Recently, MAGAs have haughtily demanded to know anything “illegal” that Trump has done after various Democratic Veterans said that members of the military are required to disobey “illegal orders.”
Well, that’s actually a pretty big can of worms if you really open it up wide.
Ahem.
We already know that Trump is a convicted felon with 34 counts of fraud for falsifying business documents. He has been adjudicated as a racist discriminator in his family’s housing discrimination case, as corrupt with his self-dealing using the Trump Foundation, as a grifter using Trump University, as a corrupt businessman using falsified documents to wrongly re-estimate the value of his properties for favorable bank loans and lower property taxes. He’s openly bragged about sexual assault, been credibly accused by over 29 victims and been found in court a liable for sexual assault in the E. Jean Carrol case. And he was named in the Katie Johnson lawsuit as a pedophile rapist alongside Jeffrey Epstein.
Also, emails reveal that Epstein apparently signed up to his campaign under the name “Pedophiles Should Be Tried.”
Epstein had already been jailed for “solicitation” at this point, but Trump had never been criminally tried for any sexual crimes. So he had a sick sense of humor, it seems.
The reason Epstein and Trump originally fell out involved a money-laundering real estate scheme with a Russian Oligarch, from similar schemes, Trump is documented to have profited $98 million from Russian Oligarchs and Gangs.
A stunning report in The New Republic alleges that, whether Donald Trump knew it or not, for decades he made a large portion of his personal fortune from Russian mobsters & oligarchs.
Russian Gangsters ran an illegal gambling ring out of Trump Tower, who were prosecuted by Preet Bharara and Trump’s Taj Mahal was fined $10 million for engaging in money laundering through the Russian mob. Most of this was known and documented well before the 2016 election. It was common knowledge before he was originally elected, and the rest was documented before the 2020 election, so this is just getting our palette wet.
Trump is a fucking criminal. And his regime is filled with his criminal cohorts.
When Trump lost the 2020 election, he adopted an illegal plan to steal the electoral college, concocted by John Eastman. On top of trying to illegally pressure State Officials and Governors like those in Georgia into changing their election results, he tried to illegally create false electors to implement Eastman’s plan.
After failing to get Mike Pence to sign on to implement that plan, he personally sent the tweet to gather a huge crowd on the exact day and time that the electoral votes were about to be counted by Congress and sent them to the Capitol with Oath Keepers and Proud Boys in the lead. The Proud Boys used a plan called “1776 Returns” to take control of the building. The Oath Keepers stocked a set of long guns at a nearby hotel in case they met heavy resistance. This was done, IMO, to force the Secret Service to pull Mike Pence out, allowing Chuck Grassley to implement the Eastman plan.
It was only because Pence refused to leave that this plot was foiled.
These documents alone prove that this attack was planned. Video evidence shows members of the Proud Boys organizing and directing the crowd to attack police at strategic points, removing barricades and smashing windows to get into the building. It was deliberate; it was not an “unlucky happenstance” that occurred just because “people got out of hand.” That was a whole lot of crime.
1,600 people had been prosecuted for this, 600 of whom for physically assaulting the police and vandalizing the building. When Trump got back into office, he pardoned all of these criminals.
So far, at least ten of these crooks have continued violating the law with charges ranging from child sexual abuse to illegal gun possession, home invasion, domestic abuse and reckless homicide.
Trump also illegally retained classified documents from his first administration, even after his security clearance had been revoked by the Biden Administration. He didn’t have a legal right to hold onto any of these documents, and if they had been “declassified” their markings would have been changed from “Secret” to “Unclassified,” but that wasn’t the case. He no longer had the power to declassify them after leaving office. He lied to the National Archives about the documents he had and instructed his own lawyers to lie to the FBI about them. This is why the FBI had to use a search warrant to recover the docs, and the DOJ charged him with falsely retaining them.
Further election deniers like Trump lawyer Stephanie Lambert have been arrested, because she refused to give her fingerprints in a case where she was accused of breaking into Dominion voting machines in an effort to prove Drumphf’s paranoid fantasies.
Trump lawyer and election denier Stefanie Lambert who represents other MAGA followers, is subject to ARREST in BOTH state and federal court because of her misconduct in aid of MAGA. Michael Popok reports on Lambert: 1) violating a bench warrant concerning her breaking into Michigan voting machines; 2) then violating a federal court order and illegally disclosed Dominion Voting Systems emails to another election denier; which resulted in her being ARRESTED by FEDERAL MARSHALLS IN FEDERAL COURT as soon as her contempt hearing ended.
In Tina Peters’ case, whom Trump has already tried to pardon even though she was convicted in state court, another Trump lawyer is claiming Trump should use the Military to perform a jailbreak for her because his pardon on state charges of election tampering didn’t take.
Tina Peters, 70, a former Colorado election official, is currently serving a 9-year prison sentence on state-level charges, having been convicted in August 2024 of facilitating a security breach after she let prominent election denier and MyPillow salesman, Mike Lindell, enter a secure room and download data containing 2020 election results, as part of his effort to find evidence of fraud and contest Joe Biden's defeat of Trump.
Following a series of federal pardons and dropped cases, Peters is now the only person serving prison time for actions related to Trump's denial of the 2020 election results. Despite Trump claiming to have pardoned her this week, the president is only capable of commuting federal charges, and Colorado officials have dismissed the possibility of releasing Peters from custody at his command.
Appearing on Steve Bannon's War Room podcast, her lawyer, Peter Ticktin, agreed with Bannon's assertion that Trump should dispatch the 101st Airborne Division to free Peters from prison.
“Do I think it should be done? For who I am, yeah – I’d love to see that happen," Ticktin said.
Trump's diverting or reallocating funds appropriated by Congress is against the law. Google AI: The president can not reappropriate congressional funds
That statement is largely correct: the President generally
cannot unilaterally reappropriate or block congressionally-approved funds due to Congress's constitutional "power of the purse," enforced by laws like the Impoundment Control Act (ICA) and Antideficiency Act, which require the President to spend money as appropriated or seek formal rescission approval from Congress. While presidents can request to delay or cut spending (impoundment), they must follow specific legal processes, and courts have historically sided with Congress, preventing unilateral executive budget control.
This means that all the firings, money and cuts that were supposedly “saved” by DOGE were entirely illegal. None of that was authorized by Congress. Estimates are that 600,000 people, 2/3rd of whom are children, have already died from disease and starvation because of these cuts. Another 11 million people remain at dire risk.
Trump does not have the power to set Tariffs except in emergency conditions because that is a power of Congress. Google AI: Except in an emergency, the president does not control the rate of tariffs
That statement is largely
true: the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to set tariffs, but presidents have gained significant authority through laws like the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and other delegations, allowing them to impose tariffs, especially under declared "emergencies" or national security claims, though this remains a contentious legal battle over separation of powers.
Constitutional Power vs. Executive Action
- Congress's Role: Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution explicitly grants Congress the power "to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises" (tariffs).
- President's Power (Delegated): Presidents can impose tariffs when Congress passes laws (like the Trade Act of 1974) that delegate this authority, often for specific purposes (e.g., trade deficits, national security).
ED. Note of correction: “The IEEPA statute does not give the president the power to levy tariffs. Tariffs are never mentioned in the text. The IEEPA was created to allow executive to levy sanctions on foreign countries. Since a tariff is a form of tax that is paid by the importer and typically passed along to consumers through a price increase, that means tariffs cannot be considered a form of sanction.”
Congress has not passed any laws delegating this authority to Trump. None. No “emergency” has been established.
Trump does not have the authority to Federalize Troops except in cases of War, Invasion or Rebellion. A Federal Judge has recently ruled exactly this is the case in the deployment of National Guard to Los Angeles.
President Donald Trump suffered another court loss related to his immigration crackdown in a blistering rebuke from a federal judge.
A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the president's deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles and ordered their return to California Gov. Gavin Newsom's control, reported Reuters.
"The Founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances," wrote U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer. "Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one."
The Trump regime doesn’t have the power to ignore the lawful orders of the Court, as they apparently did in the case of using the Alien Enemies Act to deport detainees to CECOT in El Salvador after Judge Boasberg had ordered them to “turn the planes around.” Boasberg is now considering a Contempt of Court citation against Kristi Noem and Emil Bove.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued an order on Friday demanding the Trump administration file affidavits from every official involved in the decision to carry out mass deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, despite Boasberg's standing order to turn the planes around.
The order, which gives the administration one week to comply, is a major step toward a potential criminal prosecution of Trump administration officials for contempt of court.
"Defendants ... maintain, relying heavily on Judge Katsas’s concurring opinion for the D.C. Circuit panel, that [Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's] decision was proper and not contumacious. As a result, the Government posits that 'no further steps are warranted' because 'Defendants did not violate this Court’s order,' wrote Boasberg. However, he continued, "Given that the other two panel members (plus the majority of the en banc court) did not agree with J. Katsas, the Court is not prepared at this juncture to terminate its inquiry."
They claimed that they would never bring detainees like Kilmar Abrego Garcia back to the U.S., but then they did bring him back based on trumped-up charges of human smuggling. They put him back in immigration detention and tried to get him to plead guilty to those charges in exchange for being sent to Costa Rica. But then the judge determined that DOJ was lying to her about Costa Rica not wanting them to send Garcia there after he agreed to go, but wouldn’t agree to plead guilty to their bogus charges.
Garcia has now been freed from detention without fear of deportation because there was no removal order against him.
The Maryland husband and father was swept up by federal agents earlier this year and sent to the notorious CECOT megaprison in his native El Salvador, where he feared being targeted by gang violence, but a federal judge on Thursday ruled that the administration's efforts to prevent his repatriation were illegal.
"Since Abrego Garcia’s return from wrongful detention in El Salvador, he has been re-detained, again without lawful authority," wrote U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis. "For this reason, the Court will grant Abrego Garcia’s Petition for immediate release from ICE custody."
They could still try to prosecute him for “trafficking” if they dare, because he is still pending trial on the “trafficking” case. Although, ironically, the next hearing on his case is on his lawyers’ motion to find that this is a case of “vindictive prosecution.”
Abrego Garcia has never been convicted of anything in court. Nothing has been “proven” against him.
Edit: DHS today has attempted to detain Abrego Garcia yet again, by trying to turn a 2019 immigration judge order — the one that prevented him from being deported to El Salvador — into an actual deportation order. Unfortunately, the judge has issued a TRO blocking this because, it’s still Illegal.
Whew.
In a hearing this week, Kristi Noem was confronted on the issue of deporting asylum seekers, who are already participating in a LEGAL PROCESS, and she refused to answer the question that deporting these people is illegal.
Asylum seekers and refugees are among the most vetted of all immigrants, far more than those who enter using a Visa and transition to having a Green Card.
With the Trump administration claiming 605,000 deportations this year, they are ignoring that we are obligated under International Law and UN Treaty to protect and respect the rights of refugees against “nonrefoulment,” which is being sent back to a country where their safety and lives may be at risk. Very clearly, those rights are now being grossly violated.
Some of those who have been deported have valid Visas, Green Cards, are U.S. Citizens and veterans, as was shown this week in Congress during testimony by Kristi Noem.
While Trump, Noem and Stephen Miller like to claim that all this is necessary to remove “criminal illegal aliens” reports from the CATO institute indicate that only 5% of the people they’ve detained have been “violent criminals” and 73% of them have no criminal record at all, while the rest have only minor or misdemeanor offenses.
President Donald Trump premised his mass deportation agenda on the idea that he will be “returning millions and millions of criminal aliens.” Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem has repeatedly claimed that they are arresting the “worst of the worst.” New nonpublic data from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) leaked to the Cato Institute reveal a different story.
Of people booked into ICE custody this fiscal year (since October 1, 2025):
- Nearly three in four (73 percent) had no criminal conviction.
- Nearly half had no criminal conviction nor even any pending criminal charges.
- Only 8 percent had a violent or property criminal conviction.
- Only 5 percent had a violent criminal conviction.
- A majority of criminal convicts had vice, immigration, or traffic convictions.
Recent reports are that some members of Border Patrol have gone on racist rants online and threatened to shoot protesting bystanders.
A Border Patrol agent who allegedly threatened to shoot a bystander during an arrest in Chicago has been exposed for a history of extreme, racist and hate-filled online posts, reported The Daily Beast on Friday.
"Timothy Donohue, 38, was a member of lead commander Gregory Bovino’s maurauding so-called 'Green Army' during 'Operation Midway Blitz' in Illinois, part of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown," reported Tom Latchem. "Donahue was cited — though not by name — in a blistering opinion by U.S. District Judge Sara L. Ellis after he was filmed threatening someone watching an arrest in Evanston." Footage apparently of Donohue appeared to show him saying, “Step back or I’m going to shoot you,” to a bystander.
According to the report, Donohue has an active presence on social media, where he has expressed a number of extremist opinions.
[...]
Among other things, Donohue approvingly replied "Based" to a post that showed a white father disowning his daughter for having a Black prom date, and a video that appeared to show two men ganging up to attack a gay man. He also replied "yes" to a post asking if America would be better off if women didn't have voting rights, and said "good" in response to an article about how the transgender community in Nashville feared for their safety after a high-profile school shooting.
"An archived version of Donahue’s X account shows the same handle and a photo of him, younger and clean-shaven, before his display name was changed from his own name to 'Donny,' and then, following journalist inquiries, to 'Based Red Beard,' before it changed again in the past two weeks," said the report.
This entire effort more resembles racist ethnic cleansing than it does “law enforcement.”
FBI officials claimed in testimony this week that ”ANTIFA” is our greatest domestic terrorist threat, but when asked to name who they are and where they are — he could not.
Antifa is “the largest threat,” but they have absolutely no fracking idea how many people are actually in the group? How did they do that math? This suggests that their prior claims about Antifa’s relative danger were a pack of lies. This was perjury.
FBI Director Kash Patel has illegally fired members of the FBI for participating in investigations of Donald Trump and the attack on January 6.
On top of the illegal appointment of Beauty Queen Insurance Lawyer Lindsay Halligan as U.S. Attorney in Virginia, in order to file a perjury case against James Comey, members of the DOJ violated attorney-client privilege between him and his attorney, Dan Richman.
A U.S. District Judge has issued a temporary order blocking prosecutors from using evidence seized from Daniel Richman in any potential new indictment of former FBI Director James Comey. The initial criminal case against Comey was already dismissed on separate grounds in November 2025.
Details of the Ruling
- Temporary Restraining Order (TRO): On December 6, 2025, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly granted Richman a temporary restraining order that requires the Justice Department to stop accessing the files and to return or segregate the materials.
- Reasoning: The judge's order indicated that Richman is "likely to succeed on the merits of his claim" that the government violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. Prosecutors had retained a complete copy of his computer files for years after closing an initial investigation in 2020 without charge, and then used them without obtaining new warrants for the subsequent Comey case this year.
It’s also the case that Richman denies that Comey authorized him to leak his memos to the media.
Law professor Daniel Richman, who prosecutors allege Comey authorized to leak information to the media, told investigators the former FBI director had instructed him at least twice not to engage with journalists and unequivocally did not authorize him to provide information to a reporter before the 2016 election, according to sources who spoke to ABC News.
"According to prosecutors who investigated the circumstances surrounding Comey's 2020 testimony for two months, using Richman's testimony to prove that Comey knowingly provided false statements to Congress would result in 'likely insurmountable problems' for the prosecution," the network reported.
FBI investigators knew this was the case and found that information from Richman actually undermined that case against Comey, but Trump and his handpicked lackey, Halligan, forged ahead anyway after, apparently, falsifying evidence to the Grand Jury.
Investigators stated their concerns about the case last month in a lengthy memo advocating against criminal charges, according to sources familiar with the document, but President Donald Trump replaced the lead investigator with a loyalist aide, Lindsey Halligan, who quickly presented the case to a grand jury and secured an indictment.
Since Andrew McCabe has also said Comey didn’t authorize his leak to the WSJ, this confirms Comey’s testimony that he “Never” authorized anyone at the FBI to leak for him. There is no case here.
Similarly, private mortgage information, which was initially used to indict Letitia James, may have been obtained illegally.
New York Attorney General Letitia James and her legal team argue that the mortgage fraud case against her, which has been dismissed by a judge and rejected twice by grand juries, is the product of
"illegal and unethical behavior" by Trump administration officials.
Key Developments in the Case
- Illegally Appointed Prosecutor: A federal judge dismissed the original indictment against James in November 2025, ruling that the prosecutor overseeing the case, U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully appointed to her role by President Trump. This meant she lacked the legal authority to bring the charges.
- Grand Jury Rejections: After the judge's dismissal, the Department of Justice (DOJ) attempted twice to secure new indictments against James from separate grand juries in Virginia. Both grand juries refused to return new charges, a rare occurrence in the legal system.
- FHFA Director's Role: James' team alleges that the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), Bill Pulte, may have violated her rights by illegally accessing her loan documents and actively involving himself in the investigation
Time and time again, prosecutors in Trump’s DOJ have shown a willingness to face-plant in court in order to make the Dear Leader happy with bogus cases.
That's according to a Friday article by the New York Times' Glenn Thrush and Alan Feuer, who reported that the DOJ's recent string of public losses is seen as highly uncharacteristic of the federal government. One recent example is the DOJ failing to convince a grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), just one week after a separate grand jury in Norfolk, Virginia, declined to return an indictment.
"Federal grand juries almost never decline to bring an indictment once, much less twice. Such rejections, known as 'no true bills,' have been exceedingly rare, a misfire that often stigmatizes the prosecutors involved," Thrush and Feuer wrote. "They are becoming more common, and accepted, in a department where face-planting in court might be preferable to facing down the boss."
The same day Trump's DOJ struck out with the Alexandria grand jury, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ruled that detained Maryland man Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia was to be freed immediately, saying the government had no "lawful authority" to keep him in custody. The Trump administration had threatened to send Abrego Garcia to Liberia and Costa Rica, though never followed through on those threats while keeping Abrego Garcia in custody for more than four months.
Former U.S. Attorney John P. Fishwick told the Times that Trump had done himself no favors by aggressively publicizing his efforts to strike back at his political enemies via indictments, which may have soured the public against him.
"I think many of these cases are nationalized for the public and there is a pushback on Trump and his targeting of individuals," Fishwick said. "This is a major shift."
For the record, Vindictive and Selective prosecutions are Illegal.
Laws against vindictive prosecution stem from the
Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, prohibiting prosecutors from punishing defendants for exercising legal rights (like appealing or going to trial) by bringing harsher charges; it's a high bar to prove, requiring evidence of retaliatory intent or a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness, not just facing more severe charges after challenging the state. Key U.S. Supreme Court cases like
North Carolina v. Pearce and
Blackledge v. Perry established this, creating a presumption of vindictiveness that prosecutors must rebut with legitimate, objective reasons for the increased charges, such as new evidence.
As much as MAGA complain that Dems engaged in “Lawfare” and “Weaponization” with their cases against Trump and his associates, they never had a prosecutor who was wrongfully appointed. (Yes, I know a Florida Judge determined that Jack Smith wasn’t legally appointed, but he was appointed under the same law as Alina Habba, and his case would have easily survived appeal.). They never had a Grand Jury fail to return an indictment. They WON most of their cases because the defendants were very clearly guilty based on the evidence and all reasonable doubt. The DOJ was obligated to bring these cases against Trump, they are not obligated, based on the evidence, to bring these charges against his critics.
Merrick Garland didn’t even try to indict Trump for his being “Individual #1” in the Michael Cohen case — which was later followed up by Alvin Bragg — nor did he prosecute Trump for the 10 cases of Obstruction which were identified by Mueller. Garland testified several times that if Biden ever tried to tell him who to prosecute, he would immediately resign.
Trump, on the other hand, long before Biden became President. was already calling to “Lock Her Up” with Hillary Clinton and tried to prosecute Hillary with the John Durham investigation, except he failed and ended his investigation with two acquittals. He was impeached for trying to get Zelensky to implement a false investigation of Joe Biden. He spent 6 years investigating Hunter Biden with Special Counsel David Weiss, who reversed a negotiated plea deal and prosecuted Hunter for tax evasion after he had already paid all of his back taxes with interest. We all know, for a fact, that Pam Bondi is following Trump’s instructions for her prosecutions because he posted them publicly himself, and she immediately obeyed.
The difference between the Trump and Biden administrations' abuse of DOJ power is immense.
The Pentagon Inspector General did not exonerate Pete Hegseth in his revealing attack details to a reporter via Signal Chat.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed that he received “total exoneration” in an investigative report by the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General regarding a Signal group chat about a military attack in Yemen. But the report contradicts that assessment, concluding that Hegseth’s messages “created a risk to operational security that could have resulted in failed U.S. mission objectives and potential harm to U.S. pilots.”
The inspector general report, which was issued Dec. 2 and publicly released two days later, also faulted Hegseth for using a personal cell phone to relay sensitive DoD information, and for not retaining the Signal conversations as official records, as required by federal law and Pentagon policy.
The chat between top administration national security officials on Signal, a private encrypted messaging app, came to light because Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, was inadvertently added to the group chat by National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, who was later removed from his job. In one of the messages, Hegseth appeared to provide a timeline for impending U.S. military strikes in Yemen on March 15.
And then you have the illegal drone strikes on boats from Venezuela, which are being called a War Crime and Murder.
Axios' Andrew Solender reported Wednesday that Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) will be officially unveiling articles of impeachment against the embattled Pentagon chief during an event at Union Station in Washington D.C. on Thursday morning. Thanedar is introducing the legislation alongside a group that has been carrying out a sustained 24-hour, daily protest against President Donald Trump's administration.
"Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has committed war crimes through his military strikes in the Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific Ocean and his reckless and unlawful handling of classified information," a statement accompanying the announcement read.
According to the statement, Thanedar's impeachment legislation accuses Hegseth of "murder," "conspiracy to murder" and "reckless and unlawful handling of classified information." The Michigan Democrat has previously filed articles of impeachment against Trump alleging obstruction of justice and abuse of executive power, as well as usurpation of appropriations power and abuse of trade powers, among others.
This is notable since Hegseth has a long history of advocating in favor of War Crimes by the military.
In 2019, CNN reported that Hegseth was privately courting Trump to pardon some servicemen accused and convicted of war crimes. Against the advice of his Pentagon officials, who worried the pardons would undermine the military justice system, Trump pardoned two service members and restored the rank of a Navy SEAL who had been demoted.
Hegseth reiterated his support for not criminalizing soldiers on a podcast in June 2024.
“Donald Trump pardoned a bunch of guys I advocated for in his last couple years in office. They killed the right guys in the wrong way, according to somebody. I’m done with that,” Hegseth said. “We need to fight total war against our enemies when we do. And yeah, you don’t kill civilians on purpose, but you kill bad guys. All of ’em, you stack bodies, and when it’s over, then you let the dust settle and you figure out who’s ahead.”
[...]
In a Fox News segment, Hegseth suggested Trump should take further action by targeting cultural sites that may harbor dangerous weapons – a violation of both international law and the Department of Defense’s policy.
“If we want to defeat them, we have to think smart about how we navigate within these rules, without playing a game rigged to help them,” he said in January 2020. “I don’t want to hit cultural sites on purpose. If you are using one to harbor your most dangerous weapons, that should be on the list.”
Like Trump, Hegseth has also praised waterboarding as an “effective” tactic. He said it was “absolutely a mistake” to take waterboarding off the table in 2016 and said the president had the power to bring it back.
“If it’s gonna keep us safe, all it would take is an executive order by the next president to change that law,” Hegseth said in 2016.
These are not “mistakes.” This isn’t a coincidence. Nobody could possibly fuck up this much accidentally, and this consistently. From the top to the bottom, the regime is operating in rampant violation of the law.
They apparently know this because reports are that they are considering a set of pre-emptive pardons for his underlings.
Sources with knowledge of the discussions say the conversations have been sporadic and preliminary, and have included Trump, his senior aides, federal appointees, and Republicans close to the White House. Any sweeping preemptive pardon, the sources told Zeteo, would likely occur shortly before the inauguration of a Democratic president-elect, though it is unclear how long the potential presidential list might run.
Among the names reportedly under consideration is Stephen Miller, Trump’s policy architect widely associated with the administration’s most controversial and, critics argue, “openly, gratuitously lawless” initiatives. Another MAGA administration figure discussed in the reporting is Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, currently under scrutiny for a possible war crime related to a series of U.S. military boat strikes in Venezuela and facing judicial contempt inquiries.
“Some of these intra-administration discussions were sparked, sources say, after certain Democrats publicly suggested that the Supreme Court gifted Trump with broad presidential immunity – but that his underlings were not shielded from accountability,” according to Zeteo’s Friday report.
“They’re not always going to be in office,” Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker said in October, referring to the potential for legal consequences for administration officials.
This is on purpose. They are a criminal gang.
