Jack - Another ICE Coverup

Episode Date: July 12, 2026

FBI Director Kash Patel has been demanding special perks from Bureau employees during his taxpayer-funded travels throughout the country, including helicopter tours and jet ski excursions. US Attorney Andrew Boutros agrees to pay the attorney’s fees for the Broadview Six in a bid to avoid discovery as the codefendants seek a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department. The Harris County DA says federal authorities have sidelined local officials from investigating the shooting of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo by ICE agents in Houston. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche will face confirmation hearings this week as New Mexico accuses the justice department of obstructing the Epstein Ranch investigation. Plus listener questions. Do you have questions for the pod or something for HITMEINTHEHEADWITHABAT? Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/ Follow AGMueller, She Wrote SubstackMueller She Wrote on Blueskyhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://twitter.com/dailybeanspodMore from Andrew McCabeThe Real McCabe on [e-mail] on BlueskyThe Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump This Show is Available Ad-Free And Early For Patreon and Supercast Supporters at https://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.

M.SW. Media. FBI director Cash Patel has been demanding special perks from bureau employees during his taxpayer-funded travels throughout the country, including helicopter tours and jet ski excursions. U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros agrees to pay the attorney's fees for the Broadview Six in a bid to avoid discovery as the co-defendants seek a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department. The Harris County DA says federal authorities have sidelined local officials from investigating the shooting of Lorenzo Salgado Arouho by ICE agents in Houston. And acting attorney general Todd Blanche will face confirmation hearings this week as New Mexico accuses the Justice Department of obstructing the Epstein Ranch investigation. This is unjustified. Hey, everybody, welcome to episode 77 of Unjustified. It's Sunday, July 12. 2026. I'm Alison Gill. And I'm Andy McCabe. And Allison, first up, thanks to all the patrons who came to the

Happy Hour Zoom call last Thursday, which was awesome. Tons of people on that call. It was great to see everybody there. We have so many folks that really hit those each time. So it's like, I feel like I'm getting to know them a little bit from these happy hours, which is great. And yeah, good, good to be back on with the folks. Yeah. And if you want to become a patron, and be invited to our monthly Zoom, happy hour calls, where you can ask us questions. And you would also get this show

and The Daily Beans and Beans Talk early and ad-free. And you get invites to our events like our Chicago Gala, which we just had with Dana Goldberg and Tignitaro. And our next gala coming up, November 3rd,

I'm hosting an election night party here in San Diego. I've rented out a whole bar. I'm going to pay for food and drinks, and we're going to turn all the screens on to MS now and just watch election returns all night. Sweet. I mean, that's falling the dice because I can go either way. But hopefully,

it'll be glee and happiness throughout the bar by the end of the night. Yeah. Well, if it didn't take California 70 years to count our votes, we would have the giant blue wave that night. That's true. That's true. Hopefully we'll be watching some key Senate races, governor races, local legislatures, House races. We're going to be watching all of it. So looking forward to that. And if you want to become a patron and get all the invites to all that, stuff. It's just five bucks a month and you're supporting independent media. You can do it by going to patreon.com slash Mueller she wrote. And just to remind, Mueller is M-U-E-L-L-E-R. It's been a while since his name's been in the news. I know that, but I'm glad you mentioned it for everybody else.

All right. Let's start with a shooting death of Lorenzo Salgado Oroho by ICE agents in Houston. This story comes from PBS and it's kind of putting together a bunch of stories that have come out this week. Yeah. Federal officials are refusing to release the name of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Officer who fatally shot a Mexican man during a traffic stop in Houston, and scrutiny of the shooting is growing, especially after authorities said the man killed, was not the person ICE was trying to find. The shooting in Houston has revived critical voices deriding the Trump administration's immigration crackdown and how it operates, especially after the immigration

arrests around the country surged to 10,000 over a recent five-day period, fueled in part by massive congressional funding. Now, no evidence has emerged to support the Department of Homeland Security's version of the events that led to the killing early Tuesday of Lorenzo Salgado Arouho. And that version of events from DHS is that he rammed an ice vehicle when it was chasing his white van and that an officer opened fire in self-defense. These stories are starting to sound really familiar. Yes, they are. Now, three other men inside the van told an attorney that the officers are lying about what happened

and that Salgado Oruho did not ram an ice vehicle, but that he was shot through the passenger side window. Quote, that is a lie, wrote Jose Trinidad Rojas. He's 51, and he said that in a handwritten statement. He went on to say, it is impossible for them to say they were going to get run over, there were no officers in front of or behind the vehicle. They were on the sides. Now Lorenzo's brother, Victor Salgado, said the agent who pulled his brother out of the vehicle and cuffed him on the ground as he bled out after he'd been shot, asked in a mocking tone,

which means you wanted to escape, right? Now, the officers were not wearing body cameras. And neither ICE nor DHS, which oversees that agency, has released photos, videos or any other evidence from the scene. Salgado Arruho, a 52-year-old homebuilder who was shot and killed as he drove his crew to a construction site, was not who ICE was looking for, Democratic rep Sylvia Garcia said. Salgado Arruho's family said he had lived in the United States for more than 35 years, had no criminal record, and was close to finishing the long process of obtaining legal status when he was killed. Ice detained the other three men in the van and a lawyer who said he has spoken to them said the version told by DHS is completely false. Quote, at no point did they ever use the van to

ram into the ICE agents and at no point were these ICE agents lives ever in danger. Attorney Hugo Baldara-Cibara said on Instagram. And now the other men detained by ICE included Salgado Oruho's brother. Ice has not not released their names, but family members say they've been able to briefly talk with them. And ICE is pressuring them to self-deport, which would make it harder for them to share their version of events with investigators or others. And Daniel Torado Pentoya has no legal permission to live in the United States, but has no criminal record, his stepdaughter said. Quote, we just told him not to sign anything and that we're going to fight the case.

That's Juana de Goyado. That's what she told the Associated Press. Now, DHS says all these allegations are, quote, categorically false. When asked if officers were specifically targeting Salgado Arruho, DHS said Thursday that officers investigating a tip weeks before the shooting saw two white vans at the address of a target. While heading to that address on Tuesday, officers saw a white van and someone inside it who resembled the person they were looking for, the department said in a state. You got to be kidding me. I'm saying in response to that. Here's a white van with a guy who looks like the guy that we're looking for. So it must be him.

Let's take it. We should start shooting before he gets out. Yeah, that's what satisfies probable cause to pull somebody over and take them out of a van, much less shoot them. Okay. DHS said it will not release the officer's name because they could face threats and violence and their family could be at risk. yeah, something bad could happen to that agent for doing something bad to a citizen, right? Or a person living here in this country.

I like when they released the name of Jonathan Ross and then tried to arrest someone for posting that it was Jonathan Ross after the name was public, calling simply naming the ICE agent doxing somehow. Right, right. After his name had been released by the newspaper in Minneapolis. Right.

It was publicly reported. DHS said it will not release the officer's name. Okay, we covered that. DHS has also not responded to requests for other information, including how long the officer has worked for ICE or whether anyone involved in the shooting is on administrative leave. The department has taken a similar stance after previous fatal shootings involving its officers,

unlike many local and state agencies that routinely identify and provide biographical details about officers involved in critical incidents. Yeah, we're thinking so-sacelis. We're thinking Renee Good, we're thinking Alex Pretti. I mean, it's been happening. Now, unlike some previous deaths involving federal immigration officers, few photos or videos surrounding this shooting have emerged publicly in the days since Elgado Oruho's death.

The League of United Latin American Citizens offered a $5,000 reward for video or other evidence, but the positions of the vehicles means surveillance cameras in the area were blocked from recording the shooting. And just like in the Prattie and Good cases, the district attorney in Harris County, Texas, said Wednesday that federal authorities have sidelined local officials from participating in an investigation into the fatal shooting. District attorney Sean Tier said in a social media post that his office typically conducts a, quote, parallel investigation into any death caused by law enforcement. But he added, quote, unfortunately at this time, federal authorities continue exclusively handling all aspects of this case. okay prosecutor tier it's time to stand up it's time to do your job as uncomfortable as that might be and force yourself into this case it's in your jurisdiction you have the legal authority to do it

and only by doing it and getting blocked serving requests and having them denied are you going to be able to expose to the public how this is being covered up by the federal government So there's a value there, even if you never indict someone or never bring anyone to justice, there is a value in shedding some light here. Losing access to the crime scene, losing access to all the vehicles, having no ability to photograph what happened to preserve the positions of the vehicles vis-a-vis, the victim's vehicle, preserve whether or not there was any damage to the government's cars, if they had been, you know, rammed by, allegedly rammed by Mr. Rujo.

all that stuff makes doing a full and complete investigation almost impossible. But you got to ask, you got to try. Let's get out there. Yeah. Do what Minneapolis has been doing. It's a long process. But you know, you submit your Tu-I request. So two-e request is a formal written request to a federal agency asking for, you know, documents, data, evidence. When those are denied, you file suit with the court asking them to preserve the evidence. You know, you go through these steps. And a lot of this stuff gets denied, as we've seen in Minneapolis. But the ultimate goal is to get to a point where you've exhausted all of your regular legal remedies so that you can then maybe issue a warrant or, you know, something to that effect and then fight that in court. Yeah. We just never see this.

Like, pursue an action against the government. And by doing it, the issue gets out. I mean, I mean, this is so important. This is so incredibly important. This man was shot in the stomach and ultimately died an hour or more after they got him to the hospital, likely by blood loss. The idea that an agent would approach the driver's side of a van and fire through the window and hit the driver in the stomach, that's a hard angle to even imagine happening. It's much more likely that it happened as the witnesses indicated that it was someone who shot through the passenger side. And therefore you have like a longer distance for the round to travel.

And it's easier to make that kind of drop to the level where it would hit someone in the in the stomach who is behind the wheel. Right. So like all these things can be easily proven by a competent forensic investigation. Yeah, if you get the evidence. You get the body. You get the vehicle. You get the trajectories. You can do the string thing to show which. You got to have that stuff to be able to figure this out. And without any access to it, it just remains behind the curtain. Yeah.

And for anyone, probably no one listening to this program, but anyone who thought, oh, DHS is chilling out, CBP is chilling out. They brought home and in. They withdrew from Minneapolis. It's not. It's not. They're just, I think what's happening is that they're not doing their big propaganda movies. and putting that stuff out.

Like, I think that they're continuing on as they are just doing it more quietly. They're just better at managing the PR. I mean, all that stuff that you mentioned, that was dumb. Like, you don't want to draw attention to this. They thought they did. And then they overreached. Yeah. Because the cruelty, the unusual way they're doing it, the departure from historically how we think about people who are out of status in this country

and who we send agents after to take into custody to pursue deportation, where those lines are kind of drawn, that's not good for the government, for people to be focused on how different things are today than they have been in the past. So, yeah, that's why they're being quiet about it. Yeah, and we should remember, you know, as I've reported over on the breakdown and everything,

this has been going on for a really long time, especially with Customs and Border Protection, and particularly at the border, but now they're on the interior doing these raids and things like that under the new Trump immigration crackdown. But, I mean, there was an inspector general and a PERF report that came out in 2014 about how CBP officers were, you know, using rocks thrown and vehicle weaponization to justify shooting migrants. Like it's been going on for a really, really long time. And a lot of these officers, you know, folks say, well, they just need to be retrained. these are the new kids. No, the ones who shot Sosa Celis, Brené, Good, and Alex Prady were on the job

8, 10, and 12 years. Yeah. And they won't tell us how long this person's been on the job, but this is a longstanding problem that has been well documented throughout DHS, CBPSI, ice history and uh i it's really you know the calls for i don't think personally i'm not a reform i don't think you can reform this i i want to dismantle dhs and put everything back where it was pre nine 11 but you know anyway um something has to give here and now they're they're super charge funded because of the one big beautiful bill act and because of this new reconciliation piece after the democrats refused to fund ICE, CBP, and, you know, DHS through this last government shutdown. The Republicans took it upon themselves to use the budget reconciliation process, which doesn't require 60 votes in the Senate,

to infuse them with the tens of billions of additional dollars. They were, before that budget reconciliation process, Andy, they were funded at two times their operating costs through the end of Trump's term. Now they are funded at five times their operating cost throughout the rest of Trump's term. That's obscene. And they're doing this because they don't want, if we take the house, if we take one or both of the chambers, there's no fight to stop funding for ICE or CBP over certain things. It's not leverage anymore because they already have the money. Yeah, for sure. That's it. You're just basically taking away the other side's ability to conduct oversight. I mean, they don't have any interest in doing that now, but potentially after the midterms. But the only cudgel that Congress has is a denial

of funding. And they can say, that's right, we're good. We're good for the next few years. It's crazy. They're good times five. It's ridiculous. I think it's because they're overpaying for ICE facilities to put money in their buddy's pockets and get a kickback. I think it's a big money laundering scheme. But again, no proof of that. That's just Allison's feelings based on how Trump has operated his entire life. You can pressure another rug if you want. That's Allison's Spidey Sense, which I got to say is formidable. So, you know. Thank you. There you go. All right. We're going to talk about Kosh Patel. There's been a new piece this week in MS Now about additional perks and funding and things and vacations that he's been taking in addition to all the other things

that you and I have been following. And this breaks it down piece by piece. And Andy, I'm really interested in your thoughts on whether or not this kind of spending and perks and jet skis and whether that's a normal thing for an FBI director to participate in. So we're going to talk about all that right after the years. You're like trying to hold back your laughter, I know. I'm jumping at the bit here. We're going to talk about all of it after this break.

Stick around. We'll be right back. Okay, everybody, welcome back. As I promised before the break, this next story is from MS Now. FBI Director Kosh Patel has been demanding special perks from Bureau employees during his taxpayer-funded travels throughout the country, including helicopter tours, jet ski excursions. All of this is according to whistleblower accounts, plural accounts, given to Democrats on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees and obtained exclusively by MS. Now. And FBI spokesman is, of course, disputing these allegations.

But the Democrats are not alone in their concerns about Patel's use of public resources. MS Now has also viewed a letter to Patel from Republican Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, written in May demanding that Patel turn over information about his flights on FBI aircraft and about the FBI's purchase of BMW vehicles, which was first reported in December by MS Now. Quote, for each trip where you use an FBI aircraft for personal travel, have you reimbursed the FBI as required by law? If yes, please provide the records, the Grassley letter says. Chuck Grassley, writing strongly worded letters, Takash Patel. Waking up, Chuck.

Somebody must have set the alarm in Chuck's office. Come on, Chuck. Let's get back at it. We haven't sent a letter to the FBI since we cave work there. Let's go. Let's go, buddy. Geez. In an email Thursday sent after this story was published, FBI spokesman Ben Williamson said Kosh Patel's travel has been, quote, fully consistent with executive branch requirements and policies that extend over decades across all administrations. FBI director Patel has reimbursed all personal travel expenses strictly following the Office of Management and Budget Rules in the exact same manner as all previous FBI directors and is fully compliant. great, show us the records.

So let's see those receipts. Now, Grassley acknowledged that FBI policy requires a director to fly in the FBI jet, even when traveling for personal reasons, but he says Congress deserves an accounting of the director's use of FBI aircraft to conduct an independent and objective review. Grassley, who has consistently defended Patel publicly, asked the director in the letter to please explain why you decided to purchase BMW vehicles instead of Chevy Suburbanes.

Now, MS now reported in December that Patel directed the FBI to purchase several BMW X5 SUVs for the director's use, despite a longstanding policy of purchasing Chevrolet suburban SUVs for that purpose. Patel's spokesman said at the time that the move saved the government money, but he declined to release any documents substantiating that claim. Of course he did. Now, in their own letter, Jamie Raskin and Senator Richard Durbin said that they, quote, appreciate Chairman Grassley raising these concerns, which mirror those raised repeatedly by House and Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats. I love this, that Grassley writes a letter and then the Democrats write a letter pointing a big arrow to the fact that Grassley wrote a letter. In a post on Twitter. Everyone's just so surprised. They just all wanted to come to the party.

Yes. You guys, look at this. Chuck is back. The hero to whistleblower. The paragon of government oversight of DOJ and the FBI, something happened and he came out of his hibernation and has now written a letter. Yeah, and by the way, Andy, you're not, that's not sarcasm.

Grassley has always really been a staunch supporter of whistleblowers and spending and, you know. 100%. Always. Agee, when I was there, this guy wrote us a letter every week. We had staff in the Office of Congressional Affairs who did nothing. but the

the tedious research that was necessary to collect the things that he was asking for he was constantly hammering us with letters coming after us for the plane

Jim Comey's use of the plane where's the plane going who was on it all this stuff like nonstop which is why the fact that it's been crickets from him

since January 20th you know whatever whenever inauguration day was in 2025 nothing, nothing. All these stories about Cash Patel drinking beers with the hockey team in Italy, zero.

No letters. Now finally we get a letter. Okay, cool. Let's see what happened. Trump wouldn't even let Comey ride the FBI plane back from L.A. after he fired him. He screamed at me for letting him do that. Screamed at you for letting him do that.

All right. So Grassley didn't take too kindly to the Dems pointing a big yellow screaming arrow at his letter. On a post on Twitter after the story was published, Grassley said, I see Dems are riding my coattails and suddenly showing interest in doing oversight on FBI aircraft. Where was that energy with Ray and other directors? He wrote, referring to former FBI director Christopher Ray, who served under both Trump during his first term and Biden, quote, my oversight is the same no matter the administration, unlike Dems, who only seem

interested in oversight when it benefits them politically. You've got to be kidding. Hey, Chuck. How about no more pictures on Instagram of your vacuum at your house on Thanksgiving weekend? Okay? How about let's just do the work? Holy cow. Like it wasn't a political decision to completely turn away from every obviously horrendous decision made by this FBI director in this term. And when you do write a letter a year and a half later, you don't tell anybody about it? That wasn't political giving Cash Patel a free ride on all this insanity for the last year and a half?

Geez. Sorry. You're picking an old wound here. Seems like it. The letter from Democrats references an incident last summer when Patel was allowed by the military to take a VIP snorkeling trip in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, around the wreckage of the USS Arizona, where 1,177 sailors and Marines died during the Japanese attack in 1941. That excursion was first reported by the Associated Press and confirmed by Patel's spokesman who defended it as, okay, here we go, quote, a historical tour to honor heroes who died

on the sunken aircraft carrier because everybody knows it's culturally known in this country that the way to honor the memories and the service and the sacrifice of our war heroes is to put on goofy goggles and blow spit bubbles through a yellow tube that comes out of your mouth as you swim across their solemn ground. Mm-hmm. Right? Right. Well, that's how I do it.

Yeah, I mean, come on. Isn't there a pool at Arlington for that purpose? Who is the spokesperson? No, no. For God's sakes, dude. You got to have at some point, you're going to have to stay. it'll be like, okay, I can't, I can't do this anymore. Quote, your VIP snorkeling experience in Hawaii was not an isolated incident, Raskin

and Durbin wrote. You frequently demand special perks on official trips around the globe, such as taxpayer-funded helicopter tour during your multi-country jaunt across East Asia and other recreational activities like jet skiing. I'm just imagining Robert Mueller on a jet ski in his Brooks brother's suit with the white shirt and the pale blue tie. The tie flapping in the wind behind him as he blasts across, you know, the harbor in wherever East Asia.

Just wearing a, you know, with a little flag on the back that says, I take your point. Yeah. Mueller wouldn't even go to dinner on a foreign trip. Okay? Not even that. Right. Now they add in their letter, your jet setting and the lack of justification for these trips are out of control.

And the new attache office you established in, Wellington, New Zealand may have been opened in part to justify a sightseeing trip you took there. Williamson disputed the Patel took helicopters and jet skiing excursions, adding the visit of the military base in Hawaii to advance interagency work against our most prominent adversary, China, met all ethics requirements and has been publicly supported by both the Department of War. Both the Department of War? Maybe also the Department of Justice. They just ended at both the Department of War, period. Yeah.

I, maybe instead of an attache office in New Zealand where you go on a jet ski, maybe you could just look into Trump's secret bank accounts in China or Ivanka's patents that she got or what was Elaine Chow doing when she fled to the country after her husband had some sort of medical event. I don't know. I don't know. Maybe we need one in Albania to keep track of the Trump-Kusner development of the new resort along the protected coastline of Albania. I'm just saying there's lots of cool places where you could open more of those offices. Patel traveled to Australia and New Zealand last summer with a stop in Hawaii.

He jetted to Italy over the winter where he watched the U.S. men's hockey team win the gold medal. And he chugged a beard during the locker room celebrations just afterward. He's also made official trips paired with personal outings to watch his country singer-girlfriend perform in concert. That's so cute, as well as attend hockey games and, of course, UFC events. Quote, the opening of the FBI's legal adagee office in Wellington, New Zealand, was an official event and the first new legal adagee office opening in a decade, Williamson said. New Zealand was our only Five Eyes partner where the FBI had no league at office. Director Patel is the only person to address this partnership blunder from prior leadership. Okay, I take that remark personally.

I have questions about this. Yeah. Like, why didn't, Andy, why didn't you build an attache office in New Zealand? Because I couldn't fit it into my vacation schedule, obviously. Oh, right, right, right. Well, I'm working on putting an attache office together on the Amalfi Coast. I was thinking that would be a good central sort of Mediterranean. Yeah. You know, the legal out of J office in Wellington, New Zealand is probably like harmful to the FBI workforce because so many FBI agents are like ready to cut each other's throats to get assigned to that league at. Like that could be as far away from headquarters as you could possibly live as an FBI agent. And therefore it's a very valuable place. Maybe we need one in Tahiti so we can watch the Islamic Republic of Japan more closely.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, you know, you never know. By the way, I just want to tell everybody in case you don't know what I'm talking about this past week, Donald Trump referred to Iran as the Islamic Republic of Japan. And that's why I classic. Of course he did. Now, the Democrats said they have been told that Patel demoted personnel in Brussels because they failed to ensure you were adequately entertained. stoking fear among rank-and-file agents that they must provide your demanded perks or face termination. Concerns and strains prompted by the prioritization of your personal entertainment on international trips may have led to the resignation of the head of the FBI's international operations this year.

They did not provide further details on that, by the way. The Democrats recounted in their letter what a source told them about something Patel was overheard saying to the field office personnel in a meeting last year. and I quote, If you have golf, hockey, fishing or hunting, and beautiful sights, you're going to see a lot of me. Wow. That's putting it out there.

This is not the conduct of a committed and faithful public servant, especially one entrusted with ensuring the safety of almost 350 million Americans, the Democrats wrote. I got to tell you when I was at the Department of Veterans Affairs taking leadership seminars, I got to travel. Oh my God, Andy. I went to Kansas City, Missouri.

I went to Wisconsin. I went to... All the best places. Yeah. Not New Zealand. And hey, by the way, Kansas City, Wisconsin, you've got some beautiful stuff going on there. For real.

I went, I mean, I traveled a lot, A.G. I went to, I mean, I went to, of course, Iraq and Afghanistan. I went to Libya while they were in the middle of a civil war. Libya, vacation land. Yeah. I went to Tunisia once to see how, like, local terrorists that tried to burn down the embassy. I'm trying to think.

Yeah, it just not a lot of great places. I've been to Russia many times. I can't even go there now because, you know, I don't think I'd come back. You know. So, yeah. Surf sucks in Russia. No jet skiing, though, not on any trip.

Or snorkeling or swimming of any sort. Yeah. I don't know. This is just so, it's so stupid. it's so silly. It seems, you know, overdone to call it out, but it's not because it's indicative of something much more insidious. Yeah. This is a very serious job.

It's a super important job. Those 350 million Americans depend upon you to do it. People around the globe are partners, our colleagues and allies and friendly countries. And Cash Patel is not a serious person. He doesn't have the background, the knowledge, the wherewithal, the judgment, or the experience to do this job well, he should be removed and replaced by someone competent, at least, the basic level of competence and professionalism. Every FBI director I've ever known, and I've known many.

I didn't agree with every decision they made. Some of them I like better than others, but all of them conducted themselves with dignity and professionalism, and particularly in their professional lives. and to blatantly use the organization as like a vehicle for self-entertainment, it's just an insult to the rest of the organization that does not function this way and to the American people. Yeah. Yeah, and it's just heartbreaking, thinking about all of the previous professional career people who bent over backwards to not give the agency or the Bureau a black eye.

Yeah. And he's just out here. He thinks VIP doesn't mean you need extra security detail. He thinks it means you're going to get bottle service wherever you go. That's just gross. They added in their letter, quote, your lack of judiciousness regarding your personal travel and dubious use of official travel appear to violate not only government ethics law

and Department of Justice policy, but also White House directive. Despite its myriad failures and hypocrisies on this point, the Trump administration has expressly promised Americans that it would crack down on waste, fraud, and abuse of government spending and has reportedly directed officials to limit their travel, particularly overseas or travel unrelated to the president's agenda. That's what they wrote. We do have to take another quick break here,

but I wanted to just, there's another quick story about the Department of Justice and Kash Patel that I just wanted to tell you about. really quickly. From Raw story, Janine Piro, whose office covers D.C., U.S. attorney,

is the defendant in a public records lawsuit filed by Democracy Forward Foundation, watchdog group, which sued the FBI and the Justice Department after the agencies, according to the complaint,

ignored or rejected records request about Patel's alleged drinking and unexplained absences. The group wanted records searched for terms including drunk, hungover, inebriated,

passed out, won't wake, and unresponsive, according to the complaint, as well as any use of breaching breaching equipment by Patel's security detail because of that story where they had to break into his room to wake him up after a night of drinking, multiple times, I guess, allegedly.

But Piro filed an emergency motion using the word emergency three times saying she needs two more weeks to put together this paperwork. So we'll keep an eye on that for you. I guess she's just busy going after that dude who cut the slit in the reflecting pool. Yeah, sandwich guy 2.0. Sandwich guy 2.0. Apparently, like, can swim underwater.

Maybe borrowed Patel's snorkeling equipment, but he was able to go underwater with a razor blade knife for 300, 200, 275, maybe 300, 350 feet, depending on which Trump clip you're listening to and destroyed the entire great paint job, greatest of all paint jobs. Yeah, I haven't thought. thought about that. Maybe those cash Patel snorkeling gear. All right, we've got some news about

Todd Blanche coming up after this. His confirmation hearings are this week. And he's facing down a lot of stuff, but it might not actually make a difference. At least not for him getting the job or doing the job. It certainly makes a difference for getting the truth out and for grilling him on some of these issues. I think that's the main opportunity here. We're going to talk about that and why. he might be able to remain in his position, at least, doing this job, regardless of what happens with this confirmation. Stick around. We'll be right back. Welcome back. Okay, Todd Blanche's confirmation hearings are scheduled for two days this week, July 15th and 16th.

And he's facing a lot of scrutiny. Too much to cover, obviously, in this one show, A.G. But a story out this week for the New York Times reports that New Mexico's Attorney General on Thursday accused the Justice Department of obstructing the state's criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein's activities on a sprawling high desert estate south of Santa Fe by withholding unredacted documents and records. What? Todd Blanche is withholding Epstein documents? You're kidding. By the way, if you're listening to this on Sunday, well, actually it doesn't really matter when you're listening to this, but Sunday at noon, Pacific, Andy, I have some exclusive, pretty massive breaking news in my FOIA lawsuit against Todd Blanche regarding the Epstein files. The FBI has conceded something that I never thought they would admit to. And this isn't on any court docket. This is a FOIA letter that my lawyer and I received in the mail. It's not published anywhere yet, and we're going to be revealing it on the breakdown, on the Midas Touch Network, today, Sunday at noon Pacific 3 Eastern.

And it'll be up on my substack after that in case you aren't able to join us live. And my substack is Mueller, she wrote.com. I'm going to tell you offline what this thing is I got. Nice. It's really, really a stunning admission that my lawyer and I never thought would happen. And it has pretty massive implications, especially with the confirmation hearing. coming up this week. All right. Back to the story, Raul Torres, New Mexico's top law enforcement officer, first requested original documents related to Epstein's Zorro Ranch property in February.

He said he reiterated the request five times in the following months through a range of channels, but Justice Department officials have not responded. They haven't said no. They just are ignoring it. The records, he said, contain names of survivors, witnesses, co-conspirators, and other individuals who may aid the long-delayed state investigation into the deceased financiers' crimes in New Mexico. I hate when I call them a deceased financier. It's a sex of death. Dead pedophile. The department, quote,

the U.S. DOJ's continued withholding of unredacted records as causing real and escalating harm, Torres, wrote to Todd Blanche, acting attorney general, and a letter sent last week made public on Thursday. Went on to say, every day that the U.S. DOJ withholds these records, the foundation upon which a New Mexico prosecution could be built erodes. The breakdown in cooperation between federal and state authorities is the latest obstacle in an ongoing effort to bring justice to Mr. Epstein's victims,

some of whom have said they were trafficked and abused at Zorro Ranch. The remote property had escaped scrutiny for years, even as other parts of Mr. Epstein's empire were scoured. Documents unsealed in the release of the Epstein files indicated that federal investigators had overlooked the ranch when in 2019 they took over a state-level inquiry into Mr. Epstein's actions. New Mexico officials have since said that the federal authorities failed to thoroughly search the property. How do you take over the local investigation and then basically not do it?

Well, I don't know. Gosh, how often has Trump's Department of Justice done that? Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen. So I guess the way you do that is well known. It's a practiced strategy. in this administration and in its prior iteration. Yeah. Yeah. Now, the disclosure this year that Zorro went largely ignored in the inquiries into Epstein's wrongdoing led state lawmakers to establish a bipartisan truth commission equipped with subpoena power and prompted Torres to reopen his agency's investigation. In March, the state attorney

general's office began a search of the ranch, which is now owned by Dallas real estate magnate named Don Huff Hines, which always just makes me think of raising Arizona. Would you have a furniture store called unpainted Huff Hines. The recently... Excuse me, but I think it's actually Huffines. Oh, Dr. Huffer. Is that what it is?

Wow. I'm full of 80s and 90s references. Dr. Rosen. Oh, never mind. Okay. Dr. Huff Hines, the recently appointed comptroller of Texas. Mr. Huff Hines, Huffines, who plans to turn the ranch to a Christian retreat, says he's cooperating with the state investigation. Wow.

Ironic. Okay. But despite this and multiple other issues with Todd Blanche, lawfare writes that the two likeliest outcomes of the confirmation hearings are Blanche gets confirmed and serves as attorney general for as long as Trump wants, or he doesn't get confirmed and serves as attorney general for as long as Trump wants. I love how lawfare cuts right to the chase. Sound odd? Yes, it sounds odd, but it's due to the Attorney General Succession Act, codified at 28 USC Section 508 for all those playing at home, which provides in pertinent part that in the case of a vacancy in the office of the Attorney General or of his absence or disability, the Deputy Attorney General may exercise all the duties of that office.

Oops. Now, those who closely follow the frequent vacancy drama of the Trump years may wonder how this squares with the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998. That act, the FVRA, imposes time limits on how long actings can serve. In some cases, however, the FVRA takes a back seat, and this is such a case. But how long can Blanche serve under Section 508? The text of the act, unlike the text of the FVRA, sets forth no limit. Can Trump really use? it as an end run around the confirmation process. Unlike in many Trump-era legal puzzles, we actually have a recent non-Trump precedent for this. Yes. In March 20203, Labor Secretary Marty Walsh resigned to become, of all things, the head of the National Hockey League Players Union. I feel like that was a really good decision on his part. But anyway, Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Sue became acting secretary via a statute similar to Section 508. A statute. Statute, that you can now find at 29 USC, Section 552, which provides that, quote, the deputy secretary shall, in case of the death, resignation, or removal from office of the secretary, perform the duties

of the secretary until a successor is appointed. President Biden promptly nominated Sue to fill the vacancy, but objections from Senator Joe Manchin and Senator Kristen Sinema, plus unified Republican opposition, doomed her nomination. Instead of nominating someone else or even insisting that Sue get a final vote on the Senate floor, the White House decided to rely on Section 552 and keep her in place. Axios dubbed her, quote, Biden's forever nominee. The Wall Street Journal summarized the president's position as so sue me. Okay, that is not my joke. That was the Wall Street Journal's joke and I'm taking no responsibility for it. So sue me because her name is Julie Sue. Yes.

So really these hearings seem mostly, as I said, about shining a light on how horrible and unqualified Todd Blanche is to be the Attorney General. But I fear that there's probably not much that can be done, even if we block his confirmation. I think that's right. You know, I get, I would, I'm, I'm no expert on Section 508. But if he remains serving under that authority, at least he's not to get to be the Attorney General. He gets to exercise the Attorney General's authority, but he is still technically the Deputy Attorney General. Yeah. I know it's cold comfort, but, you know, at least it's the little brass ring that he seeks and may not get.

But in any case, we're stuck with Todd Blanche for the next two years. Why? Because he's proven his loyalty to Donald Trump, and he's proven that he'll do anything. He considers himself Trump's lawyer, not the nation's attorney general, or first Trump's lawyer and maybe second attorney general. And that's what matters in this administration. That is the coin of the realm. That is the thing they all vie for the approval of the dear leader. And Blanche has it.

Yeah, he sure does. All right. We'll be keeping a tab on how those confirmation hearings go. There's also going to be witness testimony in relation to the confirmation hearing, and that's this week, July 15th and 16th. Up next, hit me in the head with a bat. Stick around. We'll be right back. Hey, everybody, welcome back.

It's time to hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. Hit me in the head with a bat. And as is often the case, our segment on the destruction of the presumption of regularity at the DOJ comes back to the Broadview 6K. This is the case of the six people at Broadview Detention Center protesting ICE officers that included Kat Abogazale, one of the candidates for Congress in Chicago. And this all happened, you know, in Illinois. And they were charged with a felony conspiracy count and a bunch of other counts. Then because of grand jury malfeasance.

It's a good way to summarize it. The judge was like, show me those grand jury things. And he's like, no, no, no, you know what, we'll just drop that felony charge. And then the lawyers were like, you should probably see them anyway. And so they turned over half of them and redacted a bunch of them. And then they finally got all of them. And oh, my God, everything that was in there is just ridiculous. So as a brief reminder, we've been talking about it a lot. I'm sure you're well aware and familiar, well aware of and familiar with the Broadview Six case.

That's right. And this week, the government has filed a motion saying it's not going to fight the defendants on attorney's fees. It's a really interesting spin on this thing. Back in June, CBS reported that lawyers for the group of Chicago protesters known as the Broadview 6 filed motions in court to uncover communication between the White House and the Chicago U.S. Attorney's Office in the wake of charges being dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct. The filing revealed the federal government told the defendant's attorneys that they would not contest their request to have the government pay their legal fees and costs as part of a 1997 Hyde Amendment. claim. Now, the 1997 Hyde Amendment allows federal courts to award attorney's fees in court costs to defendants where the court finds that the position of the United States was vexatious, frivolous, or in bad faith. So to unwind this backwards a little bit, these defendants, who the case was

dismissed against, they have a claim in for attorney's fees under the Hyde Amendment. And as a part of that litigation to resolve that claim, they have asked for these government records. And the government so wants to protect those records. They are so concerned about not having these communications revealed to the public that they've said, heck with it. We'll just pay your attorney's fees. You'll give you all the money. I have never, ever, ever seen the government roll over on attorney's fees in these cases. Ever. Never. They always fight it. Always. Always. It's a matter of principle. They got a ton of lawyers in the civil division sitting around happy to defend something like this and push back. That tells you how much the government wants to hide whatever was said between the U.S.

Attorney's Office and the White House. Yep. Now, the attorneys argue the government's recognition that the Broadview Six are entitled to legal's fees supports the need to see these communications and to release them through discovery, arguing it's necessary to ensure their clients receive the appropriate amount of legal fees. I mean, is the government just going to, like, if the legal fees are $18.5 million, if that's their claim, are they just going to go, yep, here you go, here's, totally make it rain. We'd like $20 million. And they're like, take $25. Just don't ask us about the documents. They should really just ask for an absorbent, absorbent amount of legal fees. But in a court filing this week, DOJ argues the motion for discovery should be denied as moot.

because the U.S. doesn't intend to contest the defendant's entitlement to fees. Again, all right, great. Well, we'll take $10 billion. Remember the ballroom was only going to cost like a couple hundred million? It was all going to be paid for by private donors. Like, they could just be like, we'd like several hundred million paid for by private donors. They could actually say, hey, we would like 200 million. So you can send the 400 million in small unmarked bills.

and then once we get your 600 million, you know, just keep, you know. We want it all in cash in Kava bags. How about that? All attorney's fees are only accepted in cash, no denominations larger than a five spot in Kava bags. Well, no, because we want so much and to make the Kava bags carryable,

we'll take your new $250 Trump bill. Nice. Yeah, I like that. I like that. It sounds like a hostage taking. or something. Yeah. Put the money

in a bowling ball carrying case and leave it. Remember when the government was about to go through discovery in the Abrago Garcia case and to avoid it?

They brought him home by charging him with 22 crimes that have since been dismissed for vindictive and selective prosecution all to avoid discovery. Yeah.

So they don't want these documents out there. Okay, so you know they considered that here. Oh yeah. You know they went deep on these people like,

is there anything that we can charge them on? Please. anything something that happened like back in 2022. The thing about it, Brago Garcia is that they argued that bringing him home mooted the need for discovery. Here, they already live here. So there's really not much they can do to moot discovery, but that doesn't mean they weren't digging into their past looking for crimes to threaten them with. We won't charge you for this shoplifting of Snickers in 1986.

We won't have Janine Piro come after you for touching water. Shoplifting of Snickers. They're looking. Have you ever thrown a sand? sandwiched anyone. All right, everybody. It's time for my favorite part of the show. Listener questions.

If you have questions, there's a link in the show notes where you can submit a question. I think we got time for one, maybe two. Let's see what we can get through here. So we have two, but they're pretty much on the same topic. So I think we can get through these. First, a quick correction. This comes to us from Kathy. Kathy writes in saying, not a question, just an FYI.

The University of California, Berkeley Law is not the same as UC Hastings, which I said on the last show. Oops. One is in Berkeley and the other is in San Francisco. John, you, who we were talking about at the time, is at Berkeley. So thank you, Kathy. I appreciate you. Keep me square on that one.

Look at that. Okay. So here's our question this week, Allison. This comes to us from this first one from Jim in Michigan. And then I have another one that's basically on the same basic topic. Okay. So I'll give you the first one first. Jim says, I never miss an episode of the podcast.

Hats off to both of you. for making these issues understandable and engaging. My question, DOJ seems to be in violation of Judge Cannon's order for non-disclosure of Volume 2 of Jack Smith's report. Oh, yes, you are right, Jim. And he goes on to clarify that he means by sending copies of the report to Carmen Lindberger's lawyers during discovery. It seems unlikely DOJ will face any charges for this violation.

Could these circumstances be used by Ms. Lineberger's attorneys in a defense based on selective prosecution. It's an interesting question. No, not selective prosecution, but I think it could be used in other defenses. It'd be like, oh, why are you similarly situated or something? Which is selective, isn't it? I mean, you talk

about similarly situated defendants when you talk about selective prosecution, but the DOJ isn't a defendant. It doesn't really isn't a defendant. It doesn't really fit, right? But it seems like it would, but it doesn't really. But where it will be important to her is her attorneys will take the tack that like, look,

the government can't even claim that there is legitimate damage, any damage was done here, because they did the same thing themselves. So what's the big deal? Okay, that argument's not going to take them that far, but it might help to minimize if she gets convicted. We don't know that she will or won't because we're not there yet. But if she does get convicted,

I expect that her attorneys will use the government's incompetence and doing the same thing as a way to minimize how the judge thinks about sentencing. Yeah. They're going to basically say, okay, fine. What are you going to do? You're talking about punishing her for doing essentially the same thing or kind of a variant of what DOJ themselves did. And I don't know.

I mean, I think that's not a bad way to try to limit the weight that she ends up carrying in terms of. of a sentence if she gets convicted. Yeah, I think it is more likely to come up in a sentencing recommendation or a sentencing memo than in a selective or vindictive prosecution case. Although she may have other grounds for vindictive and selective prosecution. Oh, sure. Yeah, yeah. You know, just for being a prosecutor who worked on Jack Smith's case or had something to do with it. She obviously had access to the report. Yeah. So, and we know a lot of those reports went through the U.S. attorney's office in the Southern District of Florida, which is, I think,

where she worked because you have to go, you know, do things locally. So, yeah, we'll be keeping an eye out on all of that for sure when and if this stuff makes it to trial. For sure. I like Timis question. Timis, yes, yes. Timis is my question is about DOJ sending volume two of Jack Smith's report to people. What would the punishment be if the lawyer read it or if even Jack Smith read it when they sent it to him? Is the DOJ trying to entrap these people into breaking the law by,

reading it or is it just 100% incompetence? Thanks and also you look marvelous. I'm doing that in the Billy Crystal voice, although that's not annotated here. Now, I think the correct answer to this is that there's probably not a sanction for reading it as much as there is for sending it or stealing it. Yeah, I think that's right. I think, well, first of all, the second part. Personally, if I were a lawyer who got it, I wouldn't read it because I wouldn't want knowledge of what. was in it. That's right. So it's different for lawyers. And this is where Jack Smith comes in. And he's like this to a, you know, at a much higher level. As a lawyer, you're considered to be an officer of the court. And your fundamental responsibility is to obey the procedures, the rules and the, and the rulings,

the orders of the court. And this is a document that has been sealed by the court. So if you're just some Rando lawyer and you happen to get this by mistake or whatever, you don't want to read it because you don't want to violate that part of your responsibility as an officer of the court because it could lead to all kinds of problems. So there's not like a specific punishment, I think. There's not like a crime that I'm aware of being prosecuted for reading something that was under seal and got sent to you mistakenly. Now in the Jack Smith example, like he's at a, he is such a, he is such a target for this administration that they would do anything to be able to trump up some sort of charge against him. And so he has to be like, as careful as any lawyer would be about this stuff,

he's going to be like a hundred times more careful. And that's what we've seen in the way that he's responded to these things. You saw on his testimony in front of Congress that he was so careful about not saying anything about that report because he didn't want to be accused of violating the direction that he'd been given by the judge and by the Department of Justice. As far as is it intentional or incompetent, honestly, my guess is 100% incompetence. Yeah, it was attached to emails that were thrown together and discover using certain software that you use to go through. I mean, you know, because of, you know, emails, like just the enormity of discovery that has to happen these days, they have companies and computer programs

that actually do discovery for you. And that's probably how these three copies, she was indicted for two copies, but they sent three copies inadvertently to the lawyer. So I'm with you. I think it's 100% incompetence. Yeah, for sure. They'd only be entrapping themselves for looking like idiots

and sending it out. And believe me, they don't want that to get out. Oh, no. So they wouldn't have purposefully given it to anybody to, you know, try to be sneaky about anything. Let's remember their boss, Todd Blanche, is the guy who represented Trump in that case, who pushed for getting this thing basically, you know, thrown into a box, locked in a safe,

put in a vault buried underground, and then covered with cement. Although I have to say I am heartened by how many copies of it are out there in the world. It feels like it's less likely that Todd Blanche can destroy every single copy of that, of it that exists out there. He can't even find all the Epstein files. So I'm not too concerned about the absolute destruction of volume two. I have full faith that we will get it at some point. Yeah.

I just don't know when that is. Like all oppressed people, that report is dying to be free. It just wants to live a free life where it's discussed and exchanged and given from friend to friend and passed down in families. So we can just hope that someday that following that light of freedom, I'm not sure how it gets there, but someday that report lands in your email or, you know, makes its way around the globe. You can bet the bourbon. I'll be filing a FOIA request when it happens, arguing that it has happened and there's no need to keep the report from the public anymore.

That's a way to get it. That is a way that could happen. You never know. being the final justice we were talking about last week. All right, everybody. Thank you so much, by the way. Again, thank you to our patrons. If you want to become a patron, please do.

We would love to see you at the election night watch party. It's going to be totes casual, just a whole barful of like-minded people watching election returns. And we would love to have you there. Go to patreon.com slash Mueller. She wrote. If you have questions, there's a link in the show notes. You can click on to submit your questions. We love reading them and we love answering them.

And, you know, we will see you next week. I'm sure we'll have no shortage of news, especially with Todd Blanche's confirmation hearings coming up and what I'm about to announce today at noon Pacific 3 Eastern on the Midas Touch Network with what the FBI has admitted to me about the Epstein files in my FOIA case. It's my mind. My mind is blown. Do you have any final thoughts today, my friend? No, I'm not going to step on that outro. I'm going to let that one just simmer in everyone's rain.

Looking forward to it. Yeah, and again, if you miss it live on Midas Touch, don't worry, you can find it at muller, she wrote.com. And there's never any paywows there. So thank you, again, patrons, for your support. You make that possible. All right, we'll see you next week. Thank you so much.

I'm Alison Gill. And I'm Andy McCabe. Unjustified is written and executive produced by Alison Gill with additional research and analysis by Andrew McCabe. Sound design and editing is by Molly Hawke Hockey, with art and web design by Joelle Reader at Moxie Design Studios. Music for Unjustified is written and performed by Ben Folds, and the show is a proud member of the MSW Media Network, a collection of creator-owned independent podcasts dedicated to news, politics, and justice.

For more information, please visit MSWMedia.com.