The Justice Department escalated its bid to search a Washington Post reporter’s electronic devices pursuant to a warrant, seeking to overturn a magistrate judge’s order that the court — not the government — lead the initial review.

In a court filing Tuesday, the DOJ said it wants a judge in the Eastern District of Virginia to vacate Magistrate Judge William Porter’s order, which he said he reached in refusing to leave “the government’s fox in charge of the Washington Post’s henhouse.”

The DOJ obtained a search warrant for reporter Hannah Natanson’s devices as part of an investigation into Aurelio Luis Perez-Lugones, who was charged with unlawfully retaining national defense information. The government said he gave Natanson top secret and other classified information that later appeared in her published articles.

Perez-Lugones was charged in Maryland. The litigation over Natanson’s devices is proceeding in Virginia because the FBI seized them from her home there during a January search. It took two laptops, a mobile phone, a portable drive, a recording device and an exercise watch. In a sworn declaration later that month, Natanson said the seizure of all her devices “has eliminated my ability to collect information and publish news stories.”

In his Feb. 24 ruling, which the DOJ is challenging, Porter said the case presented difficult legal issues, sitting at “the intersection of the government’s compelling interest in prosecuting the unlawful disclosure of classified national security information and a working journalist’s First Amendment rights.” .....

The DOJ also identified several specific issues with a court-led review, including a lack of expertise on the court’s part in spotting classified information, as well as the risk that the judge or other court personnel reviewing sensitive materials could lead to the unintentional dissemination of classified information. The DOJ emphasized that it wasn’t criticizing the judge’s reliability but maintained that the risk remained inherent in the judge’s proposed method of review.

The government specified that it wants to use a “filter team” of personnel who are technically separate from the prosecution team. The filter team would screen for privileged materials that are outside the scope of the warrant and only send information within the scope of the warrant to the prosecution team.

In the ruling that the DOJ is challenging, Porter wrote that the concern that even such a theoretically independent review within the government “may err by neglect, by malice, or by honest difference of opinion is heightened where its institutional interests are so directly at odds with the press freedom values at stake.”

For nearly two centuries, the White House’s main entrance — framed by a row of graceful Ionic columns — has been a signature image of the seat of American power.

Now the Trump-appointed head of a federal arts commission is proposing to replace them with a more ornate style favored by President Donald Trump. Those more decorative columns, a style known as Corinthian, are considered the most luxurious in classical architecture and appear on buildings such as the U.S. Capitol and the Supreme Court. They have long been deployed on Trump’s properties, and the president has handpicked them for his planned White House ballroom, too.
?v=4

....Many other architects and designers say they’re baffled or even horrified by Cook’s proposal.

“The Corinthian would be inappropriate for the Executive Residence,” said Steven Semes, a professor emeritus of architecture at the University of Notre Dame and an expert in classical architecture, warning that it would “harm” the original design of a building long known as the “People’s House.”

He added that the White House’s Ionic columns evoke “the character of dignity, grace and a kind of intimacy or domesticity,” whereas Corinthian columns are “used to express the height of formality and monumentality” for buildings such as the Capitol.

?v=14

.....Outside architects took a different view.

“Having buildings with two different classical orders next to each other isn’t that unusual,” said Matthew Bell, a University of Maryland architecture professor, arguing to keep the mansion’s Ionic columns. “Whether they were correct or not, in terms of their usage, that’s what Hoban put on the building.”

Carl Elefante, a past president of the American Institute of Architects and a critic of the ballroom — which he compared to a camel, or “a horse designed by a committee” — said he was troubled to think that it could reshape the White House, too.

“Why are we going to take the abomination of this ungainly design and start to affect the actual White House itself, rather than the other way around?” Elefante said.

President Donald Trump’s political action committee this week sent a fundraising email promising donors “private national security briefings” by the president himself and featuring a photo from the dignified transfer for U.S. service members killed in Kuwait.

“For the first time ever, I’m opening up spots on the National Security Briefing Membership,” reads the email, from Trump’s Never Surrender Inc. PAC.

“As a National Security Briefing Member, you’ll receive my private national security briefings, unfiltered updates on the threats facing America. The straight truth on border invasions, foreign adversaries, deep state sabotage, and every danger the fake news hides,” it continues. “You’ll get the inside scoop DIRECT from me, President Trump, the leader who’s rebuilt the greatest military in history, and put America First like no one else.”

The email includes a black-and-white version of an official photo taken by the White House showing the president in a white “USA” baseball cap saluting a transfer case during the dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware on March 7.

https://x.com/patriottakes/status/2032461254795686253

....But the use of a photo from the dignified transfer of U.S. troops who died in the line of duty to raise funds is notable.

“To have that imagery used for partisan advertising and fundraising, that’s a bridge, you know, a new bridge that we’re crossing,” Weiner said. “But it’s more of a question of norms.”

It’s no secret that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth doesn’t care much for the laws of war. In the opening days of the war against Iran, he proudly said the ongoing assault involved “no stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars.” Standing before the press Friday morning, Hegseth again promised “no quarter, no mercy for our enemies.” .....

As MS NOW’s Julia Jester rightly noted, Friday’s comments from Hegseth calling for “no quarter” stand out for even more implicitly greenlighting the military to violate the broader laws of war as well as the military’s own longstanding rules of engagement:

Orders or threats of “no quarter” — a term used for killing enemies who surrender or are rendered unable to fight — have been considered violations of international law since the Hague Convention of 1899, with “directions to give no quarter” listed as a war crime following World War II. […]

And it’s not just global rules that are being flouted. Not only does the term no quarter violate the Geneva Convention, it defies the U.S. Marine Corps’ own rules of engagement: “Do not engage anyone who has surrendered or is out of battle due to sickness or wounds.”

.....That seems unlikely given a new effort from Hegseth to undertake a “ruthless overhaul” of the military’s judge advocate general corps and their fellow civilian lawyers at the Pentagon. As The Atlantic reported, the concern with this review is that it provides cover for an attempt to “reduce the ranks of lawyers, purge internal dissent, and eliminate guardrails designed to restrict the military from carrying out legally dubious orders.” And while operations like the sinking of an Iranian warship returning from a multinational training exercise are technically allowed under the laws of war, it’s hard to say they were fully legal under American law, given the administration’s lack of a clear legal rationale for the war effort.

Despite what Hegseth may think, words matter in times of war. Beyond conveying the message of what is gained through fighting, it is only through clear communication that the orders from the top can be carried out by the servicemembers who’ve sworn an oath to obey them. His refusal to acknowledge that there are times where things other than body count should factor into combat decisions threatens the cohesion and professionalism of the military.

Likewise, it’s the global commitment to the established laws of war that keeps American civilians safe and untargeted. In rejecting them with his statements, he is incentivizing those who serve under his command to not only discard their humanity but destroy a shield protecting their fellow Americans from having the same standard of “maximum lethality” carried out against them.

A former senior Justice Department official accused the Trump administration of illegally dismantling the Community Relations Service, the DOJ's only office dedicated to preventing hate crimes and community violence.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, sent a scathing letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi Thursday demanding answers after receiving the protected disclosure.

The whistleblower alleged CRS leaders formally warned top DOJ brass that reducing the agency from 57 employees to one violated the Civil Rights Act, Church Arson Prevention Act, and Hate Crimes Prevention Act. The official claimed Trump's DOJ deliberately omitted warning memos from court records, requiring a federal judge to compel their release. Even then, DOJ allegedly heavily redacted the documents.

The whistleblower further contended that CRS's claimed "restoration" is theatrical, with rehired employees barred from actual work. Raskin demanded a full briefing by March 27, calling the action "systematic and unlawful" sabotage.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's offhand remark that the U.S. would show "no quarter, no mercy for our enemies," in Iran. In military context, "no quarter" means killing enemy combatants without allowing surrender.

This alarmed legal experts, who warned the statement could constitute a war crime. Even just saying it could count as a violation of international law and U.S. military code, they added.

Wall Street Journal national security reporter Alex Ward flagged the comment as violating international humanitarian law under the Geneva Convention.

Claremont McKenna College professor Jack Pitney cited the Defense Department's own Law of War Manual, which explicitly forbids declaring no quarter will be given. International Crisis Group senior adviser Brian Finucane, a former U.S. government war crimes lawyer, stated that even declaring no quarter constitutes a war crime punishable by up to life imprisonment under the DoD Manual for Military Commissions.

Stanford law professor Tom Dannenbaum confirmed declaring no quarter is prohibited under international humanitarian law and itself amounts to a war crime.

A fundraising email from President Donald Trump’s political action committee has a provocative pitch: using an image from Saturday’s dignified transfer honoring six fallen US soldiers, it promises access to the president’s “private national security briefings.”

The email, sent by Never Surrender, Inc., promotes what it calls a “National Security Briefing Membership” and urges recipients to “claim your spot” with multiple links to donate, in what it describes as an exclusive group receiving updates about national security threats.

It promises that members will “receive my private national security briefings, unfiltered updates on the threats facing America. The straight truth on border invasions, foreign adversaries, deep state sabotage, and every danger the fake news hides.”

The message includes an official White House photograph showing Trump saluting during a dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base, a solemn military tradition honoring fallen US service members. Trump attended alongside members of his administration.

A flag-draped transfer case, which is used to transport soldiers’ remains, is visible in the photo.

“I’m the strong commander who stares down tyrants, obliterates terrorists, and never backs down,” the fundraising email continues. “This is for patriots ready to stand with that kind of unbreakable strength. Not for the weak or the wavering.”

President Donald Trump has been ridiculed in recent days for repeatedly referring to his administration’s military siege on Iran as an “excursion,” a potential mix-up with the word “incursion,” but according to a new report from Zeteo, his aides are well aware of the blunder but refuse to correct him out of fear.

“I’m not telling him,” a Trump administration official told Zeteo on Friday, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

The word “excursion,” as explained by MS NOW’s Jonathan Lemire on Friday, generally refers to “a short, organized pleasure trip, à la snorkeling,” whereas an “incursion” is a “sudden, often hostile entrance or invasion into a territory or place,” a far more appropriate term to describe the Trump administration’s operation in Iran.

And yet, despite the obvious blunder, Trump officials told Zeteo that correcting the president would be “a fool’s errand,” and that “doing so would likely get them yelled at,” the outlet reported.

“We say ‘incursion,’ the boss says ‘excursion.’ It’s not a big deal,” a second Trump official told Zeteo, also speaking on the condition of anonymity.