Trump / Musk (other than DOGE) Omnibus Thread

[nycfan]

Justice Dept.’s No. 2 Targets Old Office Where He Rose as a Prosecutor​

The forceful approach that Emil Bove III has taken toward the Southern District of New York underscores his own fraught relationship with the office that gave him the expertise to do so.

“… Interviews with more than two dozen former colleagues, current department officials and others, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal, reveal new details about Mr. Bove’s nine years at the Southern District, a turbulent period that defined his career and foreshadowed his current effort to bend the Justice Department to the Trump agenda.

Jessica A. Roth, a former Southern District prosecutor, said Mr. Bove’s bellicose approach to overriding the judgment of his former office appeared to be an effort to undermine its historical independence.

… Ellen Blain, a former assistant U.S. attorney who worked in the office during Mr. Bove’s tenure, said these actions represented a dangerous new paradigm, forcing career prosecutors “to use the power of the Justice Department to instill fear in the president’s enemies and bestow favors on his friends.”

[a Spox for DOJ called the interviews given to NYT “an unacceptable weaponization of the criminal justice system.” ] …”

 

[nycfan]

Justice Dept.’s No. 2 Targets Old Office Where He Rose as a Prosecutor​

The forceful approach that Emil Bove III has taken toward the Southern District of New York underscores his own fraught relationship with the office that gave him the expertise to do so.

“… Interviews with more than two dozen former colleagues, current department officials and others, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal, reveal new details about Mr. Bove’s nine years at the Southern District, a turbulent period that defined his career and foreshadowed his current effort to bend the Justice Department to the Trump agenda.

Jessica A. Roth, a former Southern District prosecutor, said Mr. Bove’s bellicose approach to overriding the judgment of his former office appeared to be an effort to undermine its historical independence.

… Ellen Blain, a former assistant U.S. attorney who worked in the office during Mr. Bove’s tenure, said these actions represented a dangerous new paradigm, forcing career prosecutors “to use the power of the Justice Department to instill fear in the president’s enemies and bestow favors on his friends.”

[a Spox for DOJ called the interviews given to NYT “an unacceptable weaponization of the criminal justice system.” ] …”

“… In 2016, during a corruption investigation into Mayor Bill de Blasio’s 2013 campaign fund-raising, an F.B.I. agent surprised Mr. Bove’s wife, a policy adviser to the mayor, with a request that she turn over records of her communications, according to people with knowledge of the situation.

(There was no allegation of wrongdoing by Mr. Bove’s wife, and Mr. de Blasio was never charged.)

Mr. Bove believed that approach, while not technically improper, was too aggressive and needlessly traumatized his family. He made it clear that he had only wanted a heads-up and would never have tipped off his wife beforehand.

His superiors countered by saying that alerting him could have potentially compromised a sensitive political investigation.

His reaction was instant and emotional. He briefly considered quitting, and was so upset that he took several days off to clear his head. That did not sit well with some of his colleagues who believed he had overreacted, those people said.

If his aggressiveness fueled his success inside the office, it also caused problems and Mr. Bove was advised to take steps to tone down his behavior.

By all accounts, he succeeded, working on a criminal case alongside Nicolas Roos and Danielle R. Sassoon, who this month resigned as interim U.S. attorney at the Southern District rather than sign off on Mr. Bove’s order to dismiss the Adams case. …”

 

[nycfan]

“… In 2016, during a corruption investigation into Mayor Bill de Blasio’s 2013 campaign fund-raising, an F.B.I. agent surprised Mr. Bove’s wife, a policy adviser to the mayor, with a request that she turn over records of her communications, according to people with knowledge of the situation.

(There was no allegation of wrongdoing by Mr. Bove’s wife, and Mr. de Blasio was never charged.)

Mr. Bove believed that approach, while not technically improper, was too aggressive and needlessly traumatized his family. He made it clear that he had only wanted a heads-up and would never have tipped off his wife beforehand.

His superiors countered by saying that alerting him could have potentially compromised a sensitive political investigation.

His reaction was instant and emotional. He briefly considered quitting, and was so upset that he took several days off to clear his head. That did not sit well with some of his colleagues who believed he had overreacted, those people said.

If his aggressiveness fueled his success inside the office, it also caused problems and Mr. Bove was advised to take steps to tone down his behavior.

By all accounts, he succeeded, working on a criminal case alongside Nicolas Roos and Danielle R. Sassoon, who this month resigned as interim U.S. attorney at the Southern District rather than sign off on Mr. Bove’s order to dismiss the Adams case. …”

“…
It was his supervision of another high-profile international prosecution that undermined his position in the office beyond repair — yet also paved his remarkable path to Mr. Trump and a far more commanding role in federal law enforcement.

In 2020, defense lawyers accused prosecutors working under Mr. Bove’s supervision of seeking to hide exculpatory evidence in a case against an Iranian banker, Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, who was convicted that March of seeking to evade U.S. sanctions on the Islamic Republic. That July, the judge vacated the conviction and dismissed the indictment after the government acknowledged that there were problems in the way evidence had been turned over to the defense.

In September, the judge issued an opinion excoriating the Southern District for its handling of the case and criticized the office’s leaders for failing to “unequivocally condemn these prosecutors’ improper actions and communications.” In one instance, a prosecutor had suggested to a colleague that they “bury” a document in the trove of records sent to the defense. …”

 

[nycfan]

“…
It was his supervision of another high-profile international prosecution that undermined his position in the office beyond repair — yet also paved his remarkable path to Mr. Trump and a far more commanding role in federal law enforcement.

In 2020, defense lawyers accused prosecutors working under Mr. Bove’s supervision of seeking to hide exculpatory evidence in a case against an Iranian banker, Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, who was convicted that March of seeking to evade U.S. sanctions on the Islamic Republic. That July, the judge vacated the conviction and dismissed the indictment after the government acknowledged that there were problems in the way evidence had been turned over to the defense.

In September, the judge issued an opinion excoriating the Southern District for its handling of the case and criticized the office’s leaders for failing to “unequivocally condemn these prosecutors’ improper actions and communications.” In one instance, a prosecutor had suggested to a colleague that they “bury” a document in the trove of records sent to the defense. …”

“… Around the same time, the Southern District’s leaders had decided to demote Mr. Bove after an internal investigation prompted by complaints about his management style that had caused morale in his unit to plummet, according to three people familiar with the matter. But they kept him in place until the Sadr matter had been resolved, to avoid the appearance that anyone, including Mr. Bove, had done anything intentionally wrong.

In the middle of all this came a convulsive shock, the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

Mr. Bove, who in his new role at the Justice Department pressured the F.B.I.’s interim leaders to turn over the names of personnel involved in the Jan. 6 investigations, has not publicly acknowledged any role in enforcement efforts after the riot. Yet he was not only involved; he was an unapologetic participant, according to people who worked with him.

… While the Southern District could play only a limited role, Mr. Bove worked with the New York Joint Terrorism Task Force, never expressed reservations about the investigation, and half-jokingly told a member of his team to come back with an indictment of a rioter or not bother to return to the office, the person said. …”

——
But now he has no problem demanding names of everyone who participated in J6 investigations for review of (presumed) wrongdoing.

Nothing nefarious in the background story itself, but Bove definitely sounds like a maximalist prick, which is not exactly a rare personality among prosecutors. But apparently his full-blast, crank it up to 11 assholishness stood out even there.

 

[nycfan]

They might also be read by the media, so watch what you say!

 

[nycfan]

“… There are currently nearly 40,000 probationary employees across the department, the vast majority of whom were exempt from today’s personnel actions because they serve in mission-critical positions – primarily those supporting benefits and services for VA beneficiaries. VA employees who elected to participate in the Office of Personnel Management’s deferred resignation program are also exempt from today’s personnel actions.

As an additional safeguard to ensure VA benefits and services are not impacted, the first Senior Executive Service (SES) or SES-equivalent leader in a dismissed employee’s chain of command can request that the employee be exempted from removal.

Today’s actions follow other dismissals VA announced Feb. 13 and are part of a government-wide Trump Administration effort to make agencies more efficient, effective and responsive to the American people. To that end, VA is refocusing on its core mission: providing the best possible care and benefits to Veterans, their families, caregivers and survivors. …”

 

[nycfan]

Related — reportedly, the U.S. Attorney who just publicly called himself “President Trump’s lawyer”’ refusing to cooperate in a DC police investigation of a Friend of POTUS (but benefit of the doubt, maybe he is just incompetent):



MAGA has convinced themselves that prosecution of any of their rank for virtually any reason is “weaponization” of justice. With people in the government sharing this belief all the way to the top, it means there is no rule of law for MAGA (or at least not for friends of Trump). It is how Putin runs Russia, for example.

 

[nycfan]

 

[BlooVooDoo]

The Trump admin is blocking publication of study section meeting announcements in the Federal Register, essentially blocking reviews (and awards) of grant applications. Study sections meet 3 times a year so this likely means a 4 month delay at best. A lot of research labs will be in need of bridge funding to retain staff. Those purse strings are going to be tighter than ever. Making matters worse, I’m hearing to not even bother with no cost extension requests. If money is allocated, spend it before the deadline. This could get really ugly if congress doesn’t step in and put a leash on the WH.

 

[nycfan]

We all know who ACTUALLY runs DOGE, we just don’t know if there is some figurehead appointed somewhere between Musk, presidential advisor who definitely does not run DOGE according to the DOJ, and the Musketeers wilding through government systems.

 

[nycfan]

 

[nycfan]

 

[1moretimeagain]

Tesla’s Board should email their CEO and demand 5 bullet points on what he accomplished last week.

 

[ZenMode]

It really is funny to see adults, employed by the Federal Government of the United States, get so upset over being asked essentially that: "What would you say you do here?".

Anyone who is a)engaged with the details of their role and b) actually executing the responsibilities of their role should be able to respond in minutes.

BTW, the role/performance of any employed person, whether they know it or not, is likely being assessed on a daily basis.

 

[nycfan]

It really is funny to see adults, employed by the Federal Government of the United States, get so upset over being asked essentially that: "What would you say you do here?".

Anyone who is a)engaged with the details of their role and b) actually executing the responsibilities of their role should be able to respond in minutes.

BTW, the role/performance of any employed person, whether they know it or not, is likely being assessed on a daily basis.

Very few are upset about the underlying question, which is one they have to answer within their department. With millions of employees, the federal government is certain to have its share of slackers who may resent any additional efforts, sure, but all large employers have those (and most small employers do too). What people are angry about is that most of them have very well defined job descriptions, so this is not about "what do you do here" -- that is prescribed and documented. They mostly also already have to do departmental self-evaluations and get supervisors to provide performance reviews that are in their records.

The five bullet point demand would be lazy circumvention of the existing and available records if that is what Musk is up to. But it is not. He is creating some sort of ad hoc response system, with zero meaningful instruction, that he now claims will be fed to an AI to determine who is worthy of continuing work and who should be fired. Based on five bullet points about a 4-day work week. Musk doesn't actually run DOGE, per DOJ repeated filings and statements in court, so it is not clear how Musk has any authority to make any such demands of anyone who works for the Federal Government.

The process is asinine harassment as a PR stunt and to undermine the morale of federal workers generally. People who support DOGE keep using the "what would you say your do here" consultants from Office Space as a hilarious joke to support DOGE, and that is somewhat accurate but not at all positive for DOGE since those consultants were soulless outsiders brought in to slim down the ranks, not brilliant good guys defending the company's righteous efficiency.

 

[finesse]

Other than such point failures as the validity of self assessment and the proper interpretation of that assessment by the initial reader, I only see the overall cost and lack of apparent purpose as problems. You can't really cross index this. There's too many jobs with totally different requirements. I mean, what do you do with this?

I think it's just Trump mentally masturbating Musk while they both fantasize about peons jumping at their beck and call

 

[Healing]

It’s really funny (pitiable) to see educated adults valorize chaotic and incompetent destruction, simply bc they hero worship grifting, drug addled, antisocial billionaires.

 

[ZenMode]

Very few are upset about the underlying question, which is one they have to answer within their department. With millions of employees, the federal government is certain to have its share of slackers who may resent any additional efforts, sure, but all large employers have those (and most small employers do too). What people are angry about is that most of them have very well defined job descriptions, so this is not about "what do you do here" -- that is prescribed and documented. They mostly also already have to do departmental self-evaluations and get supervisors to provide performance reviews that are in their records.

The five bullet point demand would be lazy circumvention of the existing and available records if that is what Musk is up to. But it is not. He is creating some sort of ad hoc response system, with zero meaningful instruction, that he now claims will be fed to an AI to determine who is worthy of continuing work and who should be fired. Based on five bullet points about a 4-day work week. Musk doesn't actually run DOGE, per DOJ repeated filings and statements in court, so it is not clear how Musk has any authority to make any such demands of anyone who works for the Federal Government.

The process is asinine harassment as a PR stunt and to undermine the morale of federal workers generally. People who support DOGE keep using the "what would you say your do here" consultants from Office Space as a hilarious joke to support DOGE, and that is somewhat accurate but not at all positive for DOGE since those consultants were soulless outsiders brought in to slim down the ranks, not brilliant good guys defending the company's righteous efficiency.

I don't disagree that there's probably a PR aspect to this and DOGE in general. I don't think it's uncommon for administrations, at every level, to publicize their accomplishments or really anything that they believe their constituents would like. It's like the "Your tax money at work" signs I see occassionally around town.

Yes, I'm sure there are slackers. There are probably also slacker supervisors who don't much care to make sure their subordinates are not slacking themselves, which is why I'm not opposed, in principle, to what is being done. I told another poster that I don't trust all of government to "right size" itself or be truly conscientious of waste, whether it be money or people.

If I were being asked the question, I would look at it as an opportunity to tout my performance and showcase my work because I'm sure there are also people who do more than their job description or are picking up the slack of the slackers. Then there are people who are probably so disengaged, that they didn't even see the email.

 

[ZenMode]

It’s really funny (pitiable) to see educated adults valorize chaotic and incompetent destruction, simply bc they hero worship grifting, drug addled, antisocial billionaires.

There are assumptions that the changes, "destruction" as you call it, have done or are doing damage. I haven't seen any negative results, so far.

Just lots of setting of hair on fire.

 

[BlooVooDoo]

If I were being asked the question, I would look at it as an opportunity to tout my performance and showcase my work because I'm sure there are also people who do more than their job description or are picking up the slack of the slackers. Then there are people who are probably so disengaged, that they didn't even see the email.

It’s asinine to do a performance review based on less than 2% of the year. Is your job so mundane that your workload is steady state throughout the year?