rampant insider trading disclosed by Trump’s most recent disclosure form

Which is to say, Trump’s known or suspected crimes go well beyond just the two indictments charged in 2023.

Start at the beginning. This document, which was signed after the original “settlement” and Terrorist Slush Fund, suggests that Blanche created this document solely as part of setting up the Terrorist Slush Fund, as a “relevant requirement[] for the Fund.”

Bullet C claims to absolve the Plaintiffs, which already includes Trump and his spawn, of all crimes. It’s not just him and his spawn though. It includes family and related corporations, broadly defined, and so would include Trump’s cryptocurrency ventures, his failing social media company, Trump Organization, and anything else they’ve got hidden somewhere. C1 includes anything before the Agency, so presumably the IRS. But C2 also includes anything Trump would call “Lawfare and/or Weaponization,” which in his usage means, “being held accountable for his crimes.” C3 also includes things (with tax returns specifically included) before other agencies, which would include the SEC and FEC, under which agencies some of Trump’s other crimes would be investigated.

Donald Trump has committed a broad swatch of crimes, including crimes committed as a private or corporate person after becoming President.

And his personal defense attorney, Todd Blanche, in his role as Acting Attorney General, just claimed to absolve him of all those crimes.

There may be legal loopholes in this attempted pardon. But the intent of it is fairly clear.

The post Trump’s Personal Attorney Todd Blanche Attempts to Pardon His Boss appeared first on emptywheel.

Doesn’t it feel oddly quiet now, in comparison to the previous three weeks from April 23 through May 12?

Something happened, singular or plural; I don’t mean the continuing Iran war or Trump’s visit to China, or a myriad of other events like the unending stream of corruption. I’m referring to something that happened to Trump’s health and it shows in how quiet it is this week in comparison.

I collected a series of items over the previous three weeks; my spidey sense is tingling, telling me there’s a pattern in this material but I can’t tease it out. Am I missing something in this or is it just my pareidolia?

April 23, 2026 – Morning – Trump falls asleep during an Oval Office event with press present
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-asleep-meeting-claim/

April 24, 2026 – Trump posted 18 times on Truth Social between 12:04 am and 7:33 am; some posts are about treason charges against Obama and Clinton, and one about nullifying the 2020 election
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-resurrects-calls-arrest-barack-164000210.html

April 27, 2026 – Bruising on Trump’s left hand evident in a photo of him with King Charles III, and right hand in yet another photo with the king

Trump's right hand has been in bad shape for a long time now, but this picture taken today shows discoloration on the back of his *left* hand

(Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty) pic.twitter.com/J8kG9ou8yh

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 27, 2026

the back of Trump's right hand is swollen and discolored as he poses for pictures with King Charles pic.twitter.com/M9VcUEC2Sl

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 27, 2026

April 30, 2026 – Mid-day – Trump ranted on Truth Social that presidential candidates should take cognitive tests

Trump Boasts About Cognitive Exam Scores: ‘ACED IT ALL THREE TIMES’

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-79-boasts-about-brain-as-he-goes-on-manic-posting-spree/

May 1, 2026 – Trump bragged to an audience at The Villages, FL about his results on a recent cognitive test
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/trump-jokes-theres-no-place-safer-for-him-than-a-florida-retirement-community-after-shooting

May 2, 2026 – Trump attended a “scheduled dental appointment at his local dentist in Florida” though the White House has a dentist and facilities in which to operate
https://x.com/JuliaManch/status/2050641592621339062

May 3, 2026 – Trump attended the final round of the Cadillac Championship from his suite at Trump National Doral Miami golf course, Miami FL
https://www.wpbf.com/article/florida-trump-watching-doral-cameron-young-wins-cadillac-championship/71196616

May 5, 2026 – In front of a small business summit, Trump bragged again about passing three cognitive tests, one during Trump 1.0 and two during Trump 2.0, with the latest asking him to identify animals like a lion, bear, alligator, and squirrel.
https://www.nj.com/politics/2026/05/trump-brags-about-acing-cognitive-testwhere-he-needed-to-identify-a-squirrel.html
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tOQxsIHkC_A (KUTV2News)

May 6, 2026 – Photo of Trump at a podium at a White House event shows swelling and bruising with makeup to cover the bruising on both hands
https://x.com/factpostnews/status/2052129050907246609
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-79-debuts-swollen-hands-as-health-concerns-mount/

May 7, 2026 – Trump confabulates lower gasoline prices responding to a reporter’s question at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool
https://rollcall.com/factbase/trump/transcript/donald-trump-press-gaggle-lincoln-memorial-reflecting-pool-may-7-2026/

May 7, 2026 – LIV Golf Virginia tournament began, hosted at Trump National Golf Club Washington DC, May 7-10
https://northernvirginiamag.com/news/2026/05/04/liv-golfs-2026-tournament-returns-to-trump-national-in-sterling/

May 8, 2026 – Rumors spread widely across social media that Trump visited Walter Reed; White House had called a lid on media access before noon; Trump had been rage posting on Truth Social about/at Iran
https://www.pennlive.com/news/2026/04/white-house-responds-to-rumors-that-donald-trump-was-rushed-to-the-hospital.html

May 8, 2026 – Evening – Trump was scheduled to attend LIV Golf dinner in Sterling, VA

May 9, 2026 – Trump appeared at LIV Golf Virginia tournament during the third round; he remained in a suite with his son Eric
https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/president-donald-trump-makes-liv-204110816.html

May 11, 2026 – Late morning – Trump fell asleep after he had been speaking at a public White House event; later failed to recognize Indiana University’s coach Curt Cignetti who had been standing right next to him.
https://www.aol.com/entertainment/donald-trump-appears-fall-asleep-074941086.html
https://x.com/idreesali114/status/2053870475248341078
https://x.com/Acyn/status/2053935402088911018

May 11-12, 2026 – Trump posted +50 times over three hours between 10:00 pm and 1:12 am, which comedian Stephen Colbert likened to a “waterfall of paranoid madness.” Trump resumed posting at 6:46 am on May 12.
https://www.aol.com/entertainment/tv/articles/trump-slammed-night-nemesis-paranoid-115118244.html

You’ll recall I live part-time as a caretaker with a parent who has dementia. They can’t live alone any longer.

My parent is NOT as bad off as Trump, based on the three weeks above.

These are the publicly-known health exams Trump has had, and one scheduled for next week:

April 11, 2025 – Trump had a routine physical exam at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/memorandum-from-the-white-house-physician-president-donald-j-trumps-annual-physical

July 17, 2025 – Trump tested and diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency after reports of swelling of ankles and bruising on hands
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5406650-trump-vein-condition-mild-swelling/

October 10, 2025 – Trump had what he called a “semi-annual physical” at Walter Reed, which initial reports said included an MRI (eventually revealed to be a CT scan)
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/donald-trump-physical-walter-reed/

May 2, 2026 – “scheduled dental appointment”

May 26, 2026 – Trump to have dental check-up and annual physical at Walter Reed

There have surely been more consultations with healthcare professionals not disclosed to the public. For example, there must have been a visit with a doctor who diagnosed Trump and dispensed what was characterized by his physician Dr. Sean Barbabella as a “preventive skin treatment.”

The rash was visible on March 2 when Trump attended a Medal of Honor ceremony at the White House; it’s not clear that Barbabella was the dispensing physician.

What else has Trump been treated for that the public doesn’t know about? Has any of the care he’s received affected his activities of daily living, let alone his ability to function as POTUS? Is he on any medications or other therapies affecting his judgment — or are any of his conditions like that underlying his edema including chronic venous insufficiency negatively affected his judgment?

At the two golf events held at Trump branded courses, Trump was accompanied by his son Eric. Shouldn’t the media press Eric for answers since he appears to be the family member who most recently spent time with him and may be Trump’s guardian?

Is the daily observation of “Executive Time, Closed Press” noted in mornings on Trump’s schedule an accommodation for Trump’s inability to stay awake during events before noon?

Trump and the White House can’t continue to lie to the public about Trump’s health. It’s wholly visible that something is wrong, and while the previous three weeks have been manic, whatever is ailing Trump hasn’t stopped.

The American public is owed answers when this clearly ailing man fails his oath of office on a daily and hourly basis — abusing his office with everything from pump-and-dump insider trading scams to ripping up the world economy with an unauthorized war to rewarding thugs who trashed the White House while attempting to overthrow an election.

It’s not just Trump and the White House who owe the people answers. It’s Congress, particular the GOP caucus which has bent over for Trump refusing to wrest control of their own party from him. They refuse to demand answers and they refuse to check his abuses — essentially abdicating their role as co-equal branch of government.

It’s the corporate media which has failed to assign adequate and persistent resources to covering Trump’s health in any detail. Just look at the number of commercial media resources linked above — not one of them has done a comprehensive job covering Trump’s health even in the age of AI when corporate media has crammed it down its journalists throats and its output onto its readers. I can, however, rely on certain outlets outside the US, and that’s a bloody shame.

I don’t know what to make of this mess, nor do I know what will happen next based on what happened the previous three weeks. I do know we’re going to have to be more assertive with the persons who are supposed to provide the checks and balances on the executive before they brag yet again they can tell a bear from a squirrel.

This is an open thread. Discuss what you think is missing in the timeline about Trump’s health, about reporting on the same, and whatever else doesn’t fit the other threads at this site.

The post Open Thread: Three Weeks of Bruising, Bears, Squirrels, and Paranoid Ranting appeared first on emptywheel.

Chris Van Hollen: I want to submit for the record a January 2026 Washington Post [sic] story–long story–entitled: For Many January 6 Rioters a Pardon from Trump Wasn’t Enough. It goes on to quote the President of the United States, when asked about this, these payments, and said, “A lot of people in government now talk about it. Because a lot of people in government really like that group of people, unquote, referring to the January 6 rioters. Are you not aware of that statement from the President?

Todd Blanche: I have never read the Washington Post.

[snip]

Van Hollen: Mr. Attorney General, you are in a bubble.

Blanche: Because I don’t read the Washington Post?

Van Hollen was wrong. It wasn’t a WaPo Story. It was a NYT one.

But Blanche’s claim that he has never read the WaPo (or NYT, for that matter) is either a baldfaced lie, or a confession to ethical failure.

Absolutely central to the Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution that Trump submitted in October 2023 — in a brief signed by then Defense Attorney Todd Blanche — virtually the only proof at all that Trump was being treated unfairly, were claims that appeared in a Carol Leonnig article in the WaPo, which Blanche included as an exhibit.

These actions, which are demonstrated by, inter alia, Biden’s public statements and reports from the New York Times and Washington Post based on leaks from participants in the investigation, require further inquiry and dismissal of the indictment. RELEVANT FACTS In February and March 2021, according to the Washington Post, the DOJ and FBI rejected aggressive proposals by line prosecutors to target President Trump, including a “wide-ranging effort . . . to trace who had financed the [allegedly] false claims of a stolen election and paid for the travel of rallygoers-turned rioters,” targeting “the finances of Trump backers,” examining “slates of electors for Trump that his Republican allies had submitted to Congress and the Archives,” and investigating “documents that Trump used to pressure Pence not to certify the election for Biden.” Ex. 1.

For good measure (just in case Blanche was as confused to the source as Van Hollen), the motion went on to cite the NYT, also included as an exhibit.

In April 2022, the New York Times reported that, “as recently as late last year, Mr. Biden confided to his inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted, according to two people familiar with his comments.” Ex. 2.

I promise you I could find abundant other proof that Todd Blanche has claimed to read both the NYT and WaPo before.

But significantly, in Todd Blanche’s failed effort to claim that DOJ was being weaponized against Donald Trump — precisely the false premise of this Terrorist Slush Fund — he relied on both WaPo and NYT reporting.

He proved he was lying to Chris Van Hollen. Or he proved that his claims that DOJ was being weaponized against Trump were based on the equivalent of AI citations, false claims that he didn’t even read.

He told this lie in a hearing where he also admitted knowing that lying to Congress is a crime.

The post Todd Blanche Lied to Chris Van Hollen about Not Reading the Washington Post appeared first on emptywheel.

Which makes it all the more notable that Deputy Secretary of State Chris Landau cited national security when choosing to grant a journalist visa to fugitive former Polish justice minister Zbigniew Ziobro.

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau instructed senior State Department officials to facilitate and approve a visa for a fugitive former Polish cabinet minister, allowing him ​to flee to the United States from Hungary, three people familiar with the matter said.

Poland is seeking to prosecute former Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro, the architect of changes to the Polish judicial system that ‌the EU has said undermined the rule of law during the 2015-2023 rule of the conservative Law and Justice party (PiS).

[snip]

While the Trump administration has made it a priority to support ​conservative views in Europe, granting a visa to a politician facing criminal charges by a U.S.-allied government is highly unusual.

Hungary’s former Prime Minister Viktor Orban granted Ziobro asylum in January. Warsaw ⁠had hoped that Orban’s defeat by pro-EU rival Peter Magyar in an April election would see Ziobro returned to Poland. Magyar had said that he would extradite him to Poland on his first day in office.

Instead, Landau directed senior officials from ​the State Department’s Consular Affairs Bureau in Washington to instruct the U.S. embassy in Budapest to issue a visa for Ziobro, said three sources, one of whom said it was a journalist visa.

The sources spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss non-public details ​about the case.

As a result of Landau’s intervention, the former justice minister was able to secure his visa ahead of Magyar’s May 9 swearing-in.

[snip]

In directing the senior officials in the Consular Affairs Bureau to issue the ​visa, the No. 2 U.S. diplomat justified the urgency by presenting the matter as “a national security issue,” one source added. Reuters could not determine the rationale for labeling it a national security matter.[my emphasis]

It may be that Laundau cited national security because the US (or Israel) has some unique sensitivity to what Ziobro did with the Pegasus spyware he used against political opponents. It may be that Landau knows a contempt for rule of law is a foundational Trump value.

But I find it telling that Ziobro got set up on his journalist visa so he could broadcast back into Poland immediately after he arrived in the US.

Ziobro began working as a TV commentator for Polish broadcaster TV Republika, the network announced on May 10.

“I’m in the United States … It’s an incredibly complex, beautiful country, the world’s strongest democracy,” Ziobro said in a May ​10 appearance on TV Republika.

And while this story came out mid-afternoon US time, just as Trump’s own unprecedented abuse of a justice fund was breaking news, the timing of the intervention is more notable.

As Reuters notes, Ziobro got sanctuary in the US — he had a visa in hand by May 9 — before the US made a last minute decision to withhold 4,000 troops from Poland on May 14.

The Pentagon has abruptly withdrawn thousands of soldiers from a planned deployment to Poland, officials said Thursday, part of a larger troop reduction that comes as President Donald Trump has expressed anger over Europe’s refusal to aid in the war with Iran.

Soldiers and equipment from the 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, had already arrived in Poland to start a planned nine-month deployment on a mission to deter Russian aggression in Europe, U.S. defense officials said, prompting a scramble to halt soldiers departing from Fort Hood in Texas and arrange the return of hundreds of personnel who reached Poland.

Long scheduled deployments are rarely canceled and fewer still after they begin. Some U.S. military leaders in Europe were caught off guard with the decision after learning about it through a Defense Department memo distributed earlier this week, two U.S. defense officials said, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss ongoing decisions and military movements.

About 4,000 soldiers plus heavy vehicles such as Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles were expected to be deployed for exercises in the region, serving as training and a message to Moscow.

So in the wake of defeat by Russia’s puppet Viktor Orbán, Trump has picked up where Orbán left off, shielding Ziobro, who wants Poland to follow Orbán’s model, even granting him a perch from which to disrupt Poland from afar.

The post The Alleged Polish Criminal Trump Harbors While Deporting Grannies appeared first on emptywheel.

• 26-cr-28: Michael Scott Harper, accused of being a felon in possession of a firearm
• 26-cr-30: Cheyenne Swett, accused of being a felon in possession of a firearm
• 26-cr-31: Richard Allen, accused of being a felon in possession of a firearm and an unregistered firearm
• 26-cr-33: Brian Joseph Johnson, accused of being a felon in possession of a firearm
• 26-cr-34: Dennison Jay Antelope, accused of being a felon in possession of a firearm
• 26-cr-35: Matthew Christopher Jacoby, accused of methamphetamine possession with intent to distribute
• 26-cr-36: Matthew Miller, accused of meth and cocaine possession with intent to distribute
• 26-cr-38: Wolf Elkins Duran, accused of possession of CSAM, subsequent violation
• 26-cr-39: Jose Benito Ocon, accused of murder

The judges dismissed these indictments, without prejudice, because someone who was called for grand jury duty informed defense attorneys that Smith addressed the entire panel of prospective jurors and described, among other things, that all the defendants were murderers, not just Ocon, who would be accused of murder.

Witness 1 further relayed that in explaining the process, Smith stated the following. He stated the proceedings are different than a normal jury trial. He stated the defendants were not going to be run of the mill criminals seen in state court. He stated the grand jurors were going to hear cases where the defendants were bad people. He described the defendants as “bad guys” who “did what you are going to hear about.” He stated the defendants were “murderers” and that the deliberations “won’t take long” to determine they committed the alleged crimes based on the evidence provided to the grand jury. He stated the last grand jury was able to come back in 3 minutes based on the evidence provided to them.

The US Attorney’s Office conducted an investigation and discovered further improper comments from Smith:

1. During a break, an AUSA saw USA Smith handing out business cards and invited the grand jury members to reach out to him. USA Smith reports no grand jurors have reached out to him.
2. After a presentation and a vote, but before going on the record for the next case, the foreperson asked something to the effect of “are you going to give us a hard case?” At that point, USA Smith stood up and said something to the effect of, “like I told you guys before, we’re only giving you ‘slam dunks[.]'” The AUSA who witnessed this corrected that statement by telling the grand jury there would be hard cases and then left the room.
3. USA Smith asked for the list of grand jurors. However, he reports that he has not done anything with it.

Smith also told the new grand jury that “the last grand jury was able to come back in three minutes.” While the investigation did not produce evidence of how long the grand jury deliberated, “minimal questions were asked, and the presentation of evidence was relatively brief. In at least two cases, no factual questions were asked at all.”

In dismissing these cases, the judges described that the dismissals would not be prejudicial to the government because, “It may now take the case to new grand jury and start with a clean slate.” The judges, at least, expect these men may all be charged again. But the defendants are asking the judges to reconsider dismissing the cases without prejudice, partly as a way to ensure Smith is punished for his misconduct.

All this was predictable. Smith is a homophobe ideologue with no experience as a prosecutor.

Democrats have condemned Smith, saying he lacks the experience necessary for the job and threatens to impose a discriminatory approach to federal law enforcement in the state where gay college student Matthew Shepard’s 1998 murder galvanized the LGBTQ+ rights movement.

“Darin Smith is an unqualified insurrectionist with no experience in federal or criminal litigation. Not only does his lack of a resume disqualify him, there are serious doubts about his ability to fairly uphold the rule of law for all Americans,” said Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the judiciary committee.

[snip]

In written questions submitted to lawmakers on the Senate judiciary committee, Smith, who was admitted to the Wyoming bar in 2000, acknowledged that prior to taking the job of US attorney, he had never before appeared in court as part of a criminal or civil proceeding, questioned a witness before a grand jury or applied for a warrant.

Responding to a question that asked him to describe the “10 most significant litigated matters which you personally handled”, Smith replied: “My legal practice has emphasized counseling, planning, and transactional work aimed at avoiding litigation. As a result, I have not personally handled 10 significant litigated matters that proceeded to verdict, judgment, or final decision.”

Between 2018 and when he began as interim US attorney, Smith listed on his questionnaire that he held positions at the Family Research Council, a Washington DC-based group that advocates for conservative Christian policies.

He’s also a Jan6er.

Smith told US senators he was on the grounds of the Capitol on January 6, but said he did not enter the building. He maintains that the election in which Trump lost his bid for a second consecutive term was affected by “imperfections”, and believes that the attack on the Capitol was set up by unnamed actors.

“From my vantage point, I thought it was apparent that certain individuals acted as agitators, intentionally misleading others and escalating tensions, which created conditions resembling entrapment,” he said in a questionnaire.

Asked whether he agreed with Trump’s pardons of rioters convicted of attacking police officers, Smith said: “I believe that our constitution gives every president the power to pardon any individual for offenses against the United States.”

Smith’s shenanigans have set off an exodus of real attorneys, just like the ones we’ve seen in other US Attorneys office (and I assume the AUSAs who testified against him will depart if they have not already).

Five attorneys have left or are leaving the office since Smith began working as interim U.S. Attorney last August, the office spokeswoman Lori Hogan confirmed Monday following a Cowboy State Daily email inquiry.

U.S. attorney Nicole Romine, assistant U.S. attorney Jasmine Peters, criminal assistant U.S. attorney Ariel Calmes, criminal assistant U.S. attorney Paige Hammer have left the office within the past month.

Jeremy Gross, a civil assistant U.S. attorney, is expected to leave in June, Hogan noted.

And both the tribal authorities at Wind River Reservation (at least one of these defendants, Ocon, whose alleged murder sounds like a meth and booze spree gone badly awry, is an enrolled member) strongly opposed Smith after his misconduct became public.

Nevertheless, 46 Republicans still voted to confirm Smith in a larger package of Trump nominees last night.

Thom Tillis, who had earlier said Wyoming could have this guy if they wanted him, was among 11 Senators — 4 of them Democrats — who did not vote.

“If you want somebody like that presiding over cases solely in that state, knock yourself out,” [Tillis] said. “They want ’em, they can have ’em.”

The Senate had one job here: to ensure that the people of Wyoming get a top Federal prosecutor who’ll maintain rule of law in the state. Instead, Cynthia Lummis and John Barrasso have saddled their constituents with a menace to the work of law enforcement.

And Smith’s antics and confirmation will further degrade any presumption of reality owed to this DOJ.

The post Darin Smith’s Misconduct Endangered a Murder Prosecution; 46 Republicans Confirmed Him Anyway appeared first on emptywheel.

The Trump groupie auditioning to be confirmed in his current role of US Attorney for Eastern District of North Carolina, Ellis Boyle, has announced that he charged another person for threats, Christopher James Hill. Hill is the fourth person Boyle charged with threats against Trump or an aide

• Richard David Warren: Threats (apparently against Tom Homan and Todd Lyons) on June 2, 2025, indicted by Lori Warlick on April 21, 2026, arrested May 7, announced May 8.
• Jim Comey: Threats alleged on May 15, 2025, indicted by Matthew Petracca on April 28, 2026, announced same day in big presser.
• Daniel R. Swain: Threats alleged in complaint obtained by Secret Service affiant on April 30, announced May 4, 2026.
• Christopher James Hill: Threats alleged from October 3-13, 2025, indicted by Kevin Gerarde on April 23, 2026, arrested May 5, announced May 18, 2026.

Now, I’m not saying that Boyle is sucking up to Donald Trump by charging all these threats (though it appears he charges very little that doesn’t fit Trump’s priorities, and every single foreigner has been labeled as such in his announcements). There are genuinely a lot of threats out there.

But I do find the flood of recent threat cases to be of some interest, given that they should resemble each other.

For example, in no other case did Boyle announce the charges right away, much less with the Acting Attorney General — not even Daniel Swain who was arrested as an imminent threat based on the delusional threats he had written on his car windows. Hill was arrested weeks ago, but they just announced his indictment today, upon his pretrial release.

With Hill — the guy indicted on roughly the same schedule as Comey — they didn’t describe the alleged threat. (His release conditions order mental health treatment and prohibit social media use.) With Warren, who made threats on the same day against two DC officials — probably Tom Homan and Todd Lyons — they barely describe the threats.

Comey is the only one for whom there is a forfeiture allegation (though my guess is that he’s far more affluent than the other defendants).

They were all charged by different people, though that may partly be a factor of division: Swain and Hill were charged in the Southern Division, whereas Comey was charged in the Eastern Division. Warren was charged in Eastern Division too, but he hasn’t been indicted yet; AUSA Logan Liles is prosecuting him.

Aside from the glitzy press conference, all of those differences can be readily explained.

But one thing cannot, in my opinion.

Hill was charged with 18 USC 875(c). But the language about the threat described it as a “threat to kill and injure the person of another.”

Swain was charged with 18 USC 871(a), which USSS described as a threat against the President of the United States.

Three of the charges against Warren are threats to intimidate, but the two that aren’t — 18 USC 876(c) — called those threats (to kill both) a threat.

With Comey, notably, the AUSA flown in from NJ described his 86 47 threat, for which he was charged with both 18 USC 871(a) and 18 USC 875(c), in more detail than the others, and described that, “a reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret” the social media post “as a serious expression of an intent to do harm.”

It’s not even described as the same crime.

Jim Comey’s indictment looks flimsy in isolation. It also looks like overkill, especially when compared to what else Ellis Boyle was approving in the very same weeks.

Update: Boyle was among the slew of people — including the potentially even more disqualified Darin Smith whose misconduct got nine felony indictments dismissed last week — confirmed in a mass vote today.

The post Ellis Boyle’s Threat Prosecution Hobby appeared first on emptywheel.

Plaintiffs President Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and The Trump Organization, LLC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby give notice of the voluntary dismissal of this action with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).1

1 Although Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) filings are sometimes colloquially styled as “motions,” the Eleventh Circuit has made clear that a Rule 41(a)(1)(A) dismissal is self-executing, terminates the action upon filing, and divests the district court of jurisdiction. See Est. of W. v. Smith, 9 F.4th 1361, 1367–68 (11th Cir. 2021); Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d 1272, 1277–78 (11th Cir. 2012). Plaintiffs accordingly file this document as a Notice rather than a motion, as the notice does not require judicial action. Est. of W., 9 F.4th at 1368.

Some likely recipients are already celebrating.

And while Todd Blanche claims the slush fund he’s setting up must avoid fraud…

At the Attorney General’s direction, the Fund can be audited. The Fund must take steps to protect private information and avoid fraud. The Fund shall cease processing claims no later than December 15, 2028.

The fine print absolves DOJ of any fraud committed with the fund.

Once the funds are deposited into the Designated Account, the United States has no liability whatsoever for the protection or safeguarding of those funds, regardless of bank failure, fraudulent transfers, or any other fraud or misuse of funds.

As I noted, Andrew Paul Johnson attempted to silence the young boy he sexually molested by promising him a share of payout he expected from being a Jan6ers.

Andrew also told [redacted] that since he was pardoned for storming the Capitol on January 6th, 2021, and he was being awarded $10,000,000 as a result of being a “jan 6’er”. Andrew did tell [redacted] that he would be putting him in his “will” to take any money he had left over. This tactic was believed to be used to keep [redacted] from exposing what Andrew had done to him.

There will be Jan6ers everywhere planning new crimes with money they win, at the same time as Blanche is moving to kill the convictions of the Oath Keeprs and Proud Boys, including those who were adjudged to be terrorists.

And Blanche is attempting to absolve everything that happens after the slush fund gets created.

Update: I forgot a key detail. Blanche is announcing this criminal slush fund the day before he testifies before the House Appropriations Committee. The Subcommittee is stacked with Republicans who represent far right districts (including Andrew Clyde, who said Jan6 was just tourism), so Blanche may be hoping to get the appearance of Congressional buy-in.

The post Todd Blanche Attempts to Absolve Himself of Complicity in Bribes to Child Sex Abuse Victims appeared first on emptywheel.

Introduction and method

Alaisdair MacIntyre was a philosopher who wrote extensively on morality. His book, After Virtue: A Study In Moral Theory (1981) “… is one of the most important works of Anglophone moral and political philosophy in the 20th century.” Link. He wrote a prologue for the third edition in 2007 in which he confirms his thinking on the theories discussed in this work.

Much of the book is taken up with answers to questions that might be raised about his thoughts on morality and ethics. I’ll skip most of that. The main ideas are unexpected and require focus.

The loss of context for morality

MacIntyre begins by stating that we are confused and disoriented when it comes to discussions of morality. We have, he says “… lost our comprehension, both theoretical and practical, o[f] morality.” P.2; text has “or”. All of the words we use, all of the concepts they represent, and their coherence were developed in cultures far different from our own.

MacIntyre says that we don’t understand that moral structure the way it was originally understood. In particular, the justification for that moral structure arose from a vastly different social context, in which there was agreement that Christianity, and especially Catholicism, were absolutely true. It was that religious context, along with a social context that reinforced it, that gave rise to the moral principles and the forms of argument that we inherited. That context is gone.

We retain the forms of that older moral structure. One sense in which this seems true is that we want to think that other people agree with our own morality, that we all share a common morality. As any reader of the news knows, that’s just not true. On almost every issue with a moral component there are people who disagree with me on moral grounds. And that’s true even if we allow my idea about civic virtue as a common morality.

Another sense in which this seems true is that of the standard of judgment. What counts as an argument on the merits? What counts as an appropriate appeal to authority? Is there an objective standard by which we all agree to be bound, so that we can terminate a moral argument by recourse to that standard? For centuries in Western Europe, Catholicism was a unifying context for moral argument. There were sacred texts, approved commentary, such as those of Aquinas and Augustine, and a hierarchy to which people could turn for understanding and answers. Today there is no unity even in religion.

For example, at the start of the first invasion of Iraq I asked the senior minister at the PCUSA Church to which I belonged why the Church hadn’t taken a position on the morality of that war. That’s not how our Church acts, he said. Each of us was to decide that for ourselves, but apparently without doctrinal direction, and only very general guidance.

We live amidst a number of possible moral standards: utilitarianism, various strains of Christianity, and Kantian, for example. In any discussion of morality a logical argument can be constructed from first principles from each. The problem is that the first principles, the standards for judgment, are different. If the outcomes differ, it’s because first principles differ. MacIntyre gives three examples, justification for war, abortion*, and liberty/equality.

Abortion is a good example of the problem of loss of context. Catholic teaching on abortion originated centuries ago. The right of women to control of their bodies was not a consideration. There were practical considerations about having lots of children, including putting the kids to work, and high childhood mortality, plagues, famines and other catastrophes. Aristos wanted more workers and soldiers. The Bible and other accepted authorities offered apparent justifications. See, e.g.  Gen 1:28. Those real considerations and many others certainly contributed to the formulation of Church dogma.

We still use the old moral arguments, but the circumstances have changed, and the question becomes which of the old arguments, the old standards, should govern. I think we can see that in the arguments MacIntyre proposes*.

Emotivism

The problems created by the lack of context have led some moral philosophers to adopt a theory called emotivism.

Emotivism is the doctrine that all evaluative judgments and more specifically all moral judgments are nothing but expressions of preference, expressions of attitude or feeling, insofar as they are moral or evaluative in character. Pp. 11-12.

MacIntyre gives a thorough beating to this idea, which it richly deserves. If morality is nothing but personal preference, whether of the outcomes or the first principles, then nothing is better than anything else. That’s just not true. Some things are better than others, even if I can’t prove it. Beating children is bad. You can bait me with the ancient adage, Spare the Rod, Spoil the Child, and I’ll still report you for child abuse, because it’s morally wrong and thankfully illegal.

I reject the idea that we can’t find moral principles that we all accept. We know it’s possible, because we have laws that embody moral concerns, laws about harm to others, harm to property, and violations of public trust. Of course there are people who reject these laws, but they are garbage people who should be shamed and shunned

MacIntyre thinks emotivism is the dominant theory for explaining our cultural understanding of morality, even though we absolutely refuse to admit it. His rejection of emotivism is detailed and thorough. He takes the important step of showing the nature of the society that would be produced if emotivism were the accepted view. It’s not pretty. If we can’t show our reasons and discuss morality because it’s just personal preference, then interactions over moral issues become contests over who can manipulate the other. It’s a society in which people

 … see in the social world nothing but a meeting place for individual wills, each with its own set of attitudes and preferences and … understand that world solely as an arena for the achievement of their own satisfaction, … interpret reality as a series of opportunities for their enjoyment .… P. 25.

Maybe it’s fortunate that we still pretend to operate under the old standards and a version of a civil virtue morality.

Side note. MacIntyre makes a more general point that we often pretend that we are engaged in a dialog with thinkers of earlier times. We act as if they were addressing the same problems from the same point of view that we do. That isn’t true. When Aristotle talks about virtue, he doesn’t mean the same thing Aquinas does. Aquinas accepts the ideals of Christian virtue, while for Aristotle, we might think of Homeric virtue. I also think the goals of the inquiries of earlier thinkers are tied to their ideas about their cultures, and the questions that seemed important in their times.

The failure of Enlightenment to fill the void

MacIntyre thinks that Enlightenment thinkers worked to replace the specifically religious justification of the inherited morality with something else. He analyses the efforts of Kant, Hume and Diderot. Kant tries to rely on reason. Hume and Diderot focus on human passions and desires. Kierkegaard recognizes that both failed, and suggests that we accept the old morality by personal choice, the “leap of faith.”. Kierkegaard seems to accept an early version of emotivism. None of this works for MacIntyre.

Additional discussion

We came in in the middle. When we were born, the world was up and running and we gradually began to take our part. Most of us internalized the old moral structure, along with all the other things we needed to survive and thrive. We didn’t ask where any of it came from, or why those were the rules. Only later did we ask real questions and seeks alternatives. In this we are just like our ancestors.

There were always events that didn’t seem to track our stated morality: in my case, very specifically, the Viet Nam War. But today it just seems worse. It seems like too many of us justify behavior that is deeply immoral under the old structure. Maybe that’s emotivism at work.

Featured image: by Sean O’Connor

__________
* This is MacIntyre”s example of moral argumets about abortion in the US.

2. (a) Everybody has certain rights over his or her own person, including his or her own body. It follows from the nature of these rights that at the stage when the embryo is essentially part of the mother’s body, the mother has a right to make her own uncoerced decision on whether she will have an abortion or not. Therefore abortion is morally permissible and ought to be allowed by law.

(b) I cannot will that my mother should have had an abortion when she was pregnant with me, except perhaps if it had been certain that the embryo was dead or gravely damaged. But if I cannot will this in my own case, how can I consistently deny to others the right to life that I claim for myself? I would break the so-called Golden Rule unless I denied that a mother has in general a right to an abortion. I am not of course thereby committed to the view that abortion ought to be legally prohibited.

(c) Murder is wrong. Murder is the taking of innocent life. An embryo is an identifiable individual, differing from a newborn infant only in being at an earlier stage on the long road to adult capacities and, if any life is innocent, that of an embryo is. If infanticide is murder, as it is, abortion is murder. So abortion is not only morally wrong, but ought to be legally prohibited. Pp. 6-7.

The post After Virtue By Alaisdair MacIntyre appeared first on emptywheel.

Listen on Spotify (transcripts available)

Listen on Apple (transcripts available)

The post Fridays with Nicole Sandler appeared first on emptywheel.