Podcasts about justice department

The House Oversight Committee voted 24 - 19 to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi in their Epstein files investigation. US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro quietly closes an investigation into President Biden for his use of the autopen after failing to establish a case. A longtime Justice Department employee has been arrested and charged in a child pornography case. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has rescinded former Attorney General Merrick Garland's restrictions on no-knock warrants. Do you have questions for the pod? https://formfacade.com/sm/PTk_BSogJ  Follow AG Substack|MuellershewroteBlueSky|@muellershewroteAndrew McCabe isn't on social media, but you can buy his book The ThreatThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump Questions for the pod?https://formfacade.com/sm/PTk_BSogJ We would like to know more about our listeners. Please participate in this brief surveyListener Survey and CommentsThis Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at the Justice Enforcers level and above:https://dailybeans.supercast.techOrhttps://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr when you subscribe on Apple Podcastshttps://apple.co/3YNpW3P Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A newly released batch of Justice Department documents revealed troubling details about the conduct of Tova Noel, one of the correctional officers assigned to monitor Jeffrey Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan the night he died in August 2019. According to the records, Noel searched Google for “latest on Epstein in jail” twice—at 5:42 a.m. and 5:52 a.m., less than forty minutes before Epstein was discovered dead in his cell at approximately 6:30 a.m. The documents also indicate that Noel and another guard on duty, Michael Thomas, had failed to carry out mandatory checks on Epstein every thirty minutes as required. Instead, investigators said the guards spent portions of the shift browsing the internet, shopping online, or sleeping. Both guards were previously accused of falsifying prison logs to claim they had performed the required checks, though the criminal charges against them were later dropped.The files also highlighted suspicious financial activity involving Noel. Banking records showed that ten days before Epstein's death she made a $5,000 cash deposit, the largest of several deposits that totaled nearly $12,000 over a period of months, transactions that had been flagged in a suspicious activity report. Surveillance footage from the prison additionally captured what investigators described as a blurry orange figure approaching the area of Epstein's cell around 10:40 p.m. the night before he died; an FBI briefing suggested the figure was likely Noel carrying linens or clothing. Epstein was later found hanging in his cell with strips of cloth. Noel told investigators she did not remember searching Epstein online and denied providing linens or having any role in his death. The newly disclosed information has revived scrutiny over the circumstances surrounding Epstein's death and the conduct of prison staff responsible for monitoring him.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein prison guard googled him minutes before his body was found: DOJBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen watching courtrooms turn into battlegrounds, but here we are in the thick of it with Donald Trump facing off in multiple high-stakes trials. Over the past few days, tensions have boiled over in federal court in Washington, D.C., where U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan just slammed down a firm trial date of March 4 for Trump's federal election interference case. According to ABC News reports from the hearing, special counsel Jack Smith's team pushed hard for a January start to deliver justice swiftly to the public, while Trump's attorneys, John Lauro and Todd Blanche, begged for a delay all the way to April 2026, citing a mountain of evidence—over 11.5 million pages from the government's first batch alone.Picture the scene in that courtroom on Monday: Lauro arguing it's a "miscarriage of justice" and a "show trial," not a speedy one, insisting Trump deserves years to sift through documents stacked as high as eight Washington Monuments, as Courthouse News detailed in their coverage. Prosecutor Molly Gaston fired back, revealing how Trump's team had secretly fought in five sealed proceedings from 2022 to 2023 to block grand jury testimony from 14 witnesses. She pointed out much of the discovery overlaps with public records Trump already knows—like his own Truth Social posts, White House files, and Jan. 6 committee transcripts. Judge Chutkan wasn't having it. "You're not going to get two more years," she told Lauro firmly, noting Trump's "considerable resources" and the public's right to a timely resolution. Politico captured the stark clash: Smith's push for January 2024 versus Trump's wild 2.5-year postponement, which Chutkan rejected outright to avoid dragging into post-election chaos.This isn't isolated. Trump's calendar is a legal nightmare. In Manhattan, District Attorney Alvin Bragg has the hush money case locked for late March, tied to payments to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. Down in Fulton County, Georgia, DA Fani Willis wants Trump in court on March 4 too, facing 41 counts alongside Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows, and David Shafer for election meddling. And don't forget the classified documents clash in Florida under Judge Aileen Cannon, eyed for May. JustSecurity's master calendar tracks it all, showing how these dates pile up amid Trump's campaign.As I watched the ABC11 clip of Chutkan's ruling, it hit me: Trump's team hopes delays let him reclaim the White House and potentially derail federal cases, though state probes like New York's and Georgia's are bulletproof to that. Chutkan even coordinated with the Manhattan judge to manage overlaps, and she's issued a protective order warning Trump against inflammatory Truth Social rants that could taint D.C. jurors. The charges? A criminal scheme to flip 2020 results via fake electors, Justice Department pressure, and Vice President Mike Pence arm-twisting amid the Capitol riot—all to cling to power.These past days feel like the calm before a perfect storm of verdicts. Will March kick off a trial marathon that reshapes everything? Listeners, thanks for tuning in. Come back next week for more, and this has been a Quiet Please production—for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Ralph welcomes sociologist and historian Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi to discuss the United States' war of aggression on Iran.Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi is an Iranian-born American historian and sociologist. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Place, Culture, and Politics at the CUNY Graduate Center. He was the Chair of the Department of Near Eastern Studies and Director of the Sharmin and Bijan Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Iran and Persian Gulf Studies at Princeton University. He is the author of four books on different aspects and historical context of the Iranian revolution of 1979 and its aftermath.The only countries that I see that are in constant violation of international law is the United States and Israel. And frankly, I am speechless, although I'm speaking, but I am speechless—in what universe can this war be justified as self-defense? You listened to Secretary Rubio's speech in Munich where he laments 400 years of colonial rule being lost to this international law and laws of fighting wars because they want to go back to the way things were in the 18th and 19th century. This is a naked expansionist, extortionist administration here, and that's the only reason they have launched this war, and there is absolutely no justification for it.Behrooz Ghamari-TabriziFor years and years, the Israelis have been assassinating Iranian scientists. They were sabotaging Iranian industries. And actually, the Iranian government showed tremendous restraint in responding to these Israeli provocations because they didn't want to create the situation in which we find ourselves today. But then at the end of the day, calling Iran the aggressor here I think is a total ignorance of history and the context in which this war has started.Behrooz Ghamari-TabriziAll these things are not to suggest that the Iranian government in any form or shape is a democratic and just state. But the question here is about the sovereignty of the Iranian state. And the only inheritance of the revolution that has been kept throughout these forty-odd years was the question of sovereignty. Because that was one of the demands of the revolution. The question of social justice was thrown out of the window after the revolution. The question of civil liberties was thrown out of the window after the revolution. The only thing that is left is Iranian sovereignty. And according to every single intelligence study, what Iranians do outside their borders is a defensive posture. Iran does not have an expansionist agenda.Behrooz Ghamari-TabriziNews 3/6/26* Last week, Bill and Hillary Clinton testified before the House Oversight Committee on their respective relationships with financier and sexual predator, Jeffrey Epstein. Hillary Clinton, in a deposition described as contentious, maintained that she had virtually zero connections with Epstein, stating at one point “I am so tired of answering that question,” per PBS. Former President Bill Clinton meanwhile, tried to downplay his relationship with Epstein, describing it as “cordial,” and claiming that he had come to an arrangement with Epstein where the financier provided his private jet for humanitarian trips in exchange for Clinton discussing politics and economics with him. The committee pressed Clinton on this point, noting that Epstein visited the White House numerous times during Clinton's presidency and that there are photos of the two men shaking hands. Clinton told lawmakers he “did not recall those interactions.” These answers leave much to be desired.* Meanwhile, another Epstein associate occupies the Oval Office today – Donald Trump – and on February 26th the Wall Street Journal reported that the Department of Justice, under the stewardship of Attorney General Pam Bondi, has been withholding interviews with a woman who accused President Donald Trump of sexual assault back in the 1980s. As the Journal writes, the suppression of this interview “raises new questions about the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files release and the pages that have been kept private.” The Journal adds that “Trump officials initially opposed the release of the files and then fumbled their response, including inconsistent redactions that exposed dozens of Epstein victims and initially kept some prominent men's names hidden.” However, on March 5th, POLITICO reported that the FBI has now published a trio of FBI interviews with the woman who accused the president of sexually assaulting her in collusion with Jeffrey Epstein. Trump and his allies categorically deny any wrongdoing on the part of the president, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt calling the allegations “completely baseless…backed by zero credible evidence, from a sadly disturbed woman who has an extensive criminal history.” This story also highlights what is sure to be the next flashpoint in this saga: on Wednesday, a House committee voted to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify about her handling of the Epstein files.* Turning to media news, last week we covered how Paramount-Skydance, led by the Ellison family and backed by the Trump administration, outmaneuvered Netflix to close a deal acquiring Warner Bros. Discovery – including CNN. Throughout this process, many have raised the alarm that if the Ellisons were to get their hands on CNN, they would turn it over to their ideological attack dog, Bari Weiss, as they did with CBS News. Variety is now echoing those concerns, reporting that “It's expected that Weiss will have a big role in steering CNN.” Just what exactly this role will be remains to be seen, but given her tenure as editor-in-chief of CBS News, there is much cause for concern.* In related news, Variety reports Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav has filed to sell 4,004,149 shares – over $114 million worth of stock – in the company following the announcement of the sale to Paramount, including Paramount's eye-popping offer of $31 per share. Zaslav retains additional stock and options which he could cash out as the deal moves forward. Curiously, even as the Trump administration backed the Paramount buyout over the Netflix deal, the president himself continues to bank on the fiscal stability of the streaming giant, with the Hollywood Reporter documenting that Trump bought between $600,000 and $1.25 million worth of Netflix debt in January, adding to the $500,000 to $1 million in Netflix bonds that he purchased in December. This story notes that while the Netflix-Warner deal fell through, Netflix walked away with a $2.8 billion “break-up fee,” and an investment grade credit rating, unlike both WBD and Paramount.* Looking at domestic politics, this week primaries were held in Texas and North Carolina which yielded the nomination of James Talarico in Texas, beating out Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett for the Democratic nod, and the razor thin victory of incumbent Valerie Foushee over her progressive challenger Nida Allam in the Durham-Chapel Hill region. But many more primary battles lay ahead, perhaps the most interesting of which is unfolding in Maine, where the Bernie Sanders-backed veteran-turned-oysterman Graham Platner is duking it out with Chuck Schumer's preferred candidate, outgoing Governor Janet Mills. Platner, despite damaging stories, has continued to draw massive crowds and enjoys a huge polling advantage. Last week, Platner's allies, led by United Autoworkers President Shawn Fain, staged a sort of intervention with Schumer, with Fain lambasting the “shortcomings” in Democratic leaders' approach to the 2026 midterms, “particularly their failure to adequately listen to working-class voters.” Michael Monahan, a high-level official in the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, also sent a letter to the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee strongly urging the DSCC to “refrain from intervening further in [the Maine] primary.” A mid-February independent poll found Platner with a 38-point lead over Mills among likely Democratic primary voters, yet the party continues to back Mills to the hilt. This from NBC.* Our remaining stories this week concern foreign affairs. First, in South Africa, it seems the forces of the Left are looking to pool their support by entering into a political alliance. According to TimesLIVE, a prominent South African online newspaper, the country's largest standalone Left party, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has convened with the South African Communist Party (SACP) to discuss such an electoral pact. The SACP has long participated in a tripartite alliance with the African National Congress party (ANC), which has ruled South Africa since the end of Apartheid, but recently announced they would contest elections independently. The EFF and SACP emphasized that their priorities align on the “deep crises confronting South Africa: de-industrialisation, austerity-driven fiscal consolidation, collapsing energy security, mass unemployment, and extreme poverty.”* In another major political realignment, the Green Party of England and Wales is surging as the Labour Party, under the centrist leadership of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, continues to lose ground to the Nigel Farage-led far right party, Reform UK. The rise of the Green Party has been bubbling for some time, as progressive voters feel betrayed by Labour and the momentum behind Jeremy Corbyn's “Your Party” has fizzled, but the first major test occurred recently in the Labour stronghold riding of Groton and Denton in Greater Manchester. According to the BBC, this marks the first ever win for the Greens in a by-election, with 34-year-old plumber Hannah Spencer becoming the party's first ever MP in northern England. Reform ran second, with Labour dropping by 25% into third place. Moreover, Zeteo reports the Greens have leapfrogged ahead of Labour in national polling, second only to Reform and has become the single most popular party among voters under 50. For the past five months, the Greens have been led by self-described “eco-populist” Zack Polanski, and have espoused policies including giving councils the power to control rents, extending free school meals to all children, and imposing a new ‘wealth tax' on assets above £10m.* In Congress, Representative Ro Khanna has introduced the West Bank Human Rights Resolution to Condemn Israeli Settlement Expansion. This resolution is described as utilizing far more specific language to condemn “Israeli settler violence and referencing potential sanctions tools while also calling for a review of US policies that may indirectly subsidise settlement activity,” per the Middle East Eye. In part, this resolution is a response to the Israeli government's February 8th approval of “sweeping changes to land registration and civil control in Areas A and B of the West Bank, which Palestinians say breach the Oslo Accords and advance de facto annexation.” This resolution was drafted in conjunction with Cameron Kasky, the survivor of the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting who has become a leading activist on rights for Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. In a statement upon the introduction of this resolution, Kasky wrote “this is a necessary measure for Democrats and Republicans to unite behind the upholding of international law. Democrats and Republicans can agree that U.S. taxpayer money being used to subsidize the violation of international law is an outrage.”* Our final two stories concern the U.S. attacks on Iran. First, a bizarre sequence of conflicting claims between the U.S. and Spain have left many observers puzzled. First, on March 3rd, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez addressed the Iberian nation, saying “Very often great wars start with a chain of events spiralling out of control due to miscalculations, technical failures, and unforeseen circumstances. Therefore, we must learn from history and cannot play Russian roulette with the fate of millions.” Sánchez warned of “repeating the mistakes of the past,” and drew a comparison with the invasion of Iraq, concluding his government's position is “No to war,” per CNBC. More pointedly, the Spanish government prevented two jointly operated bases in its territory from being used in the strikes on Iran. Trump responded on the 4th by vowing to cut off all trade with Madrid, saying “Spain has been terrible…We don't want anything to do with Spain.” Then, on March 5th, Karoline Leavitt told the press that “With respect to Spain, I think they heard the president's message yesterday loud and clear, and it's my understanding, over the past several hours, they've agreed to cooperate with the U.S. military.” Yet, the Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares immediately responded that “The Spanish government's position on the war in the Middle East ... and the use of our bases has not changed at all.” This also from CNBC. Trump's threat to cut off trade with Spain would be difficult to follow through on, given that the 27 nations in the European Union negotiate trade agreements collectively,* Finally, far from assuaging concerns about the attacks on Iran leading to blowback, the Hill reports that, when asked during a phone call with Time magazine about whether Americans should be worried about a potential strike on the homeland, Trump replied, “I guess.” Trump went on to say “We think about it all the time. We plan for it. But yeah…we expect some things…some people will die. When you go to war, some people will die.” Stunningly, despite Trump openly declaring that we are at war with Iran sans congressional authorization and even casually admitting Americans could be killed on home soil, the feckless Congress has voted down War Powers resolutions in the House and Senate. In the upper house, the bill introduced by Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, failed 47-53, with Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky crossing party lines to support it while Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania crossed party lines to vote nay, per the AP. A similar measure in the House, introduced by Reps. Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie – the duo behind the Epstein Files Transparency Act and other war powers resolutions including on Venezuela – failed by a vote of 212-219. In addition to Massie, Republican Rep. Warren Davison of Ohio voted in favor of the resolution, while four House Democrats voted nay, per Axios. Again the question is presented to us, if this won't shock Congress to action, what will?This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Santa Ana winds could reach up to 70 miles per hour this weekend and will bring warm temperatures to SoCal. The U.S. Justice Department is set to make the final call on where $3.7 million in recently recovered funds from the Andrew Do corruption scheme will go. The story behind why chili cheese dogs are being served up for L.A. Marathon runners. Support The L.A. Report by donating at LAist.com/join and by visiting https://laist.com Visit www.preppi.com/LAist to receive a FREE Preppi Emergency Kit (with any purchase over $100) and be prepared for the next wildfire, earthquake or emergency!Support the show: https://laist.com

A newly released batch of Epstein-related documents has triggered political controversy after the U.S. Department of Justice published several previously undisclosed FBI interview summaries connected to allegations against Donald Trump. The documents include FBI Form-302 reports from 2019 interviews with a woman who claimed that Jeffrey Epstein sexually abused her as a teenager and alleged that Trump attempted to force her to perform oral sex in the 1980s after Epstein introduced them. The claims remain unverified and uncorroborated, and Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. The Justice Department has also warned that some materials submitted to investigators may contain false or sensational claims because the document release included information provided directly by the public.The disclosure prompted Representative Ted Lieu of California to call for a special counsel investigation, arguing that Attorney General Pam Bondi misled Congress when she said there was no evidence linking Trump to criminal activity. Lieu pointed to the newly released FBI interviews as evidence that allegations existed within federal records and said further investigation was necessary. The Justice Department, however, emphasized that the interviews only document what a witness told investigators and do not establish that the allegations are true. The controversy comes amid broader political pressure over transparency surrounding the Epstein files and concerns about whether key records were previously withheld or mishandled.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Files Update: Lieu Calls for Special Counsel Over Trump Claims - NewsweekBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Project 2025 began not with a bill in Congress, but with a 900‑plus page playbook assembled by the Heritage Foundation and allied conservative groups, billed as a roadmap for the next Republican president. Heritage calls it a plan to “take back our government from the deep state,” while critics describe it as a bid to, in the words of the National Federation of Federal Employees, “destroy the administrative state” and replace it with loyalists.At the heart of the project is a personnel revolution. The blueprint urges reinstating and vastly expanding “Schedule F,” a Trump‑era job category that would let presidents reclassify tens of thousands of career civil servants as at‑will employees. According to an analysis by the Center for American Progress, one architect of the original order, James Sherk, projected roughly 50,000 positions could lose civil service protections. Advocates argue this would “ensure the President's policies are faithfully executed.” Opponents warn it would allow mass firings based on ideology, undermining neutral expertise in law enforcement, public health, and regulation.The document does not stop at staffing. It zeroes in on independent agencies that Congress designed to be insulated from day‑to‑day political pressure. In Project 2025's own terms, these are “so‑called independent agencies.” Chapters urge giving the president power to remove commissioners at will and subject their rules to aggressive White House review. Analysts at the Center for American Progress note that this could let a future president pressure the Federal Communications Commission on media licenses or keep the Federal Trade Commission from issuing rules like its recent ban on most noncompete clauses.Concrete agency changes are spelled out in vivid detail. A chapter on the Department of Energy recommends outsourcing core analytical work of the Energy Information Administration to private contractors, a move Boston Review warns could turn basic energy data into an ideological battleground. At the Environmental Protection Agency, Project 2025 proposes ending the role of career staff in awarding hundreds of millions in grants and handing that power to a single political appointee. The Health and Human Services chapter calls for steering teen pregnancy prevention funds toward abstinence‑only programs, reversing a decade of evidence‑based grantmaking.Running through the plan is a view of presidential power sometimes called the “unitary executive theory.” According to the American Civil Liberties Union, Project 2025 would concentrate control of the Justice Department in the White House, prioritizing an attorney general “above all loyal to the President” and easing the removal of officials who resist politically driven investigations.Supporters frame these ideas as a long‑overdue correction to an unaccountable bureaucracy. Critics, including nonpartisan legal scholars, warn that neutral guardrails like Senate confirmation, independent data, and protected civil servants are what keep any president from becoming an “imperial” figure.With the next election cycle underway, Project 2025 now functions as both a governing manual and a political litmus test. Candidates are being pressed to endorse, amend, or reject its proposals. The real test, though, will come if a future administration tries to turn this blueprint into executive orders, agency reorganizations, and real‑world firings.Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

It was another busy week in Washington. We discuss Kristi Noem getting fired from her position as Secretary of Homeland Security and the new release of missing Epstein files related to President Trump. Note: This episode contains descriptions of sexual assault. This episode: senior White House correspondent Tamara Keith, immigration policy correspondent Ximena Bustillo, political reporter Stephen Fowler and senior political editor and correspondent Domenico Montanaro.This podcast was produced by Casey Morell and edited by Rachel Baye. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi.Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.To manage podcast ad preferences, review the links below:See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

In this episode of John Solomon Reports, we dive into a significant ruling from the Supreme Court regarding redistricting, featuring Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis from New York. She discusses how the court's decision to protect her district from racially motivated redistricting efforts signals a potential shift in the political landscape, which could impact Democratic majorities across the country.Next, we welcome Jonathan Fahey, former director of ICE, who shares his insights on the controversial topic of tax-exempt status for nonprofits that have been accused of promoting anti-ICE violence. This thought-provoking discussion raises important questions about accountability and the role of nonprofits in political discourse.In the third segment, we introduce George Moraitis, a dynamic member of the Florida state legislature running for Congress. With numerous retirements in the U.S. House this year, Moraitis is poised to make a significant impact, and he shares his vision and goals with our audience.Additionally, we cover breaking news about a federal jury convicting a man for attempting to assassinate President Trump, revealing connections to Iranian handlers. The episode also touches on the latest updates from the Justice Department regarding the Epstein case and President Trump's impressive favorability ratings among his supporters.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

President Trump fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem Thursday. The Wall Street Journal’s Michelle Hackman breaks down the factors that went into the decision. Iran’s next leader could be a son of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Parisa Hafezi, Iran bureau chief for Reuters, joins to discuss why that might frustrate some Iranians. The Formula 1 season kicks off in Australia this weekend. Apple News Sports editor Shaker Samman explains how new rule changes might change things on the track. Plus, the Justice Department published some missing Epstein files related to Trump, a curling scandal hit the Paralympics, and the new regulation United Airlines hopes will make your flight a little more peaceful. Today’s episode was hosted by Cecilia Lei.

If you look really closely at Pam Bondi's Department of Justice, you can almost see it circling the drain. Yesterday, DOJ attorneys filed a notice with the DC Circuit Court of Appeals saying they wanted to withdraw the appeals DOJ had filed in four cases involving Trump's executive orders that were designed to punish law firms he didn't like. Trump's DOJ had lost all four cases, given that his executive orders were transparently unlawful and unconstitutional. Then today, in an extraordinary flip-flop, the DOJ said they wanted to withdraw their request to withdraw their appeals. In other words, after throwing in the towel, they told the court . . . they want their towel back. This horribly inconsistent and incompetent conduct makes clear that the DOJ is in disarray.Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

President Trump calls for Iran's “unconditional surrender” as oil and gas prices skyrocket. The Justice Department releases more Epstein files related to allegations against President Trump. Thousands gather in Chicago for the funeral of Reverend Jesse Jackson, including former Presidents Obama, Biden and Clinton. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Americans woke up on Saturday morning to news that Trump and Israel had bombed Iran, killing Ayatollah Khamenei along with top Iranian military leaders. Iran retaliated with missile and drone attacks on U.S. bases and allies in the region. Asha and Renato analyze Trump's inarticulate and circular reasons for launching the attack, what triggers the War Powers Resolution and how a president has “first-mover advantage” when it comes to taking the country to war. Then, Renato and Asha turn to the Trump administration's latest retaliatory moves at home: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's designation of Anthropic as a supply chain risk after the company refused to let its AI model be used for autonomous weapons or domestic mass surveillance, and the Justice Department's clumsy moves against four law firms that successfully challenged Trump's executive orders against them. Listen up!Ask Asha: War Powers Who Has the Final Say?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku3MvJrHNf0Asha Substack: https://asharangappa.substack.com/Subscribe to our podcast: https://link.chtbl.com/its-complicatedFollow Asha on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/asharangappa.bsky.socialFollow Renato on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/renatomariotti.bsky.socialFollow Asha on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/asha.rangappa/Follow Renato on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/renato.mariotti/Cruise with us! https://www.travelstore.com/group-travel/its-complicated-cruise-2026/Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/@LegalAFMTN?sub_confirmation=1 Become a member of Legal AF YouTube community: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgZJZZbnLFPr5GJdCuIwpA/join Become a member of the Legal AF Substack: https://michaelpopok.substack.com/20off Follow Legal AF on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/legalafmtn.bsky.social Follow Michael Popok on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/mspopok.bsky.social Subscribe to the Legal AF podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/legal-af-by-meidastouch/id1580828595 Subscribe to the Intersection with Michael Popok podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-intersection-with-michael-popok/id1818863274 Subscribe to Unprecedented with Michael Popok and Dina Doll podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/unprecedented-by-legal-af/id1867023089 Subscribe to Court of History with Sidney Blumenthal and Sean Wilentz podcast feed here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-court-of-history/id1867022920 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The U.S. Department of Justice recently released several FBI interview summaries that had previously been missing from the massive archive of documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The records stem from interviews conducted in 2019 with a woman who told federal agents that Epstein had sexually abused her as a teenager in the 1980s. During those interviews, the woman also alleged that Donald Trump attempted to sexually assault her after Epstein introduced them when she was between roughly 13 and 15 years old. Trump has denied the allegations, and the White House dismissed them as baseless and politically motivatedThe documents had not appeared in the earlier public release of Epstein-related files, which raised questions about whether key materials had been omitted from the Justice Department's database. Officials later said the FBI interview reports were mistakenly labeled as duplicate records during the document review process, preventing them from being posted initially. The controversy comes amid broader scrutiny of the government's handling of the Epstein files, as lawmakers from both parties continue to question why some witness interviews and other materials were missing from the initial release required under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein files: Justice Department posts FBI interview memos related to Trump sex abuse allegation | CNN Politics

The House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify about the Justice Department's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, a move that reflected growing frustration in Congress over what lawmakers say has been a deeply flawed and opaque disclosure process. The subpoena passed in a 24–19 vote, with several Republicans joining Democrats in demanding that Bondi appear before the committee to explain why the department missed legal deadlines and failed to release large portions of the Epstein records despite the requirements of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Lawmakers say that while the Justice Department released millions of pages of documents, investigators believe tens of thousands of files remain withheld or offline, raising serious concerns that the public has not been given the full picture. The vote to compel Bondi's testimony amounted to a rare bipartisan rebuke of the nation's top law-enforcement official and signaled mounting anger in Congress over what many members believe has been a pattern of evasion and incomplete disclosure.Critics have argued that Bondi's handling of the Epstein files has been marked by delays, contradictions, and combative responses to oversight rather than transparency. Lawmakers and investigators have accused the Justice Department under her leadership of missing mandated release deadlines, redacting or withholding key documents, and failing to provide clear explanations for why large portions of the records remain unavailable. During earlier congressional questioning, Bondi reportedly deflected direct questions about Epstein's accomplices and the status of ongoing investigations, which only deepened suspicions that the department may be shielding powerful figures connected to the case. The subpoena now forces Bondi to answer under oath about decisions that critics say have undermined confidence in the Justice Department's commitment to fully exposing Epstein's network. For many in Congress, the issue is no longer simply about document management—it is about whether the nation's top prosecutor has obstructed transparency in one of the most explosive criminal investigations in modern history.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:House panel votes to subpoena Pam Bondi for Epstein files testimony

A report highlighted controversy surrounding tens of thousands of Jeffrey Epstein–related files that were temporarily taken offline or withheld from public release, fueling accusations that key documents were missing. The Justice Department acknowledged that roughly 47,000 to 50,000 Epstein files had been removed from the public archive for additional review, with officials saying the materials required further redaction or processing before they could be released. The documents are part of the broader disclosure effort mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires federal authorities to release records connected to Epstein's trafficking operation while protecting victim identities and privileged information.The controversy intensified after claims emerged that some of the withheld files contained FBI interview summaries and other records referencing unverified allegations involving Donald Trump, which he has repeatedly denied. Lawmakers and critics argued the missing files raised questions about whether the Justice Department had been fully transparent in its document releases, while officials insisted the documents were removed only for technical or legal review and would be released once properly redacted. The dispute over the missing files has become part of the broader political battle surrounding the Epstein records, as Congress continues investigating the handling of the documents and pushing for the full disclosure of all remaining materials.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:US to release nearly 50,000 more Jeffrey Epstein files that may contain 'missing' Trump claims | Daily Mail Online

If you look really closely at Pam Bondi's Department of Justice, you can almost see it circling the drain. Yesterday, DOJ attorneys filed a notice with the DC Circuit Court of Appeals saying they wanted to withdraw the appeals DOJ had filed in four cases involving Trump's executive orders that were designed to punish law firms he didn't like. Trump's DOJ had lost all four cases, given that his executive orders were transparently unlawful and unconstitutional. Then today, in an extraordinary flip-flop, the DOJ said they wanted to withdraw their request to withdraw their appeals. In other words, after throwing in the towel, they told the court . . . they want their towel back. This horribly inconsistent and incompetent conduct makes clear that the DOJ is in disarray.Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The U.S. Department of Justice recently released several FBI interview summaries that had previously been missing from the massive archive of documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The records stem from interviews conducted in 2019 with a woman who told federal agents that Epstein had sexually abused her as a teenager in the 1980s. During those interviews, the woman also alleged that Donald Trump attempted to sexually assault her after Epstein introduced them when she was between roughly 13 and 15 years old. Trump has denied the allegations, and the White House dismissed them as baseless and politically motivatedThe documents had not appeared in the earlier public release of Epstein-related files, which raised questions about whether key materials had been omitted from the Justice Department's database. Officials later said the FBI interview reports were mistakenly labeled as duplicate records during the document review process, preventing them from being posted initially. The controversy comes amid broader scrutiny of the government's handling of the Epstein files, as lawmakers from both parties continue to question why some witness interviews and other materials were missing from the initial release required under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein files: Justice Department posts FBI interview memos related to Trump sex abuse allegation | CNN PoliticsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A newly released batch of Epstein-related documents has triggered political controversy after the U.S. Department of Justice published several previously undisclosed FBI interview summaries connected to allegations against Donald Trump. The documents include FBI Form-302 reports from 2019 interviews with a woman who claimed that Jeffrey Epstein sexually abused her as a teenager and alleged that Trump attempted to force her to perform oral sex in the 1980s after Epstein introduced them. The claims remain unverified and uncorroborated, and Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. The Justice Department has also warned that some materials submitted to investigators may contain false or sensational claims because the document release included information provided directly by the public.The disclosure prompted Representative Ted Lieu of California to call for a special counsel investigation, arguing that Attorney General Pam Bondi misled Congress when she said there was no evidence linking Trump to criminal activity. Lieu pointed to the newly released FBI interviews as evidence that allegations existed within federal records and said further investigation was necessary. The Justice Department, however, emphasized that the interviews only document what a witness told investigators and do not establish that the allegations are true. The controversy comes amid broader political pressure over transparency surrounding the Epstein files and concerns about whether key records were previously withheld or mishandled.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Files Update: Lieu Calls for Special Counsel Over Trump Claims - NewsweekBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

I never thought I'd be glued to my screen watching courtrooms turn into battlegrounds, but here we are in early March 2026, and the trials involving Donald Trump are heating up like never before. Just days ago, on March 4, the federal election interference case kicked off in Washington, D.C., under U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan. Special Counsel Jack Smith, leading the charge, accuses Trump of a criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 election results—think fake electors, pressuring Vice President Mike Pence to alter the vote count, and pushing sham investigations through the Justice Department, all while the January 6 riot unfolded at the Capitol. Trump pleaded not guilty back in 2023, calling it political persecution, but now, with jury selection underway, his legal team, including attorneys John Lauro and Todd Blanche, is fighting tooth and nail.Flash back to that tense August 2023 hearing where it all ramped up. Trump's lawyers begged Judge Chutkan for an April 2026 start date—ironically, just weeks from now—citing 11.6 million pages of discovery evidence, everything from National Archives documents to Truth Social posts and House January 6 Committee transcripts. They claimed it was like reviewing stacks as tall as eight Washington Monuments, and rushing it would be a miscarriage of justice, denying Trump effective counsel. Lauro even accused Smith of turning it into a show trial. But Chutkan shot that down, setting March 4, 2024, as the date, saying it balanced preparation time with the public's right to a speedy trial. She told Lauro point-blank, you're not getting two more years. Prosecutors like Molly Gaston pushed back hard, noting 65% of those pages were duplicates or already public, with key docs front-loaded for quick review.It's not just D.C. Overlapping chaos: In New York, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's hush money case, tied to a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, was slated for late March 2024 but has dragged with appeals. Down in Georgia, Fulton County DA Fani Willis wants Trump and co-defendants like Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows, and David Shafer in court over 41 counts of election interference—her team requested March 4, 2024, too. And don't forget Florida's classified documents mess at Mar-a-Lago, where Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, pushed it to May 2024. Trump's strategy? Delay, delay, delay—hoping a 2024 win lets him pardon himself on federal charges, though state cases like New York's and Georgia's are bulletproof.These past few days, whispers from ABC News and Courthouse News suggest sealed proceedings from 2022-2023 are resurfacing, with Trump's team fighting grand jury testimony from 14 witnesses. Politico reported the stark clash: Smith gunning for January 2024, Trump eyeing post-election limbo. As of today, March 6, the D.C. trial's in full swing, witnesses lining up, and Trump's Truth Social rants risking contempt under Chutkan's protective order against inflammatory statements. The stakes? Subverting democracy versus a former president's right to a fair shot. History's watching every gavel bang.Thanks for tuning in, listeners. Come back next week for more, and this has been a Quiet Please production—for more, check out Quiet Please Dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

A report highlighted controversy surrounding tens of thousands of Jeffrey Epstein–related files that were temporarily taken offline or withheld from public release, fueling accusations that key documents were missing. The Justice Department acknowledged that roughly 47,000 to 50,000 Epstein files had been removed from the public archive for additional review, with officials saying the materials required further redaction or processing before they could be released. The documents are part of the broader disclosure effort mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires federal authorities to release records connected to Epstein's trafficking operation while protecting victim identities and privileged information.The controversy intensified after claims emerged that some of the withheld files contained FBI interview summaries and other records referencing unverified allegations involving Donald Trump, which he has repeatedly denied. Lawmakers and critics argued the missing files raised questions about whether the Justice Department had been fully transparent in its document releases, while officials insisted the documents were removed only for technical or legal review and would be released once properly redacted. The dispute over the missing files has become part of the broader political battle surrounding the Epstein records, as Congress continues investigating the handling of the documents and pushing for the full disclosure of all remaining materials.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:US to release nearly 50,000 more Jeffrey Epstein files that may contain 'missing' Trump claims | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify about the Justice Department's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, a move that reflected growing frustration in Congress over what lawmakers say has been a deeply flawed and opaque disclosure process. The subpoena passed in a 24–19 vote, with several Republicans joining Democrats in demanding that Bondi appear before the committee to explain why the department missed legal deadlines and failed to release large portions of the Epstein records despite the requirements of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Lawmakers say that while the Justice Department released millions of pages of documents, investigators believe tens of thousands of files remain withheld or offline, raising serious concerns that the public has not been given the full picture. The vote to compel Bondi's testimony amounted to a rare bipartisan rebuke of the nation's top law-enforcement official and signaled mounting anger in Congress over what many members believe has been a pattern of evasion and incomplete disclosure.Critics have argued that Bondi's handling of the Epstein files has been marked by delays, contradictions, and combative responses to oversight rather than transparency. Lawmakers and investigators have accused the Justice Department under her leadership of missing mandated release deadlines, redacting or withholding key documents, and failing to provide clear explanations for why large portions of the records remain unavailable. During earlier congressional questioning, Bondi reportedly deflected direct questions about Epstein's accomplices and the status of ongoing investigations, which only deepened suspicions that the department may be shielding powerful figures connected to the case. The subpoena now forces Bondi to answer under oath about decisions that critics say have undermined confidence in the Justice Department's commitment to fully exposing Epstein's network. For many in Congress, the issue is no longer simply about document management—it is about whether the nation's top prosecutor has obstructed transparency in one of the most explosive criminal investigations in modern history.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:House panel votes to subpoena Pam Bondi for Epstein files testimonyBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The U.S. Department of Justice recently released several FBI interview summaries that had previously been missing from the massive archive of documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The records stem from interviews conducted in 2019 with a woman who told federal agents that Epstein had sexually abused her as a teenager in the 1980s. During those interviews, the woman also alleged that Donald Trump attempted to sexually assault her after Epstein introduced them when she was between roughly 13 and 15 years old. Trump has denied the allegations, and the White House dismissed them as baseless and politically motivatedThe documents had not appeared in the earlier public release of Epstein-related files, which raised questions about whether key materials had been omitted from the Justice Department's database. Officials later said the FBI interview reports were mistakenly labeled as duplicate records during the document review process, preventing them from being posted initially. The controversy comes amid broader scrutiny of the government's handling of the Epstein files, as lawmakers from both parties continue to question why some witness interviews and other materials were missing from the initial release required under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein files: Justice Department posts FBI interview memos related to Trump sex abuse allegation | CNN PoliticsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Tom Brzozowski, formerly of the Justice Department; Lawfare Public Service Fellow Troy “LT” Edwards; and Steven Monacelli, an investigative correspondent at the Texas Observer, sit down with Lawfare Associate Editor Peter Beck to discuss the ongoing terrorism trial of an alleged Antifa cell in North Texas. The group talks about the events leading up to the trial, practices around domestic terrorism investigations and prosecutions, how the trial is unique to other terror prosecutions, and more.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tonight on The Last Word: The name of the fifth U.S. soldier killed in Donald Trump's Iran war is released. Also, Secretary Kristi Noem faces calls to resign during a Senate hearing. Plus, Noem refuses to apologize for her claim that Alex Pretti and Renee Good were “domestic terrorists.” And Attorney General Pam Bondi is subpoenaed over the Justice Department's release of the Epstein files. Sen. Mark Warner, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, and Rep. Jamie Raskin join Lawrence O'Donnell. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

It's been a month since the Justice Department released more than 3 million documents related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In that time, dozens of people were scrutinized for their close ties to Epstein, who died by suicide while in prison in 2019.Among those named in the documents is Donald Trump. The president has long denied any crimes related to Epstein. And there's no public evidence that the allegations against him are credible.But a new NPR investigation reveals that the Justice Department withheld some of the Epstein files related to allegations that Trump sexually abused a minor in the ‘80s.In this installment of our weekly politics series, “If You Can Keep It,” what did the DOJ remove exactly? And what does accountability look like for those connected to Epstein's crimes?Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.To manage podcast ad preferences, review the links below:See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Karen Friedman Agnifilo and guest host Lisa Graves host the top-ranked law and politics podcast Legal AF and break down this week's most explosive legal and political developments at the intersection of law and democracy. From the House Oversight Committee voting to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi over the Justice Department's handling of Epstein-related records, to the sweeping fallout from the Supreme Court of the United States striking down key Trump tariffs imposed under emergency powers. They also dive into the Court's New York redistricting ruling ahead of the midterms and brea down the latest Texas primary results. Finally, they unpack the folding—and unfolding—of Trump on law firm litigation. This and more on Legal AF. Support Our Sponsors: Americans United: Americans United will keep fighting for freedom without favor - equality without exception. Keep up with this issue at Https://au.org/legalaf Sundays for Dogs: Get 50% OFF your first order of Sundays. Go to https://sundaysfordogs.com/LEGALAF50 or use code: LEGALAF50 at checkout. One Skin: Get up to 30% off OneSkin with the code LEGALAF at https://www.oneskin.co/LEGALAF #oneskinpod Qualia: Go to https://QualiaLife.com/LEGALAF for up to 50% OFF! Become a member of Legal AF YouTube community: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgZJZZbnLFPr5GJdCuIwpA/join Learn more about the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Subscribe to Legal AF Substack: https://michaelpopok.substack.com/subscribe?coupon=c0fc8f5c Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At long last, it looks like federal judges have run out of patience with Trump administration officials who keep ignoring, defying, and violating federal court orders in immigration cases. Multiple judges are now moving toward holding Trump administration officials in not just civil contempt but criminal contempt.Glenn reviews some of the most recent rulings detailing the ongoing violations of court orders by the Trump administration. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

John breaks down the news of the day, including the dismissal of DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, President Trump discussing ongoing military operations against Iran and the upcoming release of Epstein documents by the Justice Department. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today's Headlines: State Rep. James Talarico won the Democratic Senate primary with 53% over Rep. Jasmine Crockett and will face either Sen. John Cornyn or Attorney General Ken Paxton, who are headed to a May 26 GOP runoff after neither cleared 50%. Rep. Dan Crenshaw was primaried from the right by state Rep. Steve Toth, while several incumbents were pushed into runoffs amid redistricting chaos, including Democrats Al Green and Christian Menefee facing each other and Republican Tony Gonzalez battling gun YouTuber Brandon Herrera. In other news, the Justice Department admitted it withheld 47,635 Jeffrey Epstein files after the Wall Street Journal flagged missing records. The House Oversight Committee has subpoenaed Attorney General Pam Bondi and is seeking testimony from Epstein associates including Bill Gates and Leon Black. A federal judge ruled the IRS illegally shared taxpayer data with ICE in roughly 42,695 cases. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, already under scrutiny over a questionable $143 million DHS contract and internal leadership turmoil, faced more heat on Capitol Hill. ProPublica reports the Trump administration is loosening intelligence-sharing restrictions, aka making it easier to spy on us, without notifying Congress. Abroad, Iran's leadership transition is intensifying, with Mojtaba Khamenei emerging as a likely successor. President Donald Trump says the U.S. is “actively considering” its role after the conflict, as the Senate narrowly rejected a measure to require congressional approval for continued strikes. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: Axios: James Talarico wins US Senate Democratic primary in Texas, beating Crockett Axios: Brutal night in Texas points to trouble ahead for House members WSJ: There Are 47,635 Epstein Files Offline for Review, DOJ Says Axios: Republicans help Dems subpoena Pam Bondi in Epstein probe WSJ: House Asks Bill Gates, Leon Black and Goldman Lawyer to Testify on Epstein AP News: The IRS broke the law by disclosing confidential information to ICE 42,695 times, judge says NBC News: Trump administration live updates: Kristi Noem faces House grilling over DHS killings; Texas Senate GOP primary heads to runoff ProPublica: Trump Administration Moves to Allow Intelligence Agencies Easier Access to Law Enforcement Files NYT: Democrats Question Credentials of Armed Squad Created by Trump Ally WSJ: Son of Khamenei Is Top Contender for Supreme Leader WSJ: Iran War Live Updates: Trump ‘Actively Considering' U.S. Role in Iran After Conflict Ends Axios: Senate rejects bid to restrain Trump's war in Iran Subscribe to the Betches News Room and join the Morning Announcements group chat. Go to: ⁠⁠⁠betchesnews.substack.com Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The U.S. House Oversight Committee requested testimony from several high-profile figures — including Bill Gates, Kathryn Ruemmler, and Leon Black — as part of its expanding investigation into connections surrounding Jeffrey Epstein. Committee Chairman James Comer sent letters asking seven individuals to appear before the panel, stating that the committee believes they may possess information relevant to its probe. Lawmakers are examining how Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell built influence among powerful figures, as well as whether federal authorities mishandled aspects of the investigation into the pair's alleged sex-trafficking operation. The requests came as Congress continues reviewing large batches of documents released by the Justice Department following legislation requiring disclosure of Epstein-related files.The documents and testimony requests highlight various previously reported interactions between Epstein and prominent figures. Gates has acknowledged meeting Epstein multiple times between 2011 and 2014 and said he is willing to testify, while maintaining he never witnessed or participated in any illegal activity. Ruemmler, who served as White House counsel under Barack Obama, appeared in emails within the released files and has also indicated she will cooperate with the committee's inquiry. Black, who previously paid Epstein large sums for tax and estate planning advice, is likewise expected to answer questions about his relationship with the financier. None of the individuals asked to testify have been charged with crimes related to Epstein, but lawmakers say their testimony could help clarify how Epstein cultivated relationships with influential people and how those connections may have intersected with the broader investigationto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bill Gates among 7 asked to testify before House committee on possible Epstein ties - CBS News

At long last, it looks like federal judges have run out of patience with Trump administration officials who keep ignoring, defying, and violating federal court orders in immigration cases. Multiple judges are now moving toward holding Trump administration officials in not just civil contempt but criminal contempt.Glenn reviews some of the most recent rulings detailing the ongoing violations of court orders by the Trump administration. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify about the Justice Department's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, a move that reflected growing frustration in Congress over what lawmakers say has been a deeply flawed and opaque disclosure process. The subpoena passed in a 24–19 vote, with several Republicans joining Democrats in demanding that Bondi appear before the committee to explain why the department missed legal deadlines and failed to release large portions of the Epstein records despite the requirements of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Lawmakers say that while the Justice Department released millions of pages of documents, investigators believe tens of thousands of files remain withheld or offline, raising serious concerns that the public has not been given the full picture. The vote to compel Bondi's testimony amounted to a rare bipartisan rebuke of the nation's top law-enforcement official and signaled mounting anger in Congress over what many members believe has been a pattern of evasion and incomplete disclosure.Critics have argued that Bondi's handling of the Epstein files has been marked by delays, contradictions, and combative responses to oversight rather than transparency. Lawmakers and investigators have accused the Justice Department under her leadership of missing mandated release deadlines, redacting or withholding key documents, and failing to provide clear explanations for why large portions of the records remain unavailable. During earlier congressional questioning, Bondi reportedly deflected direct questions about Epstein's accomplices and the status of ongoing investigations, which only deepened suspicions that the department may be shielding powerful figures connected to the case. The subpoena now forces Bondi to answer under oath about decisions that critics say have undermined confidence in the Justice Department's commitment to fully exposing Epstein's network. For many in Congress, the issue is no longer simply about document management—it is about whether the nation's top prosecutor has obstructed transparency in one of the most explosive criminal investigations in modern history.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:House panel votes to subpoena Pam Bondi for Epstein files testimonyBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A report highlighted controversy surrounding tens of thousands of Jeffrey Epstein–related files that were temporarily taken offline or withheld from public release, fueling accusations that key documents were missing. The Justice Department acknowledged that roughly 47,000 to 50,000 Epstein files had been removed from the public archive for additional review, with officials saying the materials required further redaction or processing before they could be released. The documents are part of the broader disclosure effort mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires federal authorities to release records connected to Epstein's trafficking operation while protecting victim identities and privileged information.The controversy intensified after claims emerged that some of the withheld files contained FBI interview summaries and other records referencing unverified allegations involving Donald Trump, which he has repeatedly denied. Lawmakers and critics argued the missing files raised questions about whether the Justice Department had been fully transparent in its document releases, while officials insisted the documents were removed only for technical or legal review and would be released once properly redacted. The dispute over the missing files has become part of the broader political battle surrounding the Epstein records, as Congress continues investigating the handling of the documents and pushing for the full disclosure of all remaining materials.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:US to release nearly 50,000 more Jeffrey Epstein files that may contain 'missing' Trump claims | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The U.S. House Oversight Committee requested testimony from several high-profile figures — including Bill Gates, Kathryn Ruemmler, and Leon Black — as part of its expanding investigation into connections surrounding Jeffrey Epstein. Committee Chairman James Comer sent letters asking seven individuals to appear before the panel, stating that the committee believes they may possess information relevant to its probe. Lawmakers are examining how Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell built influence among powerful figures, as well as whether federal authorities mishandled aspects of the investigation into the pair's alleged sex-trafficking operation. The requests came as Congress continues reviewing large batches of documents released by the Justice Department following legislation requiring disclosure of Epstein-related files.The documents and testimony requests highlight various previously reported interactions between Epstein and prominent figures. Gates has acknowledged meeting Epstein multiple times between 2011 and 2014 and said he is willing to testify, while maintaining he never witnessed or participated in any illegal activity. Ruemmler, who served as White House counsel under Barack Obama, appeared in emails within the released files and has also indicated she will cooperate with the committee's inquiry. Black, who previously paid Epstein large sums for tax and estate planning advice, is likewise expected to answer questions about his relationship with the financier. None of the individuals asked to testify have been charged with crimes related to Epstein, but lawmakers say their testimony could help clarify how Epstein cultivated relationships with influential people and how those connections may have intersected with the broader investigationto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bill Gates among 7 asked to testify before House committee on possible Epstein ties - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A U.S. submarine torpedoes and sinks an Iranian warship in international waters — the first such American strike since World War II. Now Iran is vowing retaliation. Plus, a Texas congressman admits to an affair with a former staffer as the House Ethics Committee opens a formal investigation. And the Justice Department drops its investigation into former President Joe Biden's use of an autopen after prosecutors say they couldn't identify a criminal case. These stories and more highlight your Unbiased Updates for Thursday, March 5, 2026.

The U.S. House Oversight Committee requested testimony from several high-profile figures — including Bill Gates, Kathryn Ruemmler, and Leon Black — as part of its expanding investigation into connections surrounding Jeffrey Epstein. Committee Chairman James Comer sent letters asking seven individuals to appear before the panel, stating that the committee believes they may possess information relevant to its probe. Lawmakers are examining how Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell built influence among powerful figures, as well as whether federal authorities mishandled aspects of the investigation into the pair's alleged sex-trafficking operation. The requests came as Congress continues reviewing large batches of documents released by the Justice Department following legislation requiring disclosure of Epstein-related files.The documents and testimony requests highlight various previously reported interactions between Epstein and prominent figures. Gates has acknowledged meeting Epstein multiple times between 2011 and 2014 and said he is willing to testify, while maintaining he never witnessed or participated in any illegal activity. Ruemmler, who served as White House counsel under Barack Obama, appeared in emails within the released files and has also indicated she will cooperate with the committee's inquiry. Black, who previously paid Epstein large sums for tax and estate planning advice, is likewise expected to answer questions about his relationship with the financier. None of the individuals asked to testify have been charged with crimes related to Epstein, but lawmakers say their testimony could help clarify how Epstein cultivated relationships with influential people and how those connections may have intersected with the broader investigationto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bill Gates among 7 asked to testify before House committee on possible Epstein ties - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia has been fighting the Trump administration and Trump's dirty DOJ leadership for nearly a year now, ever since he was snatched up in violation his constitutional rights, stuffed on a plane, and sent to a prison in El Salvador, even though he had been convicted of no crime. Ever since he was deprived of his constitutional rights nearly a year ago, Abrego has been fighting, and he has been winning - he's been defeating Trump's dirty DOJ leadership every step of the way.Abrego was back in court, this time in Tennessee, in a criminal case that was brought against him by the Trump administration, in which he filed a motion to dismiss his case based on Trump's vindictive prosecution. This was the long-awaited hearing - an evidentiary hearing - at which government officials testified and were cross-examined by Abrego's lawyers. Fortunately for us, the great legal reporter Adam Klasfeld of All Rise News was in the courtroom. Adam gives us the blow-by-blow breakdown of what went on in court today. Find Adam at: www.allrisenews.comFind Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wednesday, March 4, 2026 In this episode: The Republican-led House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi for a closed-door deposition about the Justice Department's handling of records tied to Jeffrey Epstein; Senate Republicans rejected a war powers resolution to block Trump from ordering more strikes on Iran; Trump is “actively considering and discussing” America's role in Iran after the war with his advisers and national security team; Texas state Rep. James Talarico won the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Texas; Republicans Sen. John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton advanced to a May 26 Republican runoff; the Office of Congressional Conduct said it had “substantial reason to believe” Rep. Tony Gonzales, a Texas Republican, had a sexual relationship with a subordinate who later died by suicide; and 54% of voters disapproved of Trump's handling of Iran, and 52% said the U.S. shouldn't have taken military action. Read more: Day 1870: "Why are we doing this?" Newsletter: Get the daily edition of WTFJHT in your inbox Feedback? Let me know what you think AI Policy: My AI policy

Tuesday, March 3, 2026 In this episode: Trump warned that "I guess the worst case" from U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran would be “somebody takes over who's as bad as the previous person”; Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed the U.S. attacked Iran first because “we knew that there was going to be an Israeli action” and that it would “precipitate an attack against American forces”; Sen. Thom Tillis threatened to block Trump administration nominees and stall committee work unless Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem answers his questions about the Charlotte's Web immigration operation; Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick agreed to a voluntary, closed-door House Oversight interview on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein after Justice Department records contradicted his Senate testimony; the Justice Department abruptly reversed itself and will defend Trump's executive orders targeting four law firms, less than 24 hours after telling the same court it wanted to drop the appeals; the Interior Department threatened to hold employees “accountable” after an internal database leaked showing National Park Service staff flagging hundreds of items that could “disparage” Americans for possible revision or removal; the Supreme Court temporarily blocked California from enforcing a 2024 law that limited when educators could tell parents about a student's gender identity or sexual orientation; and voters in Texas, North Carolina, and Arkansas head to the polls today to kick off the 2026 midterm season. Read more: Day 1869: "A failure of leadership." Newsletter: Get the daily edition of WTFJHT in your inbox Feedback? Let me know what you think AI Policy: My AI policy

Howard Lutnick and Kathryn Ruemmler are scheduled to appear before the congressional committee overseeing the Jeffrey Epstein investigation as lawmakers expand their effort to question individuals tied to institutions, financial networks, and legal structures that intersected with Epstein's operations. Lutnick, a prominent Wall Street executive, is expected to face questions about the extent of his contacts with Epstein, the circumstances surrounding reported appearances at gatherings where Epstein was present, and what knowledge—if any—he or his associates had about Epstein's activities at the time. Committee members are also expected to probe discrepancies between past public statements and emerging records connected to the broader Epstein document releases. The hearing is being framed by lawmakers as an opportunity to place key figures under oath and test their accounts directly in a public forum.Kathryn Ruemmler, a former senior Justice Department official and high-profile attorney who has represented major financial institutions connected to Epstein-related litigation, is also slated to testify about legal strategies, internal reviews, and institutional responses to Epstein's activities. Lawmakers are expected to question her about the handling of documents, legal advice given to institutions facing Epstein-related scrutiny, and how decisions were made regarding cooperation with investigators and disclosure of records. Her testimony is likely to focus heavily on the intersection between legal defense strategies and transparency, as the committee attempts to clarify how powerful organizations navigated the fallout from Epstein's crimes and the subsequent wave of investigations and lawsuits.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to testify on Jeffrey EpsteinGoldman Sachs lawyer Kathy Ruemmler set to face Congress over Jeffrey Epstein ties

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia has been fighting the Trump administration and Trump's dirty DOJ leadership for nearly a year now, ever since he was snatched up in violation his constitutional rights, stuffed on a plane, and sent to a prison in El Salvador, even though he had been convicted of no crime. Ever since he was deprived of his constitutional rights nearly a year ago, Abrego has been fighting, and he has been winning - he's been defeating Trump's dirty DOJ leadership every step of the way.Abrego was back in court, this time in Tennessee, in a criminal case that was brought against him by the Trump administration, in which he filed a motion to dismiss his case based on Trump's vindictive prosecution. This was the long-awaited hearing - an evidentiary hearing - at which government officials testified and were cross-examined by Abrego's lawyers. Fortunately for us, the great legal reporter Adam Klasfeld of All Rise News was in the courtroom. Adam gives us the blow-by-blow breakdown of what went on in court today. Find Adam at: www.allrisenews.comFind Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In an abrupt reversal, the Justice Department said Tuesday that it will continue to defend President Trump's executive orders targeting four big law firms.Support NPR and hear every episode of Trump's Terms sponsor-free with NPR+. Sign up at plus.npr.org.To manage podcast ad preferences, review the links below:See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

The long-running focus on Alex Acosta has obscured a more uncomfortable reality: the Epstein non-prosecution agreement was architected and approved at the highest levels of the Department of Justice, not improvised by a single U.S. Attorney in Florida. Contemporary emails and internal DOJ documentation show that Epstein's legal team did not treat Acosta as the final decision-maker. Instead, they escalated directly to Main Justice, where Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip exercised authority over the case. Those records make clear that the contours of the deal—federal immunity, secrecy from victims, and an extraordinary carve-out protecting potential co-conspirators—were discussed, vetted, and ultimately sanctioned in Washington. This was not a rogue local plea deal; it was a federal policy decision shaped by DOJ leadership.The paper trail matters because it contradicts years of public narrative and political convenience. Emails show Epstein's lawyers communicating confidence that DOJ headquarters was receptive, even as the gravity of the allegations was well understood. Mark Filip's sign-off, coming from the second-highest office in the department, formalized a decision that could not have proceeded without Mukasey's institutional blessing. That documentation undercuts claims that the NPA was the product of prosecutorial leniency or negligence at the district level. It demonstrates instead a coordinated, top-down intervention that insulated Epstein from federal exposure while sidelining victims' rights. The emails don't just revise the story of who was responsible—they confirm that the most powerful figures in the Justice Department knowingly built and approved the framework that allowed Epstein to escape meaningful accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

"They're not sending their best." Rachel Maddow reviews how the collection of unqualified culture warriors Donald Trump has put in charge of key facets of the United States national security apparatus is much worse than merely incompetent now that Trump has started a war with Iran and stoked a new level of threat against Americans and American interests. MS NOW's Carol Leonnig reports on new firings at the FBI that included members of an elite counterintelligence squad specializing in neutralizing threats from Iran. The firings came just before Trump started a war with Iran, setting up a whole new threat environment for Americans and American interests. Senator Tammy Duckworth joins Rachel to discuss Donald Trump's incoherent explanation for attacking Iran and the burden America's men and women in uniform are taking on for Trump's whim. And Donald Trump's Justice Department under Pam Bondi is in trouble with a judge again. Want more of Rachel? Check out the "Rachel Maddow Presents" feed to listen to all of her chart-topping original podcasts.To listen to all of your favorite MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Tonight on The Last Word: Donald Trump's Iran war spreads with strikes across the Middle East. Also, the House Oversight Committee releases video of the Clinton depositions in the Epstein investigation. And Trump's war in Iran now looms over Tuesday primaries. Sen. Mark Kelly, Rep. Adam Smith, Amb. Wendy Sherman, Rep. Ro Khanna, and TX Rep. James Talarico join Lawrence O'Donnell. To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Donald Trump unlawfully attacked Iran, and he has entered America into an unconstitutional "war" - that is the word Trump used. And, in the process, Trump has already sent multiple US military members to their death. Glenn discusses the unlawful and unconstitutional nature of Trump's military attack on Iran, and how there was NO imminent threat to the United States of America necessitating this military assault. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today's Headlines: The Middle East conflict has rapidly expanded to 12 countries in under 72 hours, with six U.S. troops killed after an Iranian strike hit an operations center in Kuwait. President Donald Trump signaled the fighting is far from over, saying Operation “EPIC FURY” could last four to five weeks and will continue “as long as necessary.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned that “the hardest hits are yet to come,” while Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Caine cautioned the operation will be “difficult and gritty” and likely involve additional U.S. losses. The State Department is urging Americans to evacuate more than a dozen countries, and U.S. cities are on heightened alert, according to FBI Director Kash Patel. In a twist, the Pentagon reportedly used Anthropic's Claude AI model in the Iran strikes — despite the administration recently clashing with the company and canceling contracts. Abroad, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Ukrainian drone experts will assist Gulf nations in intercepting Iranian drones, as Russia ramps up missile attacks on Ukraine. In Epstein news, federal prosecutors under Trump in 2019 reportedly took over New Mexico's investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's Zorro Ranch. The state's attorney general has now reopened the probe, and the House Oversight Committee released video testimony from Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. Meanwhile, the Justice Department is also expected to drop appeals defending Trump-era executive orders that targeted major law firms. And finally, Rep. Nancy Mace is under House Ethics Committee investigation over nearly $9,500 in alleged excess reimbursements. Resources/Articles mentioned in this episode: CNN: Live updates: US Gulf allies fend off attacks as Trump warns Iran of ‘big wave' of strikes The Guardian: Ukraine war briefing: Starmer says Ukrainian experts will help shoot down Iranian drone attacks in Gulf Axios: US cities step up security amid Iran tensions WSJ: U.S. Strikes in Middle East Use Anthropic, Hours After Trump Ban NYT: Epstein's New Mexico Ranch Gets Scrutiny at Last. It May Be Too Late. YouTube: The Deposition of President Bill Clinton on the Epstein Probe WSJ: Trump Administration Drops Defense of Law Firm Sanctions Axios: Nancy Mace under House Ethics Committee investigation Subscribe to the Betches News Room and join the Morning Announcements group chat. Go to: ⁠⁠⁠betchesnews.substack.com Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Monday, March 2, 2026 In this episode: Trump declined to rule out sending U.S. ground troops into Iran “if they were necessary,” saying “whatever it takes” and adding, “I don't have the yips with respect to boots on the ground”; Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth rejected the idea of an “endless” war in Iran; the Pentagon acknowledged in closed-door briefings with congressional staff that there was no intelligence suggesting Iran was preparing to launch a preemptive strike against the U.S. interests – contradicting Trump's claim that the U.S. was "very nearly under threat" from Iran; a federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's effort to delay litigation over potential tariff refunds; the Justice Department dropped its defense of Trump's executive orders sanctioning four law firms with ties to Democrats; Trump allies are continuing to press him to declare a national emergency and impose federal election rules without Congress as the SAVE Act's voter ID and proof-of-citizenship mandates has stalled in the Senate; 34% of Americans approved of the U.S. attacks on Iran; and 60% of Americans said they don't trust Trump to make the right decisions on U.S. use of force. Read more: Day 1868: "The yips." Newsletter: Get the daily edition of WTFJHT in your inbox Feedback? Let me know what you think AI Policy: My AI policy

Monday, March 2nd, 2026 Today, Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu have initiated a war with Iran; Democratic lawmakers call for Congress to return to DC to vote on a War Powers Resolution; a federal judge says the Trump administration is intentionally violating immigration law; the Pentagon has shot down one of our own drones; artificial intelligence giant Anthropic has told the Department of Defense it refuses to surveil Americans or build fully autonomous weapons for the government; Democrats say they have the votes to subpoena Lutnick over his Epstein Files appearances; the Justice Department exposed cooperating witnesses in the Epstein files; and Allison and Dana read your Good News. Thank You, DAILYLOOK For 50% off your first order, head to DailyLook.com and use code DAILYBEANS.   Thank You, Wildgrain Get $30 off your first box + free Croissants in every box. Go to Wildgrain.com/DAILYBEANS to start your subscription. Guests:  Michael Wriston,