The Justice Department replaced pardons online that initially featured identical copies of President Trump’s signature, attributing the error to technical and staffing issues. Experts confirmed the signatures on the original documents were identical, raising questions about their authenticity. The administration insisted Trump signed all pardons personally and blamed the error on a “technical” problem, despite Trump’s criticism of his predecessor’s use of an autopen. Legal experts maintain the identical signatures do not affect the pardon’s validity.
Read More
The Justice Department has replaced pardons posted online after it was discovered that the initial documents featured strikingly similar copies of Donald Trump’s signature. Officials attributed the issue to technical errors and staffing problems, claiming Trump personally signed all the pardons, which included individuals like Darryl Strawberry and Glen Casada. This comes amid a focus on the validity of pardons, with Republicans previously criticizing Biden’s use of an autopen and questioning his involvement in signing documents. Legal experts emphasize the president’s intent as key to pardon validity, regardless of the signature method used.
Read More
Following a “technical error,” the Justice Department replaced online pardons bearing identical copies of President Trump’s signature. The original pardons, including those for Darryl Strawberry and Glen Casada, were found to have strikingly similar signatures, confirmed by forensic document experts. The Justice Department attributed the error to staffing and technical issues, despite Trump’s history of mocking his predecessor’s use of an autopen and criticism of the practice. Legal experts maintain that the validity of the pardons is not affected.
Read More
Trump asks Justice Department to probe Epstein ties with Clinton, other Democrats, setting off a wave of reactions, and it’s easy to see why. The immediate gut reaction from many seems to be a mix of “Here we go again” and a healthy dose of skepticism. It’s hard not to notice the timing of this move, especially considering the mountain of allegations swirling around Trump and his own connections to the late Jeffrey Epstein. The feeling is that this is a classic deflection tactic, designed to shift the focus away from his own potential involvement in the Epstein scandal by directing attention toward his political rivals.… Continue reading
AP News reports that a federal judge has ordered prosecutors to provide James Comey’s defense lawyers with a wealth of investigation materials, expressing concern that the Justice Department may have “indict[ed] first” and investigated later. The judge’s order includes grand jury materials and evidence seized through search warrants, following arguments that Comey’s lawyers lacked access to crucial information gathered during the investigation into FBI media leaks. Comey, who has pleaded not guilty to charges of lying to Congress, claims the prosecution is vindictive and politically motivated. Furthermore, the judge granted a request for a transcript of grand jury proceedings, signaling potential irregularities and legal errors in the case.
Read More
In August 2022, the FBI conducted a surprise raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, uncovering highly sensitive classified documents. Internal discussions revealed the gravity of the materials, including those detailing covert operations, and the potential risk to national security. The Justice Department, initially hesitant due to Trump’s position, faced the dilemma of how to proceed. Ultimately, a special counsel was appointed, leading to Trump’s indictment on felony counts related to the mishandling of these records.
Read More
Autocrats wield law enforcement to punish dissent and protect allies. Under Mr. Trump’s leadership, the Justice Department has pursued legal action against critics and ordered investigations, often at the President’s behest. Appointees, including former personal lawyers, have issued indictments and targeted those perceived as enemies, while executive orders have also been utilized. This environment of retaliation has created fear among public officials, while supporters have been shielded from legal repercussions, as seen with pardons for January 6th rioters.
Read More
In a recent Truth Social post, former President Trump called for the prosecution of several Biden-era Justice Department officials, including Merrick Garland and Christopher Wray. Trump’s accusations stem from an FBI probe known as Arctic Frost, which involved the scrutiny of Republican lawmakers’ phone records related to the 2020 election fallout. The former president claimed these officials engaged in illegal and unethical behavior without specifying the exact crimes committed. This follows a pattern of Trump urging prosecution against individuals he views as political adversaries, amid ongoing investigations into his actions and legal challenges against him.
Read More
Former special counsel Jack Smith is seeking to testify publicly before Congress about the investigations leading to criminal charges against Donald Trump. Smith believes public hearings are necessary due to “mischaracterizations” surrounding his work and wants to defend the integrity of his investigations. However, Smith requires assurances from the Justice Department that he won’t face repercussions for revealing information still under seal or protected by grand jury secrecy. Furthermore, Smith is requesting access to files created during his tenure as special counsel to ensure full and accurate answers.
Read More
Former President Donald Trump has demanded that the Justice Department pay him $230 million in taxpayer dollars as compensation for actions he disagreed with, stemming from investigations into Russian interference and the Mar-a-Lago search. These claims, submitted in 2023, allege violations of his rights. Ethics experts have raised concerns due to the potential for conflicts of interest, as those tasked with approving payments include Trump’s appointees. Despite the obvious ethical challenges, the Justice Department has not clarified whether those involved would recuse themselves.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood