reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker points out that the prosecutor in the case has intertwined her political interests with the case, which could backfire. The prosecutor has been removed from part of the case due to a conflict of interest and has made inappropriate public statements. The speaker believes this is bad form for a prosecutor and could be a problem when the case goes to court. They predict that Donald Trump will argue that the prosecutor has improperly mixed politics with the case and should be removed. The speaker acknowledges that these arguments may not succeed, but the prosecutor has created problems for herself.

Many at the DOJ are reportedly fearful and anxious. Jack Smith, who has been in conflict with Trump, appears to be retreating to avoid being fired. The message to him is clear: he cannot escape accountability for the $50 million spent on his actions. Resigning won't absolve him of responsibility. Those who act tough but run away indicate that the accusations against them hold weight. The speaker emphasizes that previous doubts about their stance are now being proven wrong, questioning why Smith is fleeing if he has nothing to hide.

Alarm is rising among Justice Department and FBI officials over potential revenge prosecutions from the incoming Trump administration. Some civil servants have sought legal counsel due to concerns about lengthy and costly legal battles. The selection of Matt Gaetz has intensified these fears. While officials anticipated congressional investigations, Gaetz's appointment surprised many at the DOJ. He lacks prosecutorial experience but is a staunch Trump loyalist, which raises concerns about possible criminal investigations against career DOJ and FBI officials. His appointment is viewed as a way for Trump to protect Gaetz amid ongoing ethics investigations, further escalating anxiety within the department.

We're here to ensure Americans don't wake up needing to boil their water because the EPA's workforce was removed. We provide oversight, especially after reports of EPA employees facing job insecurity. These individuals are already undermining the system. Elon Musk is breaking the law; a federal court ruled against firing people with deferred payments lacking federal authority. We're protecting federal workers, clean air, water, and the environment. This isn't the time to pause climate action. We lost four years and must recover lost ground, so these critical programs must stay intact. Elon Musk threatens essential agencies. Unless the public demands environmental protection, we're here to warn that these changes are coming.

After three weeks of training, the speaker received a litigation hold and a memo granting permission to fire probationary employees from the capital c section who had been moved within the office. The memo referenced people but lacked specific names, causing confusion. Upon returning to the office, the speaker and colleagues were met with confusion and heartbreak. Two hours later, termination letters began to arrive. Ultimately, 15 assistant US attorneys were fired. The speaker's termination letter cited actions and prosecutions related to the events at or near the US Capitol on 01/06/2021. It referenced an executive order characterizing the work as a grave national injustice and stated that the speaker's hiring hindered the acting US attorney's ability to implement President Trump's agenda. The speaker believes the US attorneys represent the United States, not the president. The speaker believes that firing 15 qualified attorneys created a problem.

The speaker claims the incoming administration wants to rectify abuses by enforcing immigration law, stating that those who entered illegally should leave. They allege the administration is stopping deportations. The speaker asserts that, according to the courts, it is lawful to be unlawful if you're Joe Biden, but unlawful to be lawful if you're Donald Trump.

As a former 18-year veteran of the Department of Justice, I now lead a group called Justice Connection, aiding current DOJ employees facing demotions, firings, and threats from various sources, including January 6th rioters and those believing in the "deep state" narrative. These individuals are terrified for their careers and personal safety due to increased doxxing and harassment. The current environment within the FBI and DOJ is destabilized, impacting morale and daily functions, making it harder to focus on critical tasks like counterterrorism. While the administration defends personnel moves as aligning with its priorities, the safety and security of dedicated DOJ employees is at risk, especially with doxxing and harassment being criminal offenses.

There are reports of FBI lawyers claiming that actions against certain employees could be unconstitutional. Norm Eisen and Mark Zaid have warned the DOJ about potential legal action if the Trump administration attempts to remove or reassign FBI or DOJ staff. This is ironic, given their past violations of due process rights for January 6 defendants. Meanwhile, rumors suggest an impending FBI walkout, with some agents urged to stand their ground. One New York FBI field office director emphasized entitlement to their jobs. A walkout could expose the agents’ sense of entitlement and accountability for eroding public trust in the DOJ and FBI.

That picture of President Trump and Elon Musk in the Oval Office will be iconic when the story of Trump's second term is told. It depicts a remarkable event: the President justifying a large-scale attack on the federal government. The main criticism is the lack of accountability. Trump campaigned on reforming government and rooting out waste, but the methods—including Musk's involvement and mass firings—were unexpected. The actions haven't provided the detailed justification the American people deserve. Yalda rightly pointed out that if elected representatives can't carry out the will of the people, we don't have a democracy. Calling the bureaucracy an unconstitutional branch of government is inaccurate. However, Trump's actions are facing legal challenges, with judges objecting to actions such as mass firings at USAID and restricting access to the treasury payment system. The debate is ongoing, and Trump's team is relying on the legal system and public opinion.

The speaker highlights the departure of key personnel involved in a significant enforcement action. They express surprise at the mass exodus, emphasizing that it is unusual for everyone involved in such a case to leave. The speaker mentions the new positions these individuals are taking, including roles at law firms and crypto funds. They stress that this exodus of senior staff responsible for a major enforcement decision is unprecedented and raises concerns about conflicts of interest, impropriety, and self-dealing.

Some Democratic members of Congress are preparing for the possibility of litigation. They're considering if they have the best teams possible to carry out their work. Some Republicans may say that Democrats are weaponizing the Justice Department, citing Trump's trial as an example. But in the United States, we are judged by a jury of our peers. Trump was found guilty in court on 34 felony charges. It's hard to make a partisan argument against that.

According to reports, thousands of people at the DOJ are scared. Jack Smith is allegedly scurrying like a rat and will resign to avoid being fired by Trump. Speaker 1 says, "Bye. Bye. We're not done with him," claiming Smith spent $50,000,000 of taxpayer dollars and can't resign to hide from what he did. Speaker 1 suggests Smith is running quickly, indicating that "we were right." Speaker 1 states that people called her stupid and wrong, but now that Smith is allegedly running, she doesn't "look so wrong right now," because if he had nothing to hide, he wouldn't be leaving.

Unelected judges are attempting to control government spending, violating the separation of powers. This is happening to people like Elon Musk, a great man, and it's outrageous. People work hard and pay taxes, only to see their money spent on things like $2,000,000 for sex changes in Guatemala. This will stop. We're fighting back against agencies like USAID. This is happening daily, but the DOJ is prepared to defend these cases. We are committed to carrying out President Trump's agenda.

It's unacceptable that payments are being made to New York and other states because it's unconstitutional, biased, and an overreach of authority. Attorneys general across the nation need to uphold the rule of law. No one is above the law, not Elon Musk, treasury officials, or even the President. As attorneys general, we've been preparing for this situation. While this isn't the outcome we desired, we are ready to act.

I discussed some of the concerning individuals surrounding Musk. Does this surprise you? Sadly, no. It's a familiar pattern. Experienced professionals aren't drawn to such chaotic and toxic environments. This approach appeals to a specific type of person, as we saw at Twitter. Inexperienced engineers evaluated our code, and we endured loyalty exercises like printing code and justifying our work—a demoralizing and insulting process. I'm hearing similar accounts of long-tenured federal employees facing similar humiliating situations. This is insulting to the dedicated federal employees who work hard daily. It's truly unacceptable.

After three weeks of training, the speaker saw a litigation hold on their phone with a memo giving Mr. Martin permission to fire probationary employees from the capital c section. The memo referenced people but didn't have a list of names. The speaker headed back to the office and was met by colleagues who shared their confusion. Two hours later, letters terminating them started rolling in. At the end of the night, 15 assistant U. S. Attorneys had been fired. The termination letter stated the decision was based on actions and the prosecution of persons relating to the events that occurred at or near The U. S. Capitol on 01/06/2021. An executive order characterized that work as having involved a grave national injustice. The speaker's hiring hindered the ability of the acting US attorney Martin to staff his office in furtherance of his obligation to faithfully implement the agenda that the American people elected president Trump to SCU. The termination letter made it clear that mister Martin does not understand the role of a prosecutor. Firing 15 qualified attorneys created an immediate deficit in the office to appropriately prosecute cases.

The speaker suggests that the person being discussed is aware of committing fraud and is now playing to the public. They mention the stress this person is facing, knowing they may never do business in their home state again. Another speaker mentions the extraordinary nature of the trial and shares social media posts from both sides. Donald Trump accuses the attorney general of corruption, while the attorney general sarcastically comments on one of Trump's properties. The speaker concludes by mentioning that there are four more criminal trials scheduled for Donald Trump in the coming year.

The discussion centers on the claim that the Trump administration has been “draining the Washington DC swamp” by using a Biden-era policy, and that Trump actually tricked Biden into enacting it. The speakers present several linked points. - A report is cited: federal government employment fell by 9,000 jobs in April, and is down about 345,000 jobs since Trump took office. The speakers show a graph suggesting Trump’s entrance coincides with a “free fall,” and claim these are the lowest federal employment numbers in the country since 1966. - They attribute this purge of federal workers to a Biden-era policy that, according to their narrative, the Biden administration inadvertently made it easier for Trump to fire executive-branch employees. This claim is tied to coverage from the Heritage Foundation. - Speaker 1 recounts a sequence of events involving the firing of federal employees after Biden took office. They describe receiving an email in Biden’s early months stating that recipients must resign by a certain time or be fired, implying a policy or practice of compelled resignations. - They recount American First Legal’s attempt to sue the Biden administration, seeking plaintiffs to challenge the right to fire federal employees. They describe a process in which they hoped to lose in court so that Biden’s position would proceed to higher courts, claiming they ultimately lost at both the district court and the appeals level, with Trump then prevailing in the broader effort. - The narrative continues with the speaker mentioning contacting people and referencing it as “my servant v Biden,” followed by a call from the Washington Post about the Kennedy Center board being fired. The speaker jokes about being recognized for Dancing with the Stars rather than ballet, and the reporter’s line of inquiry is said to pivot to a statement issued by the Kennedy Center board. - The overall arc emphasized is that a Biden-era policy is claimed to have enabled broad layoffs in the executive branch, that this policy was “codified” or reinforced by actions in Biden’s early tenure, and that legal challenges by conservative groups to resist or contest these moves were unsuccessful, leading to what the speakers present as Trump succeeding in reducing federal employment and purging federal workers. The Kennedy Center firing is cited as part of the broader narrative of fired or compelled resignations as part of perceived administrative shakeups.

An individual states that someone is working to help the blind see and asks if the work comes down to aligning with President Donald Trump to identify over $100 billion in government waste, fraud, and abuse. The speaker responds that people get upset when fraudulently obtained money is taken away, and that they want to harm him for stopping their fraud and want to hurt Tesla for stopping government waste and corruption. The speaker concludes that bad people will do bad things. The first individual states that those who will end up hurt are the people who work in dealerships and those who build Teslas, which is despicable on the part of those who may have a political difference.

The speaker states that dozens of people have already left, with the civil division down 30% as of a week ago, and likely more now. While some may see opportunity amidst the departures, there's peril because there will be an accounting for lawyers who violated their ethical obligations and rules of professional responsibility. Many things Trump's attorneys are promising would violate those responsibilities. Many arguments being made in court, seemingly directed by the administration, are close to violating ethical lines because they don't appear fact-based. The speaker uses the example of being told to say Elon Musk has no authority. Judges are recognizing these arguments as shams. The speaker expresses being torn, having spent decades at the department.

Speaker 1 notes that there are thousands of ongoing investigations and prosecutions in the country, and that some involve people and entities the president has previously criticized and believes should be investigated. He says this is not pressure and will not keep him up at night, except to ensure every case is investigated to the fullest extent of the law using all available resources. Regarding weaponization, he argues that it has become a contested word, but says it means nothing to him because it is “completely false.” He contends that for four years, some in the room witnessed weaponization of the department like never before, with a president indicted four times by the department, and with the department assisting two local district attorneys in going after the president. He also asserts the department stood idly by while states tried to keep President Trump off the ballot. He emphasizes that the past four years saw this pattern, and insists that today’s department is changing, not pursuing political enemies but pursuing justice as the president has repeatedly said he wants. He acknowledges the ongoing media narrative about weaponization but rejects it, stating it happens not to be true. He emphasizes that tens of thousands of prosecutors across the country are putting bad guys in jail, something that, in his view, did not happen as it should have in the past four years. He concludes by reiterating his commitment to continue this work, saying it will happen tomorrow and in the coming days.

All the other side wants to talk about is Elon Musk, but where were they when Fauci was forcing vaccine and mask mandates? Or when Mayorkas was letting illegal aliens invade our country? Or when Cardona was targeting those who disagreed with his transgender ideology? Or when Gensler was blocking financial market growth? They didn't care because it benefited them. Musk is an employee of the President, and we have a mandate to do what he's doing. His job is to carry out the will of the people. The Democrats have grown and weaponized the administrative state, and people are fed up. We're talking about $2.7 trillion in improper payments since 2003, possibly the biggest money laundering scandal ever, and the other side doesn't care. Is it because this money funds their side? It funds media outlets that cover for them, left-wing NGOs, and transgender activism. This money, taken from Americans, is being used against them.

After three weeks of training, the speaker received a litigation hold and a memo granting permission to fire probationary employees from the capital c section who had been moved within the office. The speaker was unsure if they were on the list. Upon returning to the office, colleagues shared their confusion. Two hours later, termination letters arrived, dismissing 15 assistant U.S. Attorneys. The speaker's letter cited their actions in prosecuting individuals involved in the events at or near the U.S. Capitol on 01/06/2021. It referenced an executive order from 01/20/2025 characterizing that work as a grave national injustice. The letter stated that the speaker's hiring hindered the acting U.S. attorney's ability to implement President Trump's agenda. The speaker believes Mr. Martin doesn't understand that U.S. attorneys represent the United States, not the president, and that firing 15 attorneys created a deficit in the office's ability to prosecute cases.

The speaker reflects on a message from Maureen about justice and the Justice Department's "reservoir of trust and credibility," a gift given to every employee. This credibility allows them to be seen as impartial, "just trying to do the right thing," rather than as partisan figures. The speaker warns that this reservoir is in "grave danger" due to Trump and his allies who are trying to turn the Justice Department into a "Trump subsidiary." The speaker urges good people within the department to have courage and "do the right thing always," even if it means being fired. The speaker concludes by expressing faith in those within the department committed to the rule of law.