Habba: I have instructed my office today, to open an investigation into Governor Murphy… anybody who gets in our way will be charged in the state of New Jersey for obstruction, for concealment… those investigations will start immediately pic.twitter.com/PyYYQBNKNc
She was “chief counsel” for a parking lot company, went on Fox news, caught Trump’s attention with he fervent defense and Central Casting Mar-a-lago looks and became his “personal lawyer.” She was very bad at it and lost the cases she led. Now she’s a U.S. Attorney intimidating Democrats on behalf of Donald Trump and the GOP. All in four years.
President Trump to a legacy media reporter on the order suspending security clearances for employees who engaged in lawfare with Jack Smith:
“I've been targeted for four years… I was the target of corrupt politicians for four years. Don't talk to me about targeting.” pic.twitter.com/Zzc6IfKTJG
Never say he didn’t warn us. Going back decades, President Donald Trump has publicly declared that his one overriding philosophy of life was the necessity of getting revenge on anyone he believes has wronged him. As he told Charlie Rose back in 1992, “I love getting even with people.”
Since his first run for president in 2015, he’s made it quite clear that he intended to exact revenge on his political opponents. He showed a little bit of discretion during that first campaign declaring that his rival Hillary Clinton “has to go to jail” ostensibly for her email server, but it was obvious even then that he wanted to use the presidency for payback.
He actually attempted to do it and was thwarted by the proverbial “guardrails.” The NY Times reported that in his first term, Trump did demand that the Justice Department prosecute Clinton and former FBI Director James Comey but was steered away from it by his White House Counsel Don McGahn who told him he didn’t have the authority to order such a thing. He finally managed to get his Attorney General Bill Barr to name a special prosecutor to investigate Robert Mueller’s Russia probe. They spent years trying to prove wrongdoing and ultimately failed because there wasn’t any.
It wasn’t until his third run for president that he really cranked up the threats. In his “comeback” speech at CPAC in 2023 he made no bones about what he planned if he were to win the White House again:
In 2016, I declared: I am your voice. Today, I add: I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed: I am your retribution….I am your retribution.
By that time, of course, his own list of grievances was a mile long, having been sued repeatedly and charged with several crimes related to actions he took as president and afterwards. Although he had a long history of lawsuits being filed against him and being found liable, and his crude personal behavior toward women was well documented, he persuaded his followers that he was being railroaded for political purposes. He framed his campaign as a restoration to the White House after the election was stolen from him in 2020 and tens of millions of people believed the lie.
“the Biden regime’s weaponization of law enforcement against their political opponents is something straight out of the Stalinist Russia horror show. … From the beginning it’s been one witch hunt and phony investigation after another. … The abuses of power that we are witnessing at all levels of government will go down as among the most shameful, corrupt, and depraved chapters” in all of history.”
His henchman Stephen Miller does know how to produce a florid turn of phrase doesn’t he?
There were plenty of people pointing out that Trump was bent on revenge. He didn’t try to hide it. And some of his supporters in the media tried everything they could to get him to say that he wasn’t, that he was just going to restore impartial justice. He wouldn’t do it.
Fox News’ Sean Hannity practically begged him:
Hannity: People believe that you want retribution and will use the system of justice to go after your political enemies
In fact, on many appearances such as this one on Newsmax he was explicit about his regrets for not throwing Hillary Clinton in jail and seemed to be suggesting that he still wanted to do it:
Trump: Wouldn't it be terrible to throw the president's wife and the former secretary of state into jail? Wouldn't that be a terrible thing? It's a terrible, terrible, path that they're leading us to. And it's very possible that it's going to have to happen to them. pic.twitter.com/P0bRL6jurF
Even though he was saying these things there were many Republicans who insisted that he had no intention of getting retribution. And even he would say from time to time, “my revenge will be success” just to keep everyone guessing.
Since he’s been in office he’s completely dissolved any barrier between himself and the Department of Justice and his Attorney General Pam Bondi is honored to be his loyal hatchet woman. She has inappropriately trashed the reputation of any judge who rules against the administration and fired prosecutors who worked on the January 6th cases. And she is helping him with his crusade against the big law firms who represented clients who opposed him.
Trump is withdrawing their security clearances and threatening to bar them from government facilities, putting any business with the government at risk. It’s extortion, plain and simple, by the president and the Department of Justice and many of them have capitulated, agreeing to spend hundred of millions of dollars in pro-bono work, essentially becoming his personal army of lawyers, to do his bidding. As the presidential press secretary Karoline Leavitt said:
“Big Law continues to bend the knee to President Trump because they know they were wrong, and he looks forward to putting their pro bono legal concessions toward implementing his America First agenda.”
But this week, Trump finally went the distance and publicly issued presidential memos instructing his Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute two political appointees he believes betrayed him in the first term. The first was cybersecurity expert Christopher Krebs who testified truthfully that the 2020 election was secure despite Trump and his mindless acolytes’ conspiracy theories that the voting machines had been “rigged.” He instructed Bondi to investigate if Krebbs had violated the espionage act by providing classified information to someone who was not authorized to receive it. (The incredible chutzpah of Trump accusing him of the very crime that he has committed numerous times is impressive, even for him. But then, that’s probably the point.) He stripped Krebs of his security clearance and in an act of sheer, gratuitous malice, he did the same to the people Krebs works with at his security firm.
The other person he’s demanding be investigated is Miles Taylor, the former Department of Homeland Security Chief of Staff who wrote the famous anonymous op-ed in the New York Times saying that there were people in the administration who were keeping Trump from going off the rails. When Trump announced his instructions he said that he believes Taylor committed treason.
Both men are being investigated for things they said that Donald Trump doesn’t like. The first amendment is apparently no longer operative at least for critics of Donald Trump.
The orders aren’t really meaningful in any legal sense. He could have just phoned Bondi and told her to look into them and taken away their clearances without a ceremony. But this is meant as a shot across the bow. Krebs and Taylor were Republicans, hired by Trump, and they were, in his view, disloyal to him personally. As he said in that Charlie Rose interview all those years ago, that is the ultimate crime in his book, and he’s going to “wipe the floor with them.”
For the moment, it’s Republicans being put on notice: cross him and you will pay the price. They’re listening. Democrats are almost certainly going to be next.
“We are watching the collapse of the international order in real time,” Carole Cadwalladr insists in a nervous return to TED. Learn how to fight back, she urges. First we have to name it: “It’s a coup.”
“It’s already later than we think.”
This Is What a Digital Coup Looks Like
“It’s a kind of power we’ve never seen before.”
“We are already living within the architecture of totalitarianism. It may not have been deliberate, but we now have to act as though we are living in East Germany, and Instagram is the Stasi.”
“Privacy is power.”
Appropriating your information is “more than theft. It’s a violation. Data rights are human rights.”
“We are not powerless. The 30,000 people who supported me proved that – we are not powerless. Because we know who we are, and we know what we stand for. And my question to Silicon Valley is, do you?”
It’s overwhelming. Between the Trump cult and the digital coup this gets harder every morning. Hell, we’re still trying to certify Justice Allison Riggs’s N.C. state Supreme Court seat she won in November. While we’re not working to stop the spread of global authoritarianism and a digital coup.
Survivors in Gaza and Aleppo have it worse. So it’s chickenshit, isn’t it, for us sitting in front of computers to give in to the creeps trying to threaten or sue us into submission? We’re better than that (I hope).
Street protests do little to change the political battlefield. And I’m as quick as anyone to dismiss them as little more than events designed to make us feel better about issues than to resolve them. But April 5 was a tonic, proving we are not alone. We are many. I’m hoping April 19 comes together bigger than the last, perhaps building toward a national stike.
In its decision late Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court in an unsigned, unanimous opinion politely informed the Trump administration it must “facilitate” the release of a man it spirited off to a Salvadoran gulag last month due to its own “administrative error” (Washington Post):
A district court judge had ordered Kilmar Abrego García to be brought back to the United States by Monday night, but Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. issued a brief pause hours before the deadline, allowing the justices time to weigh a government motion to block the order.
In its brief order Thursday evening, the high court said the judge “properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.”
But not so fast. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis’s initial order instructed the Triump administration to “facilitate and effectuate” Abrego García’s return to the U.S. SCOTUS sent the case back to the lower court to expand on what it meant by “effectuate.”
The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term “effectuate” in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.
That is, another co-equal branch of our government mustn’t overstep its authority, something with which the Trump administration is thoroughly familiar. “Abrego García, a Salvadoran immigrant who is married to a U.S. citizen, was deported on March 15 despite a court ruling forbidding it,” the Post explains.
As a lame duck in 2020, Trump brought and lost dozens of lawsuits challenging his election loss to Joe Biden. Now with his sycophants installed in every cranny of the Executive Branch, with Trump-appointed judges throughout the federal judiciary, and with GOP control of both branches of Congress, Trump feels entitled to ignore adversarial rulings. In essence, “Make me.” Or “facilitate this.”
After instructing the lower court to give the Executive “due regard” in foreign affairs, SCOTUS suggested that the Trump administration “be prepared to share what it can concerning the steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps.”
Oh, we’re sharing now, are we, mugged Rachel Maddow on her show. “What is this, group therapy?” Maddow asked. “Do you feel you can share?” Is this a court order or not? Or a by-your-leave from the highest court in the land? Mustn’t make daddy angry?
Nowhere in its ruling does the SCOTUS ruling use the word “return” regarding Abrego García, notes Chris Geidner at Law Dork, adding, “Of the 13 judges — including seven appointed by Republican presidents — to look at the Trump administration’s actions here, none have sided with the administration.”
Does anyone think he or his lackeys care?
Geidner updates with this late news:
[UPDATE, 10:50 p.m.: Judge Paula Xinis issued an order following Thursday night’s Supreme Court ruling, ordering the government to “take all available steps to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the United States as soon as possible” and scheduling a status conference in the case for 1 p.m. Friday.
Additionally, Xinis ordered the Justice Department to file a declaration by 9:30 a.m. Friday detailing where Abrego Garcia is and what steps have been and will be taken to facilitate his return.]
Justice Sonia Sotamayor laid out her rather tart thoughts on the matter, and called bullshit on the Trump administration’s claims that Abrego Garcia’s fate now is out of its hands. Watch your backs. This is where Trump is haeding if he isn’t stopped:
The Government now requests an order from this Court permitting it to leave Abrego Garcia, a husband and father without a criminal record, in a Salvadoran prison for no reason recognized by the law. The only argument the Government offers in support of its request, that United States courts cannot grant relief once a deportee crosses the border, is plainly wrong. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U. S. 426, 447, n. 16 (2004); cf. Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U. S. 723, 732 (2008). The Government’s argument, moreover, implies that it could deport and incarcerate any person, including U. S. citizens, without legal consequence, so long as it does so before a court can intervene. See Trump v. J. G. G., 604 U. S. ___, ___ (2025) (SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 8). That view refutes itself.
In lieu of divine intervention, a bit of karmic comeuppance for this nasty little administration would be welcome about now.
Trump’s been getting revenge on law firms that represented people he perceives as enemies and now he’s going after individuals by name. He’s making an example of these two but I’m sure they won’t be the last.
President Trump on Wednesday signed executive orders punishing two officials from his first administration and an elite law firm, continuing a campaign of retribution that he has gleefully carried out since his inauguration.
Good luck to them finding a law firm to represent them:
A third order targeted the law firm Susman Godfrey with many of the same sanctions that Mr. Trump has applied to other law firms that had taken on cases or causes he did not like. In 2023, Fox News agreed to pay $787.5 million to resolve a defamation suit filed by Dominion Voting Systems over the network’s promotion of misinformation about the 2020 election. Susman Godfrey represented Dominion, a manufacturer of voting machines that lawyers allied with Mr. Trump attacked with outlandish claims about widespread voting fraud.
We’re all logically obsessed with the tariffs these days and the shock and awe of DOGE and Vought and Bobby Jr and all the rest is overwhelming. But the destruction of the rule of law continues, openly and without restraint and it may be the most destructive activity of all. This is full-on dictator behavior. And nobody blinks an eye. It’s just another atrocity among thousands.
Flamboyantly going after Krebbs and Taylor with an executive order is designed to intimidate anyone who might speak out. I would guess that it’s going to work quite well. Putin must be so proud of his protege.
Just a day earlier, on March 2, Mr. Trump had lobbed his latest insult at McMaster, blasting him on social media as a “weak and totally ineffective loser.” McMaster had also just appeared on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” where he voiced skepticism about Mr. Trump’s overtures to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Putin’s willingness to end the war in Ukraine.
Trump called him Henry and started talking at which point McMaster understood that it was Trump and that he thought he was talking to someone else. His name isn’t Henry. When he told the president that he was talking to H.R McMaster this is how he weirdly
“Why the f*** would I talk” to H.R. McMaster? Trump asked dismissively, and then Trump launched into a scathing critique of his former aide, two sources said.
Did he tell the White house operator to call “Henry McMaster” by mistake? He gets names mixed up. Remember Tim Apple? Or did the operator just hear the name wrong and call the wrong number? He might have had a total brain freeze for all we know. But his response is truly weird. He’s the one who placed the call (or asked for it to be placed.) And yet he asked, “why the fuck would I talk to H.R. McMaster (or “you” it’s unclear)? That makes no sense.
He’s under tremendous stress and he’s surrounded himself with sycophants and eager henchmen. And he’s not all there.
Trump played his cards close to his vest. He told advisers that he was willing to take “pain,” a person who spoke to him on Monday said. He privately acknowledged that his trade policy could trigger a recession but said he wanted to be sure it didn’t cause a depression, according to people familiar with the conversations.
He could take “pain?? Really? How noble of him.
But he didn’t want them to trigger a depression which was awfully thoughtful, Long live King Donald. He cares.
(@ArtCandee) 
