Loyalty Kash Bonuses

Summary

UnJustified Ep. 74 – "Loyalty Kash Bonuses"

MSW Media — June 21, 2026
Hosts: Allison Gill & Andrew McCabe
Episode Theme/Overview:
This episode explores alarming new allegations of corruption and political interference in Trump’s DoJ, with a detailed look into FBI Director Kash Patel’s alleged misuse of taxpayer money to reward loyalists, ongoing threats to civil liberties (notably the possible suspension of habeas corpus and use of the Insurrection Act), and the prosecution of anti-ICE protesters. Allison Gill and Andy McCabe untangle the latest reporting, examine legal and ethical ramifications, and provide deeply informed, often incredulous commentary on the erosion of democratic norms.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Kash Patel’s Alleged FBI “Slush Fund” for Loyalists

[02:06–11:00]

• House Judiciary ranking Democrat Jamie Raskin’s letter to Patel alleges he used FBI budget as a personal slush fund, issuing over $1 million in “unlawful bonus payments” to loyalist MAGA agents, particularly those tasked with his personal protection and on his advisory team.
  • Quote (Alison Gill, 03:04):
    “We’ve been receiving troubling reports that you may be using part of the budget of the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a personal slush fund to make tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in unlawful bonus payments to loyalist MAGA henchmen who have engaged in misconduct.”
• Bonuses reportedly exceeded federal pay caps; agents got $8,000 every two weeks, some reaching $40,000 per agent in just five pay periods.
  • Andy McCabe [04:19]:
    “It is just bonkers crazy to anyone who's ever been in government.”
• Payments reportedly so large and frequent that some even bounced back from depleted accounts.
  • Alison Gill [05:13]: “The government's bouncing checks. Wow.”
• Bonuses may have been used as bribes/accountability control or hush money related to allegations of Patel's excessive drinking.
  • Alison Gill [06:26]: “Is it just a corrupt attempt to slide cash to friends, or to ensure the silence of agents who witness your inebriation and accompanying professional negligence and misconduct?”
• Hosts emphasize layers of oversight in federal pay—this could only happen with help from payroll clerks, suggesting internal whistleblowing likely exposed the scheme.
• McCabe notes federal law virtually guarantees a paper (or electronic) trail ("there's paperwork. There's gotta be paperwork for this").

2. Paranoia and Fallout Within the Bureau

[09:30–10:45]

• Andy McCabe:
  “Like, what a terrible position to put those agents in... If you don't take it, then what happens to you?”
• Alison suggests agents faced with corrupt payments should hold onto the money, then report to Congress, speculating that’s likely how the whistleblowing unfolded.

---

3. Patel’s Reckless Handling of a White House Threat Investigation

[10:45–16:44]

• Federal law enforcement quietly pursued suspects plotting an attack at a planned UFC event at the White House when Patel prematurely disclosed details online, jeopardizing the ongoing investigation.
  • Law enforcement officials say Patel’s leak “did a lot of damage” to both the operation and relations with the Secret Service.
  • Andy McCabe [13:26]:
    “This is, what, second, third time he said stupid things in the middle of investigations that have likely compromised operations... You can't fix dumb.”
• Secret Service Deputy Director Matt Quinn publicly rebuked Patel, including the admonition:
  • Quote (14:03):
    “Don’t choke on your own smoke.”
• The premature announcement possibly spooked further suspects and interfered with necessary interviews.
  • Alison Gill [16:18]:
    “...interfering with people actually interviewing these folks to find out if the threat was real and if the intent was there.”

---

4. Trump White House Plotted Suspension of Habeas Corpus and Insurrection Act

[18:38–24:51]

• Revelations from Haberman & Swan’s new book:
  Trump officials seriously considered suspending habeas corpus for undocumented immigrants—an extreme constitutional erosion, possibly in tandem with invoking the Insurrection Act to quell anti-deportation protests.
  • Lawyer Will Scharf’s confidential April 2025 memo warned Chief of Staff Susie Wiles about the legal boundaries and dangers.
  • Andy McCabe [20:25]:
    “Suspending habeas corpus is step two after the step one of invoking the Insurrection Act. Those two things go together.”
• J.D. Vance (then in administration) pushed to invoke the Insurrection Act after federal agents fatally shot protester Alex Preddy.
  • Public outrage, not legal caution, forced the White House to change course.
  • Andy McCabe [24:51]:
    “They... see [violating the law or Constitution] as opportunities to push the boundaries... The only thing that seems to bend them... is political feedback.”

---

5. DOJ’s Dubious Crackdown on Minneapolis ICE Protesters ("Whipple 15")

[25:39–36:02]

• 15 protesters in Minneapolis charged with conspiracy to impede or injure ICE officers during Operation Metro Surge.
  • Charges include assault, stalking, destruction of property—Andy McCabe highlights scepticism about charging ordinary protest coordination as “organized, lawless behavior.”
  • Quote (Andy, 30:33):
    “Which seeks to disrupt the execution of—we want to shut down protests, is what [they’re really saying].”
• Judges have dismissed about half of the government’s cases against anti-ICE protesters ("99% gets a conviction, here it's half dismissed!").
  • Alison Gill [33:07]:
    "Half is nuts... It's usually 99%."
• Indictments conflate conspiracy with protected protest, but juries and defense attorneys are skeptical; Feds recently forced to pay legal fees after grand jury misconduct exposed in Chicago's "Broadview Six" protester case.

---

6. Voting Rights, Confirmation Leverage & FISA 702

[42:41–47:08]

• Trump leverages Jay Clayton’s DNI confirmation and the FISA 702 intelligence authorization as hostages for passing his voter suppression ("SAVE") act.
  • Alison Gill [44:32]:
    “He’s now tying it to FISA section 702. Like...anybody is going to be like, ‘Oh, no, we can’t get FISA section 702 reauthorized, even though it's good until March of 2027, unless we kill voting rights.’”
• Standoff described as "bizarre and bonkers," with even GOP leadership balking.

---

7. Carter Page’s Supreme Court Snub

[47:08–50:29]

• The Supreme Court declines to hear Carter Page’s lawsuit against James Comey, Andy McCabe, and others over the Russia investigation FISA warrants.
  • Andy McCabe [49:30]:
    “He’s lost at every level you can lose a civil case...every time I think this thing is gone, my...lawyer sends me an email out of the blue: ‘Well, he’s back again.’”

---

Memorable Quotes & Moments

• Alison Gill [06:26]:
  “That's specifically that rule is in place so that some supervisor or whatever can't just keep dumping money on their favorite child. Right. You have to kind of like spread it around and be, I don't know, objective.”

• Andy McCabe [13:15]:
  “Not great. We're bombing Iran again. That's not great.”

• Alison Gill [20:23]:
  “Can I tell you how many posts on social media I made...concerned about him suspending the writ of habeas corpus? ...People thought I was nuts. I'm like, I don't think so.”

• Alison Gill [32:41]:
  “That's why one of the jurors in the Broadview Six case was like, ‘I thought it was a crock of shit last week when you brought the case, and I think it's a crock of shit this week.’”

• Andy McCabe [50:18]:
  “But I do feel kind of like Carter Page is like the zombie litigant in my life, just never kind of goes away.”

---

Notable Listener Q&A

[50:40–59:18]

• On Standing to Sue Over the White House UFC Event:
  Marion of Virginia asks about legal standing and who can sue to stop executive branch use of public property for private events. McCabe explains federal courts require concrete personal injury, not just taxpayer/citizen status; real remedies lie with congressional oversight, not litigation.

  • [54:43] Alison Gill: “Unless you’re a UFC fighter who doesn’t want to get paid in crypto or someone physically hurt setting up the claw...Otherwise, you’re basically out of legal options.”

• On Haberman’s White House Sources:
  The hosts speculate that Susie Wiles and Dan Bongino are prime sources of insider quotes in recent reporting, since Trumpworld officials still routinely leak on each other (“just a big bag of rats”).

---

Tone & Key Takeaways

Gill and McCabe’s style is sharp, incredulous, and deeply knowledgeable about federal bureaucracy and the law. They highlight how unorthodox, often corrupt or reckless actions by appointees are breaking institutional norms faster than they can be held accountable, with alarm at the fact that only public outrage—not legal guardrails—is restraining further erosion of democratic safeguards. Their skepticism of official narratives, especially in protest prosecutions and Trump’s legislative maneuvers, is grounded in hard-won experience.

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Kash Patel Bonus Allegations: 01:19–11:00
• Patel’s Threat Investigation Leak: 10:45–16:44
• Trump Admin & Habeas/Insurrection Act: 18:38–24:51
• DOJ & ICE Protest Prosecutions: 25:39–36:02
• FISA 702/Save Act Drama: 42:41–47:08
• Carter Page Supreme Court Loss: 47:08–50:29
• Listener Q&A (UFC Event Standing): 50:40–55:42
• White House Source Speculation: 56:33–59:18

---

Conclusion

With grim humor, righteous outrage, and hard-earned expertise, UnJustified’s “Loyalty Kash Bonuses” episode is a must-listen for anyone concerned about institutional collapse, civil liberties, and the pathologies of power—a quick primer on how unchecked political leadership co-opts or bulldozes legal norms, federal agencies, and public accountability, all in the name of personal and political loyalty.

Transcript

[Martin Sheen]

Hello, Martin Sheen here. And it seems to me that no day of the week is without its endless barrage of bad news. Even on Sunday. For God's sake, let's change that. What do you say? Together, let's make Sunday immune to bad news. Available now every Sunday, Season three of the Martin Sheen Podcast with yours truly, Martin Sheen has begun. Yeah, 10 brand new episodes are already underway. So join me, Martin sheen, for a 20 minute journey as I share my personal stories, a bit of poetry, and insightful reflections that will encourage you to take a deep breath and enjoy a relaxing moment. Of course, it's important to know and understand what's happening in the world. But I also believe there's nothing wrong with taking a step back to find strength and clarity. And Lord knows we need that now more than ever. A moment of thoughtfulness and calm may be rare these days, but it doesn't have to be. So what do you say? You want to take back your Sundays? So do I. And guess what? I've already done it with the Martin Sheen Podcast, Season three. Available now. Don't mess with my Sunday. And thank you for listening.

[Alison Gill]

MSW Media

[Andy McCabe]

FBI Director Cash Patel may be operating a secret slush fund of taxpayer dollars to pay loyalist agents.

[Alison Gill]

Trump is urging Republicans to postpone Jay Clayton's confirmation hear as leverage to pass his voter suppression bill.

[Andy McCabe]

The Trump administration wades suspending habeas corpus and invoking the Insurrection act after being frustrated by the courts.

[Alison Gill]

And 15 protesters in Minnesota have been charged with conspiracy to impede ICE officers during Operation Metro surge. This is unjustified. Hey, everybody. Welcome to episode 74 of Unjustified. It's Sunday, June 21st, 2026. I'm Alison Gill.

[Andy McCabe]

And I'm Andy McCabe. And I would love to say we're here in a like, slow going, easy peasy week, but we are not. It's. We're drinking from the fire hose. Once again, more news than we can cover in an hour's time, but we're going to do our best. So let's kick it off with this reporting from Ms. Now. FBI Director Kash Patel may have authorized taxpayer funded special payments to his inner circle of FBI executives and agents on his protective detail. According to the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

[Alison Gill]

This blows my mind because pay scales in the government are just not something you can mess with. And the fact that his protective detail, is he trying to hope that they don't leak about. Is it a bribe?

[Andy McCabe]

Like, I mean, of course it is.

[Alison Gill]

Come on.

[Andy McCabe]

Oh, yeah. Okay, let's get through the. And we'll save our. Our comments for the report, our wonderment

[Alison Gill]

for the end quote. We've been receiving troubling reports that you may be using part of the budget of the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a personal slush fund to make tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in unlawful bonus payments to loyalist MAGA henchmen who have engaged in misconduct. That's what a letter from Rep. Jamie Raskin, Democrat from Maryland, says to Kash Patel obtained exclusively by Ms. NOW Committee. Democrats have inform. Have information that Patel has issued more than $1 million in awards.

[Andy McCabe]

Oh, my God.

[Alison Gill]

The letter says the money went to special agents serving on his director's advisory team, which Raskin's letter describes as a curated group of agents who are willing to carry out your unlawful partisan and personal orders. It also went to agents on Patel's security detail, circumventing the mandatory maximum pay caps established by statute. Can you imagine if Merrick Garland was like, hey, everybody, tell me if you're a Democrat or not. And then if you. If you are, I'm going to put you around in my special team and pay you millions of dollars in bonuses to go after the Trump administration. Can you imagine?

[Andy McCabe]

On the spot awards for every Democrat.

[Alison Gill]

There's like six. There's like six Democrats.

[Andy McCabe]

It is just bonkers crazy to anyone who's ever been in government. But okay, here we go. The reporting continues. By issuing these side payments, your office may be knowingly breaking federal law. The letter says in some cases, nearly $8,000 payments have been made to multiple individuals every two week pay period, despite many of the beneficiaries of your selective generosity already maxing out on a employee's salary. Now, the letter says it's unclear exactly how much each of the agents has received, but, quote, we can confirm that numerous Loyalist employees have received at least five such payments in consecutive pay periods, amounting to nearly $40,000 per agent. We can al. We can also confirm you have depleted this reserve at such a frenzied rate that some of the payments have bounced back from exhausted accounts.

[Alison Gill]

The government's bounce in checks. Wow.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah.

[Alison Gill]

I used to get an annual performance evaluation review bonus. It was like $1,500 $2,000. And I was a GS14. I wasn't SES, but that's up there.

[Andy McCabe]

Neither are these people. The guys on the detail are GS14s, maybe 115. And you know, on the spot awards. Right. That was the big deal. If you did something like amazing in your job, you came in and worked by yourself. Throughout a holiday weekend, 20 hours a day to get a FISA up or something like that, you got an on the spot award, which is like, you know, 1500 bucks or something.

[Alison Gill]

I got 2000 of them in my 10 year career for about 1500, maybe $2000. One for revamping an entire call center and one for like setting up a medical support assistant university, like that kind of stuff. Right.

[Andy McCabe]

It's for some big achievement. And also, once you get one, you're. You're then ineligible to get another one for some period of time. That's specifically that rule is in place so that some supervisor or whatever can't just keep dumping money on their favorite child. Right. You have to kind of like spread it around and be, I don't know, objective.

[Alison Gill]

And eight grand paycheck for five pay periods at least. All right. Yeah. Quote, it's not clear whether these bonus payments have simply been a corrupt attempt to slide cash to friends or whether they're also meant to ensure the silence of the agents who witness your inebriation and accompanying professional negligence and misconduct. That's Raskin's letter. Raskin appeared to be referring to recent reporting by Sarah Fitzpatrick at the Atlantic alleging that members of Patel's detail have been troubled by his allegedly excessive drinking. Remember, he polygraphed everybody too Y. Patel has disputed the story and sued the magazine, which stands by its reporting. Quote, either way, these freelance awards appear to constitute gross mismanagement of public funds and an abuse of authority by the director's office. I want to know, did somebody in payroll. Did somebody, like somebody told Jamie Raskin somebody blew this whistle and it wasn't the guy getting 40 grand?

[Andy McCabe]

Look, or maybe, you know, you can't do anything in government by yourself. Everything you do, I don't care where you are on the totem pole, top, middle, or bottom, whatever you do takes other people. Like the bureaucracy is big and complicated and all that stuff. So things like this happen. There's no way you're keeping this quiet. It's coming out and here it is. Here it is.

[Amanda Sturgill]

Right?

[Alison Gill]

Because you have people who enter the pay codes. You have timekeepers. You have all of that. Yeah.

[Andy McCabe]

Oh, there's paperwork. There's gotta be paperwork for this. I mean, not actual paper anymore, but you know what I'm saying.

[Alison Gill]

Then there's defas, which is a completely separate entity that does all the paperwork, pay processing. It could be a clerk there, like a GS5 going, WTF, bro? You know, just, dude, like, if you

[Andy McCabe]

thought you were going to keep this quiet, just Shows how little you know about government. Okay, so the FBI did not respond to a request for comment by Ms. Now. Shocking.

[Alison Gill]

Wow.

[Andy McCabe]

Raskin's letter asks the FBI to produce documents related to the payments. The minority Democrats have no authority to compel such production, but they would gain it next year if they retake the House in the fall, as some political forecasters have predicted.

[Alison Gill]

Yeah, they could gain the power, but that doesn't mean that the DoD is going to hand over the stuff. They can always find ways to, to slow walk that. But they can certainly have hearings and bring in the whistleblowers.

[Andy McCabe]

Hey, as as happens with every conflict, right, like let's say they take, let's say they take the House, let's say they serve subpoenas or request whatever, and DOJ stonewalls them. You got to pass a budget. The end of the day doj, you got to go to them and say, please, may I have this much money, same as last year, plus this much more. And unless you want to get that carved back to bare bones, you're going to have to turn some things over. That's how this works in a, in a normal functioning, Normal functioning administration. Yeah. And the other thing, I thought about

[Alison Gill]

this when I, when I read this story, I was like, Andy's going to, this is going to blow his mind.

[Andy McCabe]

Losing my mind. Losing my mind. Like, let's say you're just some agent, you're like a GS13 or something on the detail, and all of a sudden this starts happening, or you're offered it or your team, the team that you're on, like whichever team you're on is getting this. Like, what a terrible position to put those agents in. There gotta be people. If this is happening in the way that it's being reported. This is an allegation at this point, but man, there are people on those teams that are just like, they know this is wrong. But if you don't take it, then what happens to you?

[Martin Sheen]

Right.

[Alison Gill]

If you don't take his personalized bottle of bourbon.

[Andy McCabe]

Exactly, exactly. It just sows such paranoia and fear and instability at just another level. Now listen, you can't take it. If you think it's a corrupt payment, you cannot take it. But if you don't take it, you're not going to be in that job for very long.

[Alison Gill]

Well, if it were me, and I couldn't afford to lose my job, I'd be holding all that in an account, taking it under, you know, if it were put upon me, and then I would go and I would Talk to Congress.

[Andy McCabe]

Go to Congress.

[Alison Gill]

And that might be what happened here.

[Andy McCabe]

Whistleblow, Blow the whistle? Well, we'll see.

[Alison Gill]

We don't know. But great reporting from Ms. Now on that Jamie Raskin letter. And here's more FBI news from NBC. Over several days, federal law enforcement quietly made arrests in a alleged foiled plot to attack the ufc. Fights at the White House. I don't know. I have. I have questions every time there's a foiled plot that advances the ballroom agenda. But anyway, they were keeping a lid on the details because the investigation was still ongoing, according to two law enforcement officials with knowledge. But then Kash Patel posted details of the arrest online Tuesday, claiming the FBI credit for the investigation with a nod to law enforcement partners. That helped.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, of course he did, because that's. He's that guy. So it took some federal law enforcement officials by surprise, in part because authorities were, of course, still working to take suspects into custody in the sprawling investigation into more than two dozen people on an encrypted chat. According to three law enforcement officials, some of the suspects in the alleged plot spoke of flying drones laden with explosives onto the South Lawn and then shooting at fleeing attendees. According to law enforcement, the Ultimate Fighting Championship event was in honor of America's 250th anniversary and President Donald Trump's 80th

[Alison Gill]

birthday, especially given that 250th anniversary isn't until the Fourth of July. But I digress.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah.

[Alison Gill]

Now, law enforcement officials worried that news of the arrest would spook the suspects, the officials said, who probably did nothing wrong. But anyway, we don't know yet. This is all an allegation. But on Monday, federal prosecutors had asked a judge to seal the case. One law enforcement official was shocked by the public disclosure and worried it could hinder the ongoing probe. The official said Patel did a lot of damage, quote, unquote, by treating the work of law enforcement partners as an afterthought in the investigation. The second official said there was frustration among career FBI agents who were working on the case because interviews were still being conducted after his public announcement. Interviews were still being conducted, Quote, there were still people being rounded up on a sealed federal case. That's what they said of Patel's announcement. It's not great. Someone else said, it's not great.

[Andy McCabe]

I'm gonna use that for every. I'm gonna get so much mileage out of that.

[Alison Gill]

I'm just. Perfect encapsulation of somebody who works in the government. Well, it's not great.

[Andy McCabe]

Not great. We're bombing Iran Again, that's not great. Yeah, it's not great. Well, look, you can't fix dumb.

[Alison Gill]

No.

[Andy McCabe]

Right? I mean, this is, what, second, third time he said stupid things in the middle of investigations that have likely compromised operations. And in this case, even beyond just the operational impact, he's trashing his reputation with the Secret Service, which is a partner that he has to work closely with, particularly here in D.C. it is not an easy relationship. It never has been. Both sides are constantly always looking over their shoulders. We're all. We're both ready to kind of take offense to any minor thing. And this is not a minor thing. But anyway, the U.S. secret Service, which investigates threats to the President, made its frustrations known. Quote, I'll tell you, the Secret Service led that investigation from the beginning. I'll tell you that it's ongoing. Secret Service Deputy Director Matt Quinn said at an unrelated news conference when asked about the Post, Quote, in order to maintain the integrity of the investigation and the security of the plan, we chose not to leak it. Quinn also recalled a phrase he learned early in his career when he was in the Secret Service's New York field office. Quote, don't choke on your own smoke. That's a weird thing to say. No, that's. That's my first round with that one. But I can understand his frustration. This is just a massive faux pas, and they had five people in custody when he went out and made his post, and there are supposedly, like eight more people out there they're trying to round up. Just a moronic thing to do. Yeah. Unbelievable. Well, no, it's totally believable because he's done it a couple of times before, but here we go.

[Alison Gill]

You know? Yes. All assuming that this was a legit plot to hurt people that day. And we don't know too much about it yet, but, yeah, that doesn't really have any impact on whether or not the director should come out and tweet about an investigation. 100% legit invest seashell investigation or not.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Alison Gill]

I haven't even interviewed the octopus yet. And here you are tweeting about the Seashell problem.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, I don't know this thing. We don't really know that much. We know from the indictment what these guys were saying to each other, whether they had the, you know, look, you always evaluate these things against two factors, intent and capability. That's how we look at it in the counterterrorism world. These guys clearly had bad intent. There's all kinds of statements testing to that, so they score high there. But on the capability side, could they actually have done some of the things that they were talking about? It seems highly unlikely. Now, that doesn't mean they're not dangerous and shouldn't have been arrested, but.

[Alison Gill]

Yeah, it doesn't mean it shouldn't have been investigated, but.

[Andy McCabe]

But to go out there with this employee and make it seem like there were snipers nests around the UFC event is. It's just overselling it a bit. But anyway.

[Alison Gill]

Yeah. And also interfering with people actually interviewing these folks to find out if the threat was real and if the intent was there.

[Andy McCabe]

Exactly.

[Alison Gill]

Or did you stumble upon a discord full of 12 year olds? You know, like what?

[Andy McCabe]

I mean, the ringleader is 19.

[Martin Sheen]

No.

[Andy McCabe]

I mean, you know, anyway, I'm not saying that a 19 year old can't do. Do some damage, but there's investigation that needs to be done here to figure that out and exactly. The director step right in the middle of it again.

[Alison Gill]

Yeah, that's the whole point. All right, everybody, we have to take a quick break, but our next story comes from that. You know, last week we had talked about some reporting from Haberman and Swan about what happened in the Situation Room regarding the Epstein files. We've got more of that, but we have to take a quick break. Stick around. We'll be right back. Hi, I'm Frances Collier. And I'm Angela V. Shelton. And we're Frangela. You know what you need in your life? The Final Word podcast. Yes, you do. That's right. It is the final word on all things political and pop cultural, where we make real news, real funny, where we inspire you so you can resist. Subscribe and get a new episode of the Final Word podcast each week. It's the news we think you need to hear. That's right. We think you need to hear it.

[Martin Sheen]

Okay.

[Alison Gill]

Yeah. It's what we say, so. That's right. And because all we do is give. Every Thursday, you can listen to our hysterical podcast, Idiot of the Week. We round up the stupid. Because you know what? Somebody has to. Okay. All we do is give

[Amanda Sturgill]

foreign.

[Alison Gill]

Everybody, welcome back. As I said, our next story comes from reporting folks are getting from Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan's new book called Regime Change. Last week, like I said, we brought you their reporting on the Situation Room. Epstein files cover up plans for Donald Trump. And this week, we have inside info from them on Trump weighing some very dangerous actions. Last spring, a guy named Will Scharf, who's an arch conservative lawyer serving as the White House staff secretary, wrote a secret memo to Susie Wiles, Chief of staff. That reflected growing unease in the West Wing about one of the extreme measures being weighed by Stephen Miller, the powerful advisor driving President Trump's deportation campaign.

[Martin Sheen]

Alison.

[Andy McCabe]

He went to paper.

[Alison Gill]

Oh my gosh, he went to paper. He went to paper.

[Andy McCabe]

We went to paper. Okay. Dated April 29, 2025 and stamped confidential, the memo was careful and lawyerly, but amounted to a warning against the end running of the rule of law. The subject line read, the writ of habeas corpus. Now, habeas corpus is a centuries old right to force the government to justify before a judge why it has locked a person up and it's enshrined in Article 1 of the Constitution. Mr. Scharf's memo, in its unassuming way, was a blinking red warning light. The second Trump White House was deliberating an explosive new claim of presidential power, the suspension of habeas rights for unauthorized immigrants.

[Alison Gill]

Can I tell you how many posts on social media I made after the election but before Trump's inauguration, in his second term, concerned about him suspending the writ of habeas corpus?

[Andy McCabe]

Of course you did.

[Alison Gill]

People thought I was nuts. I'm like, I don't think so. I don't think so. I'm really scared. Anyway. The man who outlined his concerns in the memo, Scharf is no reservist resistance figure. He's a trim, balding, Harvard trained lawyer who had run for office in Missouri. He had bemoaned John McCain as too moderate for the 2008 Republican nomination and believed Trump had been vindictively prosecuted after his 2020 election loss. He had helped develop the Trump team's legal arguments behind the successful effort to get the Mar? A Lago classified documents indictment thrown out, as well as the arguments behind the presidential immunity case that prevailed at the Supreme Court. That's this guy. This guy is like, this isn't good.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah.

[Alison Gill]

So it's not great.

[Andy McCabe]

No, it's not great. Show title. I'm just suggesting.

[Alison Gill]

Yeah.

[Andy McCabe]

Oh, no, that's a little self defeating, I guess from your show title is

[Alison Gill]

listen to our show.

[Andy McCabe]

It's not great. Oh, geez. Okay. The Constitution, Mr. Scharf wrote in his memo to Susie Wiles, the White House Chief of Staff, permits the suspension of habeas corpus only in cases of rebellion or invasion. Courts have almost uniformly held that only Congress can do it. Suspending habeas corpus was one of two radical ideas Mr. Miller had been pushing that alarmed Mr. Scharf. The other was invoking the Insurrection act to deploy the military to enforce the law on American streets as protests grew against deportation sweeps. And I have to say, suspending habeas corpus is step two after the step one of invoking the Insurrection Act. Those two things go together. Okay. You don't get one without the other. You get the Insurrection Act. Next thing it loses habeas corpus.

[Alison Gill]

And they started using all this language like when they were saying, oh, Minneapolis police aren't helping us enough, that their we need the National Guard. Therefore, you know, that seems like Insurrection act language. And a lot of my concern was coming from they're going to say rebellion or invasion is that we're being invaded by immigrants and there's a rebellion by antifa, and that they were going to use those terms to try to legally set up the right to suspend habeas corpus. Anyway. Yeah. Mr. Scharf wrote confidential memos to Wiles on both topics. Insurrection act and habeas corpus, setting out in a low key way why taking either step would shatter historical norms and likely precipitate hazardous legal and constitutional battles. In the case of the Insurrection Act, J.D. vance pushed to invoke it just days after federal agents murdered Alex Preddy. Allegedly. They definitely shot Alex Preddy, let's put it that way. So I get the legal language right. That's a Minnesota critical care nurse from the VA who was protesting the immigration policy policies.

[Andy McCabe]

A few days after the Preddy killing, and even as the administration was moving to de escalate the situation, Mr. Vance walked into Ms. Wild's West Wing office. Mr. Vance got to the point they needed to invoke the Insurrection act swiftly to crush the unrest in Minnesota. It would be painful in the short term, he said, but the message it would send would make sure no one tried it again.

[Alison Gill]

My God. I have to wonder if what stopped them was something that you had mentioned before, that the courts have almost always unanimously said that only Congress can do this. Right?

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Alison Gill]

And I guess they opted for, instead of J.D. vance's invoke the Insurrection act super aggressive thing, they said let's actually get rid of Bovino and send in kava bag of cash. Tom Homan.

[Amanda Sturgill]

Yep.

[Alison Gill]

So I think they went the other way. And I think a lot of it had to do with the fact that, you know, we. There was such a loud public outcry against what was going on in Minneapolis.

[Andy McCabe]

Totally. Look, there's many examples of this. This administration is not deterred by the prospect of violating the law or the Constitution. They see those as opportunities to push the boundaries, to reset. You know, the limits of presidential power in their own favor. Of course, the only thing that seems to bend them off the arc of their own, their own positions is political feedback. They, they, they tossed Bovino and went to Kavaman because they were getting their asses handed to them on TV every night. People were outraged by the killings of innocent citizens, innocent civilians who are simply trying to, you know, drop their kids off at school or maybe even voice their protest and their disagreement with the way the administration was running the immigration raids. That's why they turn around. Not because somebody said Scharf, said, hey, it might be violating the Constitution. They, they really don't care about that.

[Alison Gill]

No. But that second amendment stuff, the first amendment stuff they don't care too much about. But the second amendment stuff. When they were like, shouldn't had a gun at a protest, shouldn't have been carrying a gun. And everyone's like, wait, what, What?

[Amanda Sturgill]

What?

[Alison Gill]

What did you just say? The needle came off the record. Let me tell you how I got here. It's not great, as they say. But you know what? They haven't really stopped, though, because they just arrested.

[Andy McCabe]

Yes.

[Alison Gill]

And charged 15 protesters. Consider peaceful protesters in Minneapolis. Minneapolis, Operation Metro Surge. And we're going to talk about that story and we're going to follow it closely as the weeks go on. But we have to take another quick break, so stick around. We'll be right back.

[Martin Sheen]

Hello, Martin Sheen here. And it seems to me that no day of the week is without its endless barrage of bad news. Even on Sunday. For God's sake, let's change that. What do you say? Together, let's make Sunday immune to bad news. Available now every Sunday, season three of the Martin Sheen Podcast with yours truly, Martin Sheen has begun. Yeah, 10 brand new episodes are already underway. So join me, Martin sheen, for a 20 minute journey as I share my personal stories, a bit of poetry, and insightful reflections that will encourage you to take a deep breath and enjoy a relaxing moment. Of course, it's important to know and understand what's happening in the world, but I also believe there's nothing wrong with taking a step back to find strength and clarity. And Lord knows we need that now more than ever. A moment of thoughtfulness and calm may be rare these days, but it doesn't have to be. So what do you say? You want to take back your Sundays? So do I. And guess what? I've already done it with the Martin Sheen Podcast, season three, available now. Don't mess with my Sunday. And thank you for listening.

[Andy McCabe]

Welcome back. Okay, we have another DOJ case that will likely face a few legal challenges. This reporting comes from the Times. Federal prosecutors on Tuesday unsealed conspiracy, assault and other charges against 15 people accused of violently impeding immigration enforcement officers in Minneapolis who during an immigration crackdown this year. Daniel N. Rosen, Minnesota's top federal prosecutor, said the defendants were members of two Minneapolis based groups connected with Antifa, a far left movement. Of course he did. Twelve defendants were arrested on Tuesday. Mr. Rosen said one was already in custody for other charges and two remained at large. Antifa, named for its anti fascist alignment, is not an organization with a leader, but rather a diffuse and sometimes violent protest culture of activists who oppose the far right.

[Alison Gill]

Sometimes. Okay, okay. All right. New York Times. Sure, it doesn't exist, but it kind of does. No, it, it doesn't. It doesn't exist. Was there a name for the anti war protesters in. During Vietnam, like Antifa? Was there some sort of. Because I know that, that they had concentrated when they wanted to go after George Floyd protesters. They just said, it's blm, it's Black Lives Matter. Now it's Antifa. Anybody protest this, this regime?

[Andy McCabe]

I mean, yeah, they were, they were called young people.

[Martin Sheen]

Yeah.

[Alison Gill]

Oh, the youth, the youth of America.

[Andy McCabe]

And yeah, it was different. Right. It was a different time. Now we have this massive national security structure that we kind of developed after 9 11. And look, I'm a part of that, so I'm not trying to like tear down the whole, the whole process. But you. We have an administration that, that needs to use the terms and the like, the lexicon and stuff of the terrorism fight. They have to paint everyone they don't like as a terrorist to justify taking these extra steps. The surveillance, the, you know, shots at the Insurrection act, which thankfully hasn't happened yet, but we've gotten pretty close in places like Chicago and la. So. Yeah. So now everything has to have a name. And you immediately allege that it's some sort of, you know, international terrorist organization. Trende Aragua. Like who'd heard of that before this administration?

[Alison Gill]

Yeah.

[Andy McCabe]

Been working criminal gangs, international criminal gangs, my entire life in the FBI.

[Alison Gill]

Never heard of it.

[Andy McCabe]

I'm not saying they don't exist, but like.

[Martin Sheen]

No.

[Alison Gill]

Right. But anyone who's, who has a tattoo is part of it, so.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, exactly.

[Alison Gill]

Even if it's an autism awareness ribbon tattoo. Clearly a member of Trend Naragua. The story continues here. The defendants were charged with conspiracy to impede or injure a federal officer. Same felony charge they tried and failed to bring against abroad v6 by the way in Chicago. Also, solicitation to commit a crime of violence, interstate stalking, assault on a federal officer, and destruction of government property. Wow. Quote today, like inner stalking. I can't get stalking charges against actual stalkers. And they're saying that because they. People who were ICE and wore big things that said ICE and they were kind of blowing whistles at them. That's stalking them. Okay. Today's charges and arrests reflect a broad federal effort to address organized lawless behavior which seeks to disrupt the execution of. We want to shut down protests. Is what.

[Andy McCabe]

Is what 100%.

[Alison Gill]

Which seeks to disrupt the execution of federal law, endanger law enforcement. Oh. Like on January 6th. And importantly, endanger the very communities that these defendants falsely claim to be protecting immigrants. That's what Mr. Rosen said in a news briefing that was annotated by me.

[Andy McCabe]

The 94 page indictment was filed at a fraught moment for Minnesota federal prosecutors who have had trouble sustaining many criminal cases they've lodged against protesters demonstrating against Immigration and Customs Enforcement since the Trump administration began its crackdown in the state late last year. The indictment links those accused of being conspirators with a broader group engaged in apparently lawful protests and tries to draw a line between criminal and protected behaviors. Good luck with that in front of a judge.

[Alison Gill]

The problem is, is if you're going to say they're co conspirators, then they're all guilty of the worst person's crime. Crime in. In federal law. That's. That's how it worked. That's how the Broadview Six case, one of the reasons, besides the absolutely insane misconduct in the grand jury room, one of the reasons the charges would have otherwise fallen apart in the Broadview Six case.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, I mean this. I've read this sentence many times now. I still don't understand. The indictment links those accused of being conspirators with a broader group engaged in apparently lawful protests. So how does that advance your criminal case? And tries to draw.

[Alison Gill]

Because they want to be able to say antifa as a whole. Like, they tried to do this with the pipeline protesters. They tried to link them with all people who protest pipelines everywhere so that they could call them a terrorist group and go out.

[Andy McCabe]

I totally get that. But has zero jury appeal because the jury's like, well, wait a minute. If they're just like these people over here and these people over here are actually not doing anything illegal, then the first people you indicted apparently aren't doing anything illegal either.

[Alison Gill]

That's why one of the jurors in the Broadview Six case was like. I thought it was a crock of shit last week when you brought the case, and I think it's a crock of shit this week.

[Andy McCabe]

Exactly, yeah. Defense lawyers say that about half of the 36 federal cases in Minnesota charging individual defendants with assaulting or interfering with federal agents assigned to the crackdown have already been dismissed.

[Amanda Sturgill]

Half.

[Andy McCabe]

50%. Judges have questioned the evidence underlying the accusations.

[Alison Gill]

Half is nuts. I don't know how I can explain this any more clearly, but it's usually 99%. 99 and a half percent. We were all shocked when Jeanine Pirro fell to 79%. This is half.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah. It's not a good number. It's not great.

[Alison Gill]

I'll bring all the. I don't care if I get a no true bill. I'll bring them all. Apparently, that's everywhere in this DOJ Now. At Tuesday's news conference, which was so embarrassing for them, but they don't feel shame, it was. In Minneapolis, reporters confronted Rosen with the struggles that his office has faced in prosecuting officer assault cases, and he sought to defend the new indictment. You watch how this case plays out, you watch how the evidence plays out, he said. Did you say that to the grand jurors?

[Andy McCabe]

We'll watch, we'll watch, we'll listen, and then we'll talk about her on the show. And probably not way a way that you will not like, but yes.

[Alison Gill]

The 15 defendants were accused of using debris, vehicles, and other objects to obstruct roads used by federal law enforcement and of wielding homemade shields to resist officers on foot. Not homemade shields.

[Andy McCabe]

Just like the garbage can lid. Okay? Ms. Morgan, a transgender woman who was addressed as Ms. Morgan in court, and Ms. Raycotts were all. Were also each charged with one count of assault on a federal officer. But Mr. Rosen declined to say during the news conference whether any officers had actually been injured. Mr. Wagner, who had been previously arrested on other charges, was also charged with solicitation to commit a crime of violence and interstate threats. Ms. Morgan and Mr. Sant were charged with interstate stalking, and Ms. Morgan was also charged with destruction of government property. So there's a whole garden variety of charges in this one. On Tuesday afternoon in St. Paul, the defendants appeared in groups before Judge John Docherty, a magistrate judge in the U.S. district Court for the District of Minnesota, who read the charges and asked if the defendants understood them.

[Alison Gill]

And Mr. Davis, a religious studies professor at McAlester College. I hope I'm saying that right. In St. Paul.

[Andy McCabe]

McAlester.

[Alison Gill]

McAllister. Ah, that's probably better. Yeah. McAlester College. McAlester. Okay. Allison in St. Paul told the judge, quote, I looked through the indictment at all the things that include my name, and I seem to be indicted for holding meetings. The indictment said that the defendants had often used information gleaned from group chats whose members tracked and monitored vehicles going to and from the Whipple Building, a hub of immigration agents. Those members who were not charged appear to be acting within the law. Prosecutors did not rule out the possibility of additional arrests, though.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, I mean, keeping track of vehicles going in and out of a facility, that is not impeding law enforcement. I don't care. I mean, maybe after that, they do something totally different, but that is not going to be enough.

[Alison Gill]

Well, you remember when they were, like, you would see a bunch of videos of people just filming ICE officers, and the ICE officers would go, US code 111. 111, baby. 111. Look it up. As though videotaping them was somehow impeding them.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, not even close. Okay. Many allegations in the indictment appear to have stemmed from a promise made in January at the height of the protests by Kash Patel, the FBI director, to investigate encrypted chats used by activists to monitor immigration raids. The move was immediately denounced by free speech groups, including the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, as unlawful and contrary, contrary to the constitutional protections afforded to political groups. Now, federal prosecutors around the country have faced extreme pressure from the Justice Department officials in Washington to crack down on ICE protesters. In January, for example, Akash Singh, a senior department official, spoke on a conference call with all of the country's 93 U.S. attorney's Offices and urged prosecutors to, quote, go big and go loud.

[Alison Gill]

Oh, wow. That was, by the way, the guy who works in Todd Blanche's office who denied, you know, you know, being part of making sure that Abrego Garcia was arrested on criminal charges.

[Andy McCabe]

He's king of the King of the Blanche Bros. Yeah, for sure.

[Alison Gill]

But the Justice Department has seen mixed results. That's a really nice way to put it in the New York Times. Last month, prosecutors dismissed all charges against four protesters accused of interfering. That's the Broadview Six. That went down to two of interfering with federal Agen ICE facility in Chicago after the judge in the case discovered an extraordinary series of grand jury violations. And I gotta say, if I'm in these. This 15, the St. Paul 15, or whatever, they're going to be named the Whipple 15. I am definitely pull that transcript trying to see their grand jury transcript.

[Andy McCabe]

100%.

[Alison Gill]

And Politico reports that the Justice Department is not going to actually just go back to the Broadview Six for a second. The GOJ is not going to fight a demand by them to, to get paid. According to defense attorneys and DOJ spokespeople like to have their, their legal fees paid. DOJ's not fighting it. The highly unusual move appears to be a gesture by the top federal prosecutor in Chicago, Andrew Boutros, to quell the controversy over as he's his handling of the Broadview Six. He's like, hey, remember when I totally broke all the grand jury rules here? If I just pay your legal bills, will talking about it please go away?

[Andy McCabe]

Boutros dropped all remaining charges in the case last month after acknowledging prosecutors engaged in grand jury misconduct, dismissing jurors who opposed charges and communicating with grand jurors outside of their official meetings. Boutros, a Trump appointee, later announced he was ordering, quote, sweeping internal reforms to the office's grand jury practices. Yeah, how about start with quit violating the rules.

[Alison Gill]

Reform the rules. They're already there. You just weren't following them.

[Andy McCabe]

You need to inform yourself. Yeah, maybe also second step might be train some people.

[Martin Sheen]

No.

[Andy McCabe]

Anyway, defense attorneys have been unsatisfied by those changes, with Several calling on U.S. district Court Judge April Perry to appoint a special counsel to investigate potential contempt of court by prosecutors and to order the government to pay the defendant's legal fees.

[Alison Gill]

That's I, I hope there is something like that. She has mentioned in, in a lot of the hearings, Rule 11 sanctions. She's mentioned issues with this. So I, I, I, I see something in the future of this and we'll keep an eye on it for you as well as I, I'll just, I'm just going to call him the Whipple 15 Rogers. While defendants who can afford it usually have to bear the cost of their own defense, regardless of who prevails at trial. A federal law passed in 97 allows judges to award legal fees to a defendant who face prosecution tactics that are vexatious, frivolous or in bad faith. And I think that qualifies at the Broadview 6. In a court filing late Wednesday, defense lawyers said prosecutors took a noteworthy and rare step earlier this month by disclosing they did not intend to oppose the defense request for fees. Yeah, that's probably the. Don't, we're not going to fight you on this. Please don't sanction us.

[Andy McCabe]

Let the sleeping dog lie.

[Alison Gill]

Let's not have a, we don't need a special prosecutor. We don't need Contempt stuff. We don't need any of that.

[Andy McCabe]

Everybody calm down. Calm down.

[Martin Sheen]

All right.

[Andy McCabe]

Okay.

[Alison Gill]

Here's your money. Sorry about what we did.

[Andy McCabe]

Sorry, sorry, sorry.

[Alison Gill]

It's not great.

[Andy McCabe]

It's definitely not great.

[Alison Gill]

There's an ongoing theme, probably actually to this whole administration and this entire show, but this episode specifically, we've got two more quick stories we need to cover and then maybe a listener question or two. But we have to take one more quick break, so everybody stick around. We'll be right back.

[Martin Sheen]

Hello, Martin Sheen here. And it seems to me that no day of the week is without its endless barrage of bad news, even on Sunday. For God's sake, let's change that. What do you say? Together, let's make Sunday immune to bad news. Available now every Sunday, season three of the Martin Sheen Podcast with yours truly, Martin Sheen has begun. Yeah. 10 brand new episodes are already underway. So join me, Martin sheen, for a 20 minute journey as I share my personal stories, a bit of poetry, and insightful reflections that will encourage you to take a deep breath and enjoy a relaxing moment. Of course, it's important to know and understand what's happening in the world, but I also believe there's nothing wrong with taking a step back to find strength and clarity. And Lord knows we need that now more than ever. A moment of thoughtfulness and calm may be rare these days, but it doesn't have to be. So what do you say? You want to take back your Sundays? So do I. And guess what? I've already done it with the Martin Sheen Podcast, season three, available now. Don't mess with my Sunday. And thank you for listening.

[Alison Gill]

All right, everybody, welcome back again. Like I said, two more quick stories before we take listener questions. This first one comes from npr. The Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said that the confirmation hearing for Jay Clayton to serve as Director of National Intelligence has been postponed after Trump called Republicans to hit pause on his nominee. The announcement from Senator Tom Cotton followed an overnight middle of the night post from President Trump, who said he's delaying the nomination and blocking the renewal of a surveillance tool at the center of the US Intelligence apparatus in order to pressure the Senate to advance long stalled voting bills and also advance another one of his nominees for a separate position. This is bizarre and bonkers, this series of events, Andy. Because at first he really wanted to pass FISA 702 and the Republicans, he had Johnson and everybody on the Hill. We got to pass it. We have to pass FISA 702 or our national security is going to crumble. You know, not putting Tulsi Gabbard in charge of it wouldn't do that. But this is the thing that's going to make it crumble. And the Democrats are like, not as long as you've nominated Bill Pulte to replace Tulsi Gabbard. And a lot of Republicans, too. They said, we're not going to advance. First of all, we want to reform 702 a little, but we're not going to advance it till you get Pulte out of the dni. He's the mortgage guy. He's wholly unqualified. And so, so Trump sort of caved and said, all right, I'll put Jay Clayton. I'll nominate Jay. Clayton also has no experience, but apparently the Republicans feel better about him than they did about Pulte. But now he's throwing the whole thing back on the Senate and saying, I'm not going to pass 702 or put in Clayton, Jay Clayton, until you pass the SAVE Act. Yeah.

[Andy McCabe]

And that's not going to happen.

[Alison Gill]

No, it's not.

[Andy McCabe]

It's not going to happen. He's. Yeah, I don't, I don't, I can't, I can't figure him out. But one possibility is he just finally got pissed at the idea that he'd knuckled under to the pressure from Republican senators. But who knows?

[Alison Gill]

Yeah. And for him to be like, we're all going to die if we don't pass fisa, and then to be like, I'm pulling it, pulling it.

[Andy McCabe]

Trump's attempt to derail the confirmation came as a surprise. Surprise, surprise. Social media post in the middle of the night, less than 12 hours before Clayton was scheduled to appear before his confirmation hearing. I'm sure it's quite a surprise to Mr. Clayton. Trump, who is currently at the G7 summit in France, issued his demands in a post just before 4am Eastern on truth Social. In the post, Trump said the plan to quickly approve Clayton was part of a deal with Democrats to derail his previous temporary pick, Bill Pulte, who has no intelligence experience and has been criticized as a political attack dog for the president. He went on to say he is demanding that reauthorization of the surveillance tool known as FISA section 702 must be tied to passage of the Save America act, the GOP voting bill that would require voters to show a document proving their U.S. citizenship, like a passport or a birth certificate when they register to vote. The legislation failed in the Senate earlier this month.

[Alison Gill]

He also tried to attach it to the budget reconciliation bill. And the parliamentarian was like, it's not great. So then he tried to pressure John Thune to fire the parliamentarian. And John Thune, when asked about whether he was going to fire the parliamentarian, said, no, just no. And so now he's just so desperate to, to pass this voter suppression bill that, you know, he, he's, he's now tying it to FISA section 702. Like, we're all good. Like, anybody is going to be like, oh, no, we can't get FISA section 702 reauthorized, even though it's good until March of 2027 unless we kill voter voting rights. Like, like people are going to fall for this.

[Martin Sheen]

Yeah.

[Alison Gill]

And I don't think John Thune is going to fire the parliamentarian either.

[Andy McCabe]

No, no.

[Alison Gill]

Anyway, anyway, that was a bizarre story. But then our second story is from the Times. The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a request from the former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and his hat to revive a lawsuit that he had filed against a former FBI director, James Comey and others. Do you know any of those others?

[Andy McCabe]

Yes, I know them all. One of them particularly well. One of them I know really well. Yeah.

[Amanda Sturgill]

Mr.

[Alison Gill]

Page was surveilled during the FBI's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election.

[Andy McCabe]

Mr. Page was never charged with a crime, full stop. Most people don't know that, but it's true. Was not. But he sued Mr. Comey and seven others, including yours truly, over botched court applications permitting surveillance of his phone calls and emails. Lower court Judges had dismissed Mr. Page's lawsuit challenging the surveillance by the FBI, saying he waited too long to file his claims. Actually, and I do have a little insider knowledge here, there was a lot more to it than just that. The failure was multi layered. It was a statutory failure. He tried to seek relief in a way that's explicitly not permitted by the FISA statute. There's all kinds of problems with this lawsuit, but timing was only one of them. He said public revelations of the surveillance he meaning Mr. Page had harmed his reputation and cut business opportunities. And he asked the Supreme Court to reconsider the issue.

[Alison Gill]

Did he? Was Rosenstein on there?

[Andy McCabe]

I don't remember him being on there.

[Alison Gill]

The guy who approved it, the Republican that worked for Bill Barr that approved that FISA application. Okay, yeah. In twice in April, the Trump administration separately agreed to pay a $1.25 million settlement to claims brought by Mr. Page. But that is not enough. No. Nope. The Justice Department back then issued a statement saying the inquiry into Page had relied on flawed and uncorroborated information, calling it a political sham. None of that is true. The FISO warrant would have been approved even if the Steele dossier weren't involved with it.

[Martin Sheen]

It.

[Alison Gill]

That action, however, did not end Mr. Page's attempts to sue former government officials. He got 1.25 million, but he still wanted to sue, an effort that concluded with Monday's action by the Supreme Court. The court's action was announced as part of the publication of a routine list of cases the justices have agreed to hear or decline to accept. The justices declined his and did not include an explanation. Well, that national nightmare is over.

[Andy McCabe]

Oh, my God. You know, I kind of don't even believe it because. Because he's lost at every level. You can lose a civil case. He, you know, filing motions for some rejudgment, denied, got his case dismissed, submitted for reconsideration, was given it, lost again, filed an appeal, lost there, submitted for an en banc hearing, lost again. I mean, like, every time I think this thing is gone, my wonderful and hard working and effective lawyer sends me an email out of the blue like, well, he's back again. He's filed. Now he wants to go to this Supreme Court.

[Alison Gill]

And he's not incarcerated. So he can't do what Ghislaine Maxwell did when the Supreme Court refused to hear her appeal and file a writ of habeas corpus. He can't. He's not incarcerated. There's no other way to keep this case alive. There just.

[Andy McCabe]

There shouldn't be. There shouldn't be. But I do feel kind of like Carter Page is like the zombie litigant in my life, just never kind of goes away.

[Alison Gill]

But think of something.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, we'll see.

[Alison Gill]

All right, well, we've got time for a listener question. And if you have a question, there's a link in the show notes you can click on and send it to us. What do we have this week, Andy?

[Andy McCabe]

All right, so we have. We have one question and one comment that we can cover as well.

[Alison Gill]

Just.

[Andy McCabe]

It'll be very quick at the end, but let's start with a question. It comes to us from Marion and Marian writes about the UFC cage match. A lot of interest in that this week. And she says, let's grant the people who brought the case against the UFC cage match on the south lawn had no standing standing, as the court declared. Who had standing to bring such a case. Let's say no one has. If the court says no one has clear standing in this matter. Does that mean that the American people have no say in what happens on publicly owned property for which we pay. We pay the President to live there and all his expenses? How is it possible he gets to act as if he owns it and has no standing and none of us have standing to argue against that claim? That's. That's a good question. So just to be clear, what we're talking about here is. Gus, just a couple days before last Sunday night's big UFC match on the White House lawn, two people from Virginia filed a law, a federal lawsuit to try to stop the event. And they argued a couple things in their case. They basically said that the structure, as it was erected on the White House grounds, was not authorized with congressional approval, which apparently is required for changes to the White House, although that seems to be happening all the time now in other ways. It doesn't get congressional approval either. So. And they also said that the use of the White House grounds to stage a private, for profit sports event with all the promotional and branding opportunities will financially benefit the UFC President Dana White and Trump himself, because Trump apparently owns stock in the UFC's parent company, company. So what the court said was, I'm sorry, none of that qualifies. You can't bring this suit because you don't have standing to sue. Now, to establish legal standing, particularly in US Federal court, there's like, basically a three part test. It comes from an old Supreme Court case. The plaintiff's got to show that they suffered an injury. In fact, now, this has to be a tangible, like concrete treat injury, it cost you money, maybe injured you physically, you know, maybe you lost a job over what happened, whatever. You also have to show a causal connection, which basically shows that the defendant's actions led directly to your injury. And finally, you have to show that the injury you're complaining of is redressible, meaning the courts can actually step in and kind of render an award that will compensate you for the injury you suffered. So in this case, they determined, I think they made the right call. These two plaintiffs weren't really personally affected in any way by what happened with the UFC match, and so they were thrown out. Now, the question of who could possibly have standing, that's a tough one, because here, the way you would remedy, like moving forward without required congressional authorization, which, if that's required here, I'm not even 100% sure that's something that Congress has to stand up and enforce. They have to come after the White House. They have to hold hearings, do oversight, you know, take money out of the next budget to kind of penalize them for it, what have you. There's a limited number of causes of action cases, laws basically that allow for plaintiffs who are not directly impacted by a federal government action to bring a lawsuit to basically enforce the law against the government. Very rare. And it has to be specifically granted by Congress when they pass the underlying law. The Voting Rights act had that essentially.

[Martin Sheen]

Right.

[Andy McCabe]

Used to, until it all got gutted. But here I don't know who could have stepped forward and said, said, hey, I'm a citizen. I'm filing a lawsuit to stop the ufc. I just felt it.

[Alison Gill]

Unless you're a, a competitive fighting thing and there was a no bid contract awarded, or maybe you are a UFC fighter who doesn't want to get paid for this in crypto or, you know, somebody directly involved in, you know, got physically hurt setting up the claw or whatever. Yeah. And they also kind of said, the judge in the case, I think it was Amit Mehta, seemed to say, like, also, what do you want me to do? The thing is built. If you want to go on, it's hurting the environment or the lawn or whatever. First of all, I'm not sure how you're personally harmed by that, but it's built. And that kind of goes toward this administration's ask forgiveness, not permission way. 100% of living where I'm just going to demolish the east wing. Had anybody known about that, there would be people who had stinks standing in order to, you know, ensure that that destruction didn't happen.

[Andy McCabe]

The commission that's required for these changes to national monuments, they could have filed a federal lawsuit to stop or put, you know, to impose an injunction or something like that. But he comes. Yeah, but you're right, they, this is, and this is what I was talking about earlier in the show. They don't care. They're going to run right past the, the law, the rule, the policy, certainly the norm. And their attitude is like, you try

[Alison Gill]

to catch me, it's too late. What are you going to do? That third prong of the Lujan factors, it has to be redressible.

[Martin Sheen]

Right.

[Alison Gill]

What would you like for us to do? Yeah, get back in a time machine. And yeah, it's, that's why, that's why they do the way they do. Move fast and break things. That's sure something a lot of.

[Amanda Sturgill]

Of.

[Andy McCabe]

All right, time for one quick comment.

[Alison Gill]

All right, great.

[Andy McCabe]

I want to hear what you think about this. So Reed in Texas says, hi, guys, I don't have a question But BO has to be Haberman. Source?

[Alison Gill]

I think it's Susie Wiles, and here's why. Remember the recording of Donald Trump in the classified documents case in Bedminster, New Jersey, waving around a classified document about that from General Milley about attack plans for Iran, and Susie Wiles is there in the room and there's a recording of that. That's why. And Susie Wiles has also, I think in the past more recently talked to reporters quite a bit about things that are going on in the White House. So, but they, again, they did a thousand interviews for this book and talked to dozens and dozens and dozens and dozens of people. But some folks are saying that the White House is concerned that there were actually audio tapes of these conversations because they got it right word for word. They're not arguing that these things didn't happen.

[Andy McCabe]

I agree with you. There are probably 50 sources for this book and I think Dan Pongino is probably one of them. When those quotes that we read last week over the fight about the Epstein files release and he's like, I don't have anything to do with this. You're not taking me down with this. That's the kind of thing that someone says about themselves. No one would have remembered that in that kind of detail. I, I, I don't know. I can't say for sure, but it would be my guess. It's my opinion that that was related by him. Now, you know, like I said, take it for what it's worth. That's just my opinion. But look, they talked to Trump. They quote Trump. They, they, the amazing thing about Maggie Haberman, Jonathan Swan and that whole team is that they get such incredible access to these people. They write repeated books about them that make them look awful and yet they still sit down and talk to them.

[Alison Gill]

Well, I'm sure Kash Patel will set up some polygraph tests and then start paying them $8,000 every pay period in bonuses to keep them quiet. But yeah, to imagine that, that, that a Trump White House, a Trump administration would not be leaky is, is a folly. These guys are always at each other's throats. They hate each other. That's how Boris Epstein found out about Corcoran and all of the BS with the classified documents subpoena, and they were just turning on each other, just a big bag of rats. So there you go.

[Andy McCabe]

There you go.

[Alison Gill]

A thousand interviews for that book.

[Martin Sheen]

Yeah.

[Alison Gill]

Anyway, great comments, great questions. Send them to us, link in the show notes. And we appreciate you listening. I think we got it done in under an hour this week.

[Andy McCabe]

We did. We did. We're doing it. Pulling it off.

[Alison Gill]

Incredible. Well, we appreciate you listening. If you'd like to become a patron and support our work, you can do [e-mail] Muller she wrote, not only do you get this show ad free and early on the premium feed, you also get the daily beans and beans talk and plus like cool mugs and, and shirts and stuff like that. So again, that's patreon.com mullisherote and speaking of that, or we're having a patron gala this weekend.

[Andy McCabe]

Yes, we are.

[Alison Gill]

I'm looking forward to seeing some of our patrons there. It's going to be a really fun time and we will then, I think next week have a patron zoom happy hour every month that we hop on and do Q and A with with our patrons as well. It's like five bucks a month for all that, so. And it really, really helps us out with our work. So if you can. Again, Patreon, but thanks for listening. It's always free anyway, so we appreciate you. Any last, final, Any last words? I almost said any last words.

[Andy McCabe]

No, just come back next week for another hour of madness because it's not great.

[Alison Gill]

Yeah, we had so much news, we couldn't even hit me in the head with a bat this week.

[Andy McCabe]

Yeah, we'll have a big one next week.

[Alison Gill]

We'll have a big bat next week. All right, everybody. It's not great. Thank you so much. We'll see you next week. I'm Alison. Goodbye, Gill.

[Andy McCabe]

I'm Andy McCabe.

[Alison Gill]

Unjustified is written and executive produced by Allison Gill with additional research and analysis by Andrew McCabe. Sound design and editing is by Molly Hockey with art and web design by Joelle Reader at Moxie Design Studios. The theme 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 MSW Media.

[Amanda Sturgill]

It's no surprise that newsmakers try to manipulate the audience. They want you to believe that they are the one holding the line. And they'll use any trick they can to get you there.

[Alison Gill]

But don't let them fool you.

[Amanda Sturgill]

Get unspun. I'm Amanda Sturgill. I've been a reporter and today I teach future reporters to cut the spin and think critically about what newsmakers set. My podcast, Unspun, shows you how to know when you're being manipulated by the news. Learn to spot the tricks and how to make up your own mind about what's true. So if you're tired of being fooled by the news, subscribe to Unspun today. Unspun. Because you deserve the truth.