MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on how Trump’s DOJ dismissal of the reflecting pool provides the articles of impeachment against Trump and ground for a massive defamation case against Fox.
My comments:
Pirro, Burgum, Demented Donnie, and FAUX News are in some serious $#!t of their own making with their BASELESS, vicious, continuously escalating lies, prejudicious attacks prior to the Grand Jury, likely tampering with the Grand Jury, making threats of prolonged imprisonment, false arrest, extreme defamation…
This needs to be prosecuted to the FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW and included in the growing list of CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS at tRUMP’s rapidly approaching impeachment!
This is not only a Document To Dismiss an indictment. It is actually an indictment of the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jenine Pirro.
tRump's DOJ is getting itself into hot water by losing credibility with judges all over the country. The legal phrase is DOJ is losing “the presumption of regularity.”
Federal Judges Chastise Trump’s Justice Department for “Unlawful,” “Unethical” and “Unseemly” ConductJuly 28, 2026
Across the country, federal judges are calling out Department of Justice lawyers, questioning in unprecedented ways whether they can be trusted to tell the truth or uphold centuries-old legal norms.
From Washington, D.C., to Rhode Island to Oregon, federal judges nominated by presidents from both parties, including Donald Trump, have zeroed in on what’s called “the presumption of regularity.” It essentially means that judges must presume that the government — whether it be federal prosecutors, an IRS auditor or an FBI agent — did their jobs according to the rules and in good faith.
... ProPublica reviewed hundreds of cases since Trump retook the White House in which judges criticized the actions of DOJ lawyers and found more than 40 in which they explicitly referenced the presumption of regularity. In many cases, judges have expressed frustration that they can no longer take the government at its word.
“Judges simply don’t believe the representations that are being made by United States attorneys, assistant United States attorneys and the like,” said John E. Jones, a former federal judge for the District of Pennsylvania, appointed by President George W. Bush.
“I don’t think in the annals of the Department of Justice, in the history of jurisprudence in the United States, we’ve ever seen anything close to this.”
