For a long time I've noted that the FBI changed its hiring priorities and practices when Obama was elected. This guy was hired in 2011 when he was 30.
Because of the changed priorities, the FBI relaxed the standards for appearance and off-hours behavior in order to accommodate "lifestyle" choices among the now-prioritized recruiting practices.
When a fed. agency relaxes standards for certain demographics in an effort to attract and hire more from that demographic, it has to relax the standards for all.
That is how you end up with this guy carrying an FBI Badge when that would have been impossible prior to 2008.
Up until about 6 years ago, FBI agents were not allowed to have a second job. FBI agents are paid to be available 24/7/365. A second job complicates that availability. This guy apparently operated a gym on land he owned, and served as a personal trainer.
These are the kinds of changes that have accelerated the pace of retirement by agents hired in 1990s.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Summarizing the hearing in Abrego Garcia where Plaintiffs are seeking an order that he be sent to the District of Maryland if released from custody on criminal case in Tennessee, and ICE takes him into ICE custody as a result.
Judge asks if DOJ has any intention to remove him to El Salvador if released into ICE custody in Tenn. DOJ attorney says removal proceedings will begin, but to a third country, not El Salvador.
DOJ attorney says he has no info on the timing of such a removal -- says "not imminent." Judge says later that timing could be important factor in how she schedules the matters currently before the Court.
Plaintiffs attorney in MD says he doesn't rep. KAG in Tenn case, but is in contact with his attorneys.
Without coming right out and saying so, Judge tells Plaintiffs attorney they need to stop the effort to have him released from USMS custody in criminal case.
Having him go into ICE custody in Tenn will likely set off a chain of events -- ending in removal to a third country that she might be unable to prevent.
Plaintiffs (KAG and family) lawyer keeps saying that is why they need emergency order from her -- and she practically hits him in the head with a hammer to make him understand that until she decides she still has jurisdiction, they aren't going to get that order from her, and they need to work to keep him in USMS custody in Tenn.
Two motions to dismiss have been filed by DOJ in her case. One is fully briefed. The second one has opposition papers due next Monday. She sets a short briefing schedule on Emergency motion but says it likely depends on outcome of Motions to Dismiss.
I'm currently writing a long substack story about Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts and the Supreme Court order yesterday afternoon staying the earlier Preliminary Injunction put in place by Judge Murphy.
Judge Murphy, in April, ordered a halt of removals to Third Countries -- a country other than the deportee's home country -- unless the DHS gave the deportee an opportunity to apply for protection under the Convention Against Torture to that specific Third Country.
The Govt appealed and asked for a Stay from the First Circuit Court of Appeals. The motion for Stay was denied, and the appeal is still pending. DOJ then sought an appeal from the Supreme Court -- which had remained pending until yesterday.
Judge Murphy held in May that DHS had violated the Injunction in a couple of different respects -- details not important here.
But one effect of the Injunction is that 8 deportees are temporarily housed at a US military outpost in the African country of Djibouti rather than continue on to South Sudan which has agreed to accept them.
As part of the proceedings involving the violation as he found them, Judge Murphy issued a clarification of what his Injunction prohibited.
He also issued a "Remedial Order" telling DHS what its options were to fix the earlier violation.
In all the figurative handwringing and fist pounding you have read here about the Order yesterday that Kilmar Abrego Garcia not be detained in custody pending trial, did any of you know the Magistrate Judge wrote this at the very beginning of her Opinion:
The merchants of outrage porn largely do not understand the subject-matter they are so outraged about.
But their ability to spin-up outrage in the X community by giving voice here to their own outrage generates the X-$ they rake in each month.
They are about "heat" and not "light."
The Magistrate Judge knew her decision was basically a "freebie" -- Abrego-Garcia was not getting released from custody and back into the community regardless of what she decided.
I've also seen it noted by my fellow "legal analyst" and tennis expert that some outrage should apply to the fact that Magistrate's are not accountable because they are not Presidentially Appointed.
An Act of Congress created the position of "Magistrate Judge" in the Judiciary.
In addition, there is a specific statute passed by Congress that gives to Magistrate's the express authority by law to make decisions involving release and detention in federal criminal cases.
28 USC Sec. 636 -- the part of Title 28 concerning the powers of Magistrate Judges -- expressly states as follows:
(a) Each United States magistrate judge serving under this chapter shall have within the district...
(2) the power to administer oaths and affirmations, issue orders pursuant to section 3142 of title 18 concerning release or detention of persons pending trial, and take acknowledgements, affidavits, and depositions;
Again, for all our "legal analysts" who really don't understand the law, it helps to read it before voicing opinions.
Those criticizing Judge Carl Nichols and the USAID case -- NOT THE TREASURY CASE -- reflect the fact that they likely haven't read the complaint or motion for a TRO, or his order, and -- for some -- sitting a courtroom without knowing what you are watching makes you an unreliable narrator.
The complaint was filed on Feb. 6 -- Thur -- seemingly at just past 11:30 pm based on some info in the TRO notice. The complaint is 30 pages long. The TRO was filed the next morning and is 24 pages long. It was filed early enough that Judge Nichols set an in-person status hearing for 3:00 pm. on 3/7.
As of Friday afternoon, approx. 500 USAID employees were already on leave, and nearly all additional USAID employees were set to go on paid leave starting at midnight on Feb. 8 -- 9 hours after the hearing.
This is the Central Door on the West Upper Terrance, one level up from the Inaugural stage.
This door is opened for the first time at 2:33:43 by protesters who are exiting the Capitol. They had been sent down this hallway by Capitol Police inside -- at the other end of this hallway.
Not the time stamp at the top, and that the doors are closed
A few months ago, just after the Fischer decision came out, I was contacted by Lisa Eisenhart and Taylor Munchel, mother and wife of J6 defendant Eric Munchel -- the "Zip-Tie Guy" -- about coming in to assist with their defense.
Lisa and Eric were together at the Capitol, both were arrested and detained initially, and both later proceeded by way of a "stipulated bench trial" and were convicted on all counts.
🧵
Lisa was charged with only 2 felonies -- both involved Sec. 1512, and after Fischer both were dismissed while her appeal was pending. The Govt agreed to vacate her sentence and have the case come back to the district court for resentencing.
That is happening later today. Lisa was originally sentenced to 30 months back in 2023, but she was granted bail pending appeal because the Supreme Court just agreed to hear the Fischer case so the validity of her convictions was in doubt.
When the resentencing was finally set on the calendar she asked me to file a Notice of Appearance on her behalf and I did so. I did not seek to move the sentencing date as I expected doing so would have been a basis to prevent me from coming into the case. A defendant can be denied a request to change attorneys if doing so would work to prejudice the Govt or unnecessarily delay the proceedings.