LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's JournalMaddowBlog-DHS' Noem faces new articles of impeachment backed by dozens of House Democrats
The effort to hold the Homeland Security secretary to account probably won’t pass, but that doesn’t make it irrelevant.
The impeachment effort targeting Kristi Noem almost certainly won’t succeed, at least not anytime soon, but it’s starting with a heck of a lot more congressional support than the usual impeachment resolutions. www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-01-14T19:34:38.227Z
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/kristi-noem-impeached-impeachment-house-democrats
With the support of nearly 70 colleagues, Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.) on Wednesday introduced three articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
The first accuses Noem of obstruction of Congress, for denying lawmakers access to Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities to provide oversight. The second accuses her of violating public trust, for directing DHS agents to arrest people without warrants and for ignoring due process. The third accuses her of self-dealing, for secretly steering a federal contract to a firm run by her friend.
“Secretary Noem has called my impeachment effort ‘silly,’” Kelly told reporters. “I want to tell her right now, ‘Secretary Noem, you have violated your oath of office, and there will be consequences. I am watching you. Members of Congress are watching you. The American people, most importantly, are watching you.’”
Rep. Kelly: Secretary Noem, you have violated your oath of office. And there will be consequences.
— FactPost (@factpostnews.bsky.social) 2026-01-14T16:58:52.736519087Z
....The articles of impeachment against Noem, however, are quantitatively different: Kelly’s resolution was introduced with the support of 69 House Democrats, which represents roughly a third of the party’s conference in the chamber, and there’s no reason to assume that total won’t grow.....
But there’s certainly symbolic value in the Democratic effort, which is being used to draw attention to the failures and outrages at the Department of Homeland Security. Watch this space.
MaddowBlog-In Trump's Justice Department, resignations, once rare, are suddenly much more common
Prosecutors hardly ever walk away from their sought-after DOJ jobs in protest — but that’s changing in a hurry.
It used to be quite rare to see federal prosecutors resign in large numbers, exiting the Justice Department in protest.
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-01-14T18:18:19.248Z
But as Trump-era abuses become common, it’s clearly not rare anymore. www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/resignations-justice-department-minneapolis-more-common
It’s against this backdrop that The New York Times reported:
Six federal prosecutors in Minnesota resigned on Tuesday over the Justice Department’s push to investigate the widow of a woman killed by an ICE agent and the department’s reluctance to investigate the shooter, according to people with knowledge of their decision.
Joseph H. Thompson, who was second in command at the U.S. attorney’s office and oversaw a sprawling fraud investigation that has roiled Minnesota’s political landscape, was among those who quit on Tuesday, according to three people with knowledge of the decision.
The departure of Thompson and several of his colleagues will ironically undermine the Minnesota fraud investigation that the White House claims to care so much about.
These highly sought-after positions are career highlights for those who reach such prosecutorial heights. It’s not at all common for attorneys to walk away from these jobs in protest.....
The more common these resignations become, the clearer it becomes that the DOJ is an institution in crisis and apparently coming apart at the seams
Rene Good's family hires law firm that represented George Floyd's family
This lawsuit will be fun to watch
https://virginiatimesnow.com/renee-good-family-hires-george-floyd-law-firm/
Romanucci & Blandin and attorney Antonio Romanucci—a legal firm and lawyer known for representing George Floyd’s family in the civil case that ended in a landmark settlement—signaling.
In a statement from Romanucci & Blandin, the family called for calm in Minneapolis and urged the public not to turn Good’s death into a political fight. The lawyers said that the family wants Good to be remembered with a simple message: “Be Good.” They also stated that they will disclose information from their investigation as it is developed , describing transparency as essential.
Attorney Antonio M. Romanucci, the firm’s founding partner, said the team represents Good’s partner, Becca Good, along with her parents, Tim and Donna Ganger, and her siblings. The attorneys said Minneapolis lawyer Kevin Riach is serving as co-counsel.
The legal team’s account describes what it said occurred on Jan. 7, 2026, along Portland Avenue between East 33rd and 34th streets. The attorneys said Good, 37, and her partner were driving home after dropping off their 6-year-old child at school when they saw federal agents in their neighborhood and stopped to observe. The attorneys said videos show Good gesturing for other vehicles to pass, as agents moved toward her car.
Deadline Legal Blog-Powell probe comes ahead of SCOTUS hearing on Trump's Federal Reserve firing power
The high court has signaled it wants to protect the Fed’s independence more than that of other federal agencies.
Powell probe comes ahead of SCOTUS hearing on Trump’s Federal Reserve firing power www.ms.now/deadline-whi...
— MS NOW (@ms.now) 2026-01-12T18:12:00.341Z
https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/powell-doj-probe-supreme-court-federal-reserve-lisa-cook
While the high court’s Republican-appointed majority has broadly blessed Trump’s firing powers and doesn’t seem to care much for independent federal agencies in general, the court has nonetheless signaled it wants to insulate the Fed from Trump’s consolidation of agency power. Indeed, the court let Cook stay on the board pending the outcome of the litigation, which the court hasn’t allowed for many other agency members.
Against that backdrop, news of the Powell probe might not help the Trump administration in the Cook case. It’s unclear whether the new investigation will come up directly in the appeal, but the addition of further apparent evidence that the administration is weaponizing the DOJ to carry out the president’s policy goals could make the high court even more likely to take steps to secure the central bank’s independence. .....
In the Cook case, however, Trump has claimed he has cause to fire her over alleged mortgage fraud that purportedly took place prior to her Senate confirmation to the board, and the legal fight is over the sufficiency of that alleged cause and related issues. The administration argues that courts can’t even review the president’s assertion of cause, while Cook argues that unproven claims over alleged actions that predate her taking office are insufficient. She argues that Trump’s “insistence that his removals are not subject to judicial scrutiny would eviscerate Congress’s choice to safeguard the Board’s independence and protect Board governors from arbitrary removals.”
Again, the Powell investigation might not surface formally at all at the Cook hearing, and perhaps the court was already determined to safeguard Fed independence — at least more than other agencies.
But the court that has gone out of its way to protect the Fed is surely aware of the news. And to the extent that it agrees with Powell’s pretextual view of the probe, that would only seem to strengthen the court’s apparent inclination to protect the Fed’s independence.
UAW defends union member who heckled Trump at Detroit factory
The president flipped off the worker and mouthed an expletive at him during a visit to a Michigan.
UAW defends union member who heckled Trump at Detroit factory
— Politico (@politico.com) 2026-01-14T18:51:20Z
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/14/uaw-defends-member-heckled-trump-00728913
“Workers should never be subjected to vulgar language or behavior by anyone — including the President of the United States,” UAW Vice President Laura Dickerson said in a Wednesday statement.
Dickerson said the autoworker “believes in freedom of speech, a principle we wholeheartedly embrace,” adding, “We stand with our membership in protecting their voice on the job.”....
The “pedophile protector” heckling incident isn’t the first time Trump has clashed with the UAW. Trump called UAW’s president a “dope” after the union endorsed former President Joe Biden during his reelection bid in 2024.
Dickerson promised that the union would “ensure that our member receives the full protection of all negotiated contract language safeguarding his job and his rights as a union member.”
A GoFundMe page set up for Sabula had raised over $360,000 as of Wednesday afternoon. Sabula was suspended following the incident, according to the page. He later told The Washington Post that he had been “targeted for political retribution” for “embarrassing” the president.
Alina Habba wants her old job back
DOJ appeals ruling that disqualified New Jersey's top federal prosecutor.
Alina Habba wants her old job back www.politico.com/news/2026/01...
— Ry Rivard (@ryrivard.bsky.social) 2026-01-14T18:46:19.799Z
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/14/habba-wants-her-old-job-back-00728695
Attorney General Pam Bondi on Wednesday asked the full Third Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a three-judge panel’s December ruling that Habba was serving unlawfully after staying in the job too long without Senate confirmation.
The ruling prompted Habba to step down.
In a declaration accompanying the request for a rehearing, Habba said she resigned because she didn’t want legal controversy over her authority to “interfere with the office’s critical and important work.” Challenges to her authority were brought by defense attorneys and had already disrupted criminal and civil proceedings in New Jersey federal courts.
If the Third Circuit or the Supreme Court sides with her, “I intend to return to my prior position,” Habba wrote.
Alina Habba wants her old job back
Source: Politico
Alina Habba, who stepped down as New Jersey’s top prosecutor, wants her old job back.
Attorney General Pam Bondi on Wednesday asked the full Third Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a three-judge panel’s December ruling that Habba was serving unlawfully after staying in the job too long without Senate confirmation.
The ruling prompted Habba to step down.
In a declaration accompanying the request for a rehearing, Habba said she resigned because she didn’t want legal controversy over her authority to “interfere with the office’s critical and important work.” Challenges to her authority were brought by defense attorneys and had already disrupted criminal and civil proceedings in New Jersey federal courts.
If the Third Circuit or the Supreme Court sides with her, “I intend to return to my prior position,” Habba wrote.
Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/14/habba-wants-her-old-job-back-00728695
Alina Habba wants her old job back www.politico.com/news/2026/01...
— Ry Rivard (@ryrivard.bsky.social) 2026-01-14T18:46:19.799Z
Senator Says Prosecutors Are Investigating Her After Video About Illegal Orders (gift subscription)
This investigation is totally bogus
https://x.com/BarbMcQuade/status/2011412006109348059
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/13/us/politics/slotkin-pirro-trump-justice-dept-video.html?unlocked_article_code=1.EVA.sUa_.uWWYuYIOmuoA&smid=nytcore-ios-share
Ms. Slotkin, a Democrat, said in an interview on Monday that she found out about the inquiry from the office of Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia and a longtime ally of President Trump’s. In an email sent to the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms, Ms. Pirro’s office requested an interview with the senator or her private counsel.
A spokesman for Ms. Pirro’s office declined to confirm or deny any investigation, and it is unclear exactly what officials have identified as a possible crime related to the video.
Ms. Slotkin organized the video, which Mr. Trump and other administration officials have described as “seditious,” along with five other Democratic lawmakers who are also military veterans. Its message that military officers are obligated to ignore illegal orders is a fundamental principle of military law.
The investigation by Ms. Pirro’s office is the latest escalation in a campaign by Mr. Trump and his allies to exact retribution on those he views as enemies seeking to undermine his administration or his authority as commander in chief.
Senator Says Prosecutors Are Investigating Her After Video About Illegal Orders
Source: New York Times
Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan says she has learned that federal prosecutors are investigating her after she took part in a video urging military service members to resist illegal orders.
Ms. Slotkin, a Democrat, said in an interview on Monday that she found out about the inquiry from the office of Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia and a longtime ally of President Trump’s. In an email sent to the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms, Ms. Pirro’s office requested an interview with the senator or her private counsel.
A spokesman for Ms. Pirro’s office declined to confirm or deny any investigation, and it is unclear exactly what officials have identified as a possible crime related to the video.
Ms. Slotkin organized the video, which Mr. Trump and other administration officials have described as “seditious,” along with five other Democratic lawmakers who are also military veterans. Its message that military officers are obligated to ignore illegal orders is a fundamental principle of military law.
The investigation by Ms. Pirro’s office is the latest escalation in a campaign by Mr. Trump and his allies to exact retribution on those he views as enemies seeking to undermine his administration or his authority as commander in chief.
Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/13/us/politics/slotkin-pirro-trump-justice-dept-video.html?unlocked_article_code=1.EVA.sUa_.uWWYuYIOmuoA&smid=nytcore-ios-share
Gift Subscription
https://x.com/BarbMcQuade/status/2011412006109348059?s=20
Deadline Legal Blog-Ordered to explain herself, Lindsey Halligan invokes Jack Smith
Halligan maintains that she can still call herself a U.S. attorney even though a judge said she was unlawfully appointed.
https://x.com/Mabeltooted/status/2011395492807131365
https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/lindsey-halligan-us-attorney-jack-smith-unlawfully-appointed
Among her defenses: Jack Smith did it, too.
In her response Tuesday, Halligan recalled that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Donald Trump’s classified documents indictment in Florida on the grounds that Smith was unlawfully appointed as special counsel. “Yet in the days and weeks that followed, the Government continued — openly and without objection by any Court — to file documents identifying Jack Smith by his title as Special Counsel while appellate review proceeded,” Halligan wrote.
She added that Smith continued to refer to himself as special counsel in Trump’s separate election interference case in Washington, D.C., and that “as far as the Government is aware, no court — much less any judge — ever threatened Smith with attorney discipline for making purportedly ‘false or misleading statement[s],’ ‘knowingly disobey[ing]’ a court order, or engaging in ‘professional misconduct,’” Halligan wrote, referring to the order that demanded her response, which was issued by U.S. District Judge David Novak, a Trump appointee in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Yet Cannon’s 2024 order dismissing the documents indictment specified that it was “confined to this proceeding” in the Florida case, so it’s unclear how it could’ve led Smith to think he couldn’t refer to himself as special counsel in D.C., where Cannon’s ruling would not apply anyway..
But that general notion wouldn’t make much sense to apply in this situation, where Currie was seemingly brought in to resolve the issue across the board throughout the district. When dealing with the lawfulness of a U.S. attorney’s appointment, a judge will be brought in from outside the district, apparently to avoid a conflict because the judges in a given district have the power to appoint replacement U.S. attorneys when there’s a vacancy. So unless Currie or some other out-of-district judge is going to be brought in to resolve the legality of Halligan’s tenure whenever a new defendant challenges it, it would make sense to consider her ruling as binding throughout the district unless it’s overturned on appeal.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 03:58 PMNumber of posts: 175,321