Main Justice Podcast – Episode Summary

Episode: Callous and Lawless
Date: February 3, 2026
Hosts: Andrew Weissmann & Mary McCord

Overview

In this episode of Main Justice, veteran DOJ prosecutors Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord examine a series of alarming legal and constitutional developments inside Trump's newly reconstituted Department of Justice. With the criminal cases against former President Trump concluding and his administration returning to power, Weissmann and McCord draw from both their DOJ experience and current legal reporting to expose how justice is being undermined from within: through overtly partisan DOJ recruiting, unprecedented mishandling of sensitive files, disregard for judicial authority, and assaults on protected press activity. The central theme, as Andrew distills early on: "Callousness and lawlessness" now define the department's approach.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Partisan DOJ Hiring and Erosion of Impartiality

(02:14–11:54)

• The episode opens with shock over a social media jobs post (originally on X, formerly Twitter) from Chad Mizell, former Chief of Staff to the Attorney General, overtly recruiting DOJ lawyers specifically “to support President Trump and [his] anti-crime agenda.”
  • Weissmann: "There's no sense of separation from the White House. This is, 'you have to support President Trump.'"
  • The overtly political framing breaks with DOJ tradition, risking the Department's credibility as an impartial law enforcement body.
  • Formerly, DOJ positions were highly competitive among elite law graduates; now, the department is "bleeding" experienced prosecutors, and even law students are reluctant to apply.
  • McCord: "To think that you have to go out and essentially crowdsource to get people to apply is just dumbfounding to me. It shows how much turmoil is in the department." (08:37)
  • Both hosts stress the difference between policy disagreement—which is expected in government—and the mass exodus triggered when asked to do something unethical or illegal.

2. Retaliatory Complaint Against Judge Boasberg

(11:56–18:28)

• Chad Mizell also filed a formal DOJ complaint against U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg, alleging improper conduct for expressing concerns at the Judicial Conference that the administration might disregard federal court rulings.
  • The complaint was dismissed by a neutral Chief Judge from the Sixth Circuit for lack of evidence ("Attachment A" was never even produced), and on the merits, even assuming the alleged comments were made.
  • Weissmann: “You can’t just make an allegation… cite to something that doesn’t exist. And then when the judge says, okay, let me see it... you say, well, I don’t have it. Then it’s like case over.” (16:08)
  • Wider significance: This marks a new pattern of "brushback pitches"—using official complaints or even indictments to intimidate those in the justice system who voice concerns about executive misconduct.
  • Weissmann: “It is a brushback pitch to those who are voicing concern. You voice a concern—we're filing a complaint against you. You voice a concern, you document something—we're going to indict you.” (17:24)

3. Epstein Files Data Dump: Victim Exposure and DOJ Recklessness

(20:17–28:12)

• DOJ released some 3 million records related to the Jeffrey Epstein case, but failed to adequately redact the names, images, and sensitive personal information of hundreds of survivors—despite having been given a list in December and already missing the congressional deadline.
  • Weissmann: “I'm not willing, because of the history of this department, to think it's just a mistake... Some of it might be somewhat intentional. And it has the effect of saying to people who are victims who have spoken out against the administration, 'We have a lot of power and we can ruin your lives.'” (21:06)
  • Victim letter quote read by McCord (23:04):
    “Many newspapers and websites are publishing everything about us, including pictures. And I'm getting disgusting private messages and a flood of followers on social accounts.”
  • DOJ’s response: Blamed technology and human failure, but survivors’ counsel argue the scale defies incompetence alone:
    “There is no conceivable degree of institutional incompetence sufficient to explain the scale, consistency, and persistence of the failures that occurred.” (22:40, quoted by Weissmann)
  • Both hosts: This is not just “a real screw up” but, at minimum, reckless and lawless.

4. Rule of Law Under Siege: Minnesota Immigration Orders

(28:42–41:25)

• The hosts turn to a pattern of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) openly flouting court orders in Minnesota.
  • Chief Judge’s lengthy opinion details 96 separate violations in 74 cases.
  • Weissmann: “If the court thinks that Todd Lyons [ICE head] has violated his order, releasing the person beforehand doesn’t get rid of the violation. ... The district courts have been doing yeoman’s work... but at some point it has to be more. It can’t just be saying it happened.” (29:50)
  • There’s a vivid analogy to parenting or dog training—warnings issued, but no real consequences.
  • External commentary: Every former general counsel (Republican and Democrat) of DHS signed a public NYT op-ed refuting the legal claim that non-citizens lack Fourth Amendment protections, showing bipartisan alarm at current policy shifts.

5. Courts Still Applying Law, Despite Personal Concern (Minnesota Injunction Case)

(37:04–43:11)

• District Judge in Minnesota is “deeply, deeply troubled” by ICE’s violations and their devastating societal impact but rules against an injunction sought by the state and cities, citing lack of existing legal precedent.
  • McCord: “She talks about the violations ... but... doesn’t find that the state and the cities have shown enough at this preliminary stage…”
  • Weissmann: “This is the rule of law in action, where the judge may have her own personal views... but she is saying, I have to apply the law here.” (41:25)
  • Lawsuit continues with other claims and possible narrower relief.

6. Criminalizing Journalism: Don Lemon & Georgia Fort Charged

(45:43–54:26)

• Don Lemon and Georgia Fort, both prominent journalists, indicted for a protest at a religious institution—under a broad conspiracy theory of violating the FACE Act.
  • The initial judge, and then an appellate judge, refused to find probable cause they were conspirators, stating Lemon was present as a journalist livestreaming events.
  • Despite this, DOJ returns to a grand jury & secures charges—undermining First Amendment protections.
  • Weissmann: "Just because you’re a journalist doesn't mean you can't also be a conspirator… but if you're there to cover what is happening, that is actually First Amendment protected activity." (47:25)
  • Indictment’s own language omits Lemon/Fort from any description of violent/obstructive conduct; they were not chanting or physically present in the described manner (see overt act 14, p. 8).
  • McCord: "It’s another one of these brushbacks. If you engage in protest, we will use the tools of law enforcement against you… We see it over and over and over again." (54:30)

7. Seizure of Fulton County Election Records: Foreshadowing Federal Takeover?

(54:26–60:13)

• Last week, a federal search warrant was executed on the Fulton County Georgia Clerk’s office for 2020 ballots and voting records, nominally investigating “election fraud” under statutes that appear inapplicable given the timeline and facts.
  • Trump’s DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard personally attended, citing “coordination of intelligence regarding election security.”
  • Weissmann: The lead-up is clear: “They are telegraphing ... that will be the predicate for what the president I think just yesterday called for, which is federalization of the state processes that are used to engage in elections." That’s a move previously attempted—and blocked—during Trump’s first term. (59:01)
  • McCord: “The Constitution says who’s responsible for elections, and it’s not the president. It is the states.” (60:02)
  • They flag the need for an entire episode on this looming constitutional crisis before the 2026 midterms.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "There's no sense of separation from the White House. This is, 'you have to support President Trump.' That is the world we're in." – Weissmann, 06:52
• "To think that you have to go out and essentially crowdsource to get people to apply is just dumbfounding to me. And it shows how much turmoil is in the department." – McCord, 08:38
• “You can’t just make an allegation… cite to something that doesn’t exist. And then when the judge says, okay, let me see it... you say, well, I don’t have it. Then it’s like case over.” – Weissmann, 16:08
• "There is no conceivable degree of institutional incompetence sufficient to explain the scale, consistency, and persistence of the failures that occurred." – Victims’ letter quoted by Weissmann, 22:40
• "This is one where, if you in the Department of Justice thought that this might be a close call, there are lots of other ways to deal with this other than just going ahead and charging him criminally because of the concern about the First Amendment." – Weissmann, 52:43
• "The Constitution says who's responsible for elections, and it's not the president, it is the states." – McCord, 60:02

Timestamps for Key Segments

• DOJ Partisan Hiring Posting & Department Exodus: 02:14–11:54
• Boasberg Complaint Filing and Dismissal: 11:56–18:28
• Epstein Files Redaction Disaster: 20:17–28:12
• ICE/DOJ Lawlessness in Minnesota: 28:42–41:25
• Judicial Integrity Amidst Outrage (MN Injunction Case): 37:04–43:11
• Attacks on Press Freedom – Don Lemon & Georgia Fort: 45:43–54:26
• Fulton County Election Search – Federal Overreach Foreshadowed: 54:26–60:13

Tone & Takeaways

Weissmann and McCord’s tone is grave yet urgent, using direct and precise legal language drawn from both professional experience and personal outrage. The episode is a warning: Legal norms are being brazenly upended, and fundamental constitutional guardrails—separation of powers, freedom of the press, impartial law enforcement, and state control of elections—are all under open, unprecedented threat.

Listeners are left with a sense that the traditional checks on executive power are being systematically worn away—and that the only remaining bulwark may be robust vigilance by the judiciary, the legal profession, journalists, and engaged citizens.

For More:

• Full court documents and the referenced NYT op-ed by former general counsels are available in the episode notes.
• Upcoming episodes will explore the federal takeover of elections in detail as the 2026 midterms approach.