Skip to content
Chimera readability score 0.6371 out of 100, reading level.

A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo.
It’s Not the Crime, It’s the Clowning
Then-acting D.C. U.S. Attorney Ed Martin already had plenty of trouble on his hands, all of his own making, when D.C. Bar disciplinary counsel last year began looking into his extortionist threat against Georgetown University. But good ol’ Ed, with characteristic aplomb, managed to make things a whole lot worse for himself.
In a newly filed two-count disciplinary case against Martin in DC, half of the complaint is devoted to his unconstitutional pressure campaign against the Jesuit University and half to Martin’s ham-handed efforts to block the probe by threatening the bar’s disciplinary counsel and by going over his head to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals while the probe was still underway.
In short, Martin managed to get a second count lodged against himself in the course of unsuccessfully fighting off the first count. Well done, sir, well done.
Morning Memo covered last March the details of Martin’s anti-DEI-fueled threat to Georgetown Law School Dean William M. Treanor. (He subsequently upped the ante by threatening Georgetown’s president and board of directors, too, according to the bar complaint.) So let me zero in on Count II, which is where the real comedy is.
Martin went nuclear on the disciplinary counsel right off the bat, according to the complaint:
That letter earned Martin an admonishment from the chief judge, who told him in a follow-up letter that the judges couldn’t meet with him ex parte — that is, without disciplinary counsel present — and that he needed to go through the normal bar disciplinary process.
A week later, Martin cc’ed the chief judge on an email to the disciplinary counsel, which earned him another admonishment from the chief judge:
A month later, after allegedly failing to respond to communications from the disciplinary counsel, Martin sent yet another letter to the chief judge, now taking aim at the disciplinary counsel himself:
That earned Martin a third admonishment from the chief judge.
For his efforts, Martin was hit with the second count in the bar complaint accusing him of (i) improperly communicating ex parte with a judge during a proceeding; and (ii) engaging in conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice.
Again, Martin was the acting U.S. attorney in D.C. while all this was going on. He remains the U.S. Pardon Attorney. He wore numerous other hats over the past year, including director of the Trump DOJ’s Weaponization Working Group, Special Attorney for Mortgage Fraud, and assistant attorney general. Apologies if I left out any other titles.
The Trump DOJ came to Martin’s defense after the bar complaint was filed. You’ll recall that the Trump administration is promulgating a new rule that purports to subordinate state bar investigations of DOJ attorneys to the attorney general’s own investigation. Stay tuned.
A New Vindictive Prosecution Claim
The parent company of Smartmatic — the voting machine company falsely reviled by MAGA conspiracists after the 2020 election which has pursued defamation claims against Fox News and right-wing Trump allies — is raising a compelling new claim of vindictive prosecution in a corporate bribery case where it was added as defendant last fall by the Trump DOJ.
Three things that make the Smartmatic vindictive prosecution claim stand out, as it argues in its new filing seeking to get the indictment in federal court in Miami dismissed:
- Smartmatic cooperated with the investigation of its executives in the Philippines, where the alleged 2016 scheme took place, and wasn’t charged when the Biden administration initially brought the prosecution in 2024. Smartmatic was added to the case in a superseding indictment last fall.
- The Trump administration has notoriously abandoned enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act in cases like this, but it made a notable exception for Smartmatic, the first company indicted under the federal law in 15 years.
- Fox News, which is still fighting off a billion-dollar defamation claim from Smartmatic, has allegedly used the criminal charges to try to gain leverage in the civil lawsuit.
Among the other defendants in Smartmatic’s defamation lawsuits: Newsmax, D.C. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a former Fox personality, Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and Mike Lindell.
Jan. 6 Never Ends: Arizona Edition
In a highly unusual development, Homeland Security Investigations is conducting its own investigation of the 2020 election results in Arizona, The Atlantic is reporting. This is in addition to the bogus conspiracy-fueled DOJ probe that led to a grand jury subpoena of state Senate records of its “audit” the 2020 election in Maricopa County. Here’s the key paragraph from The Atlantic in full:
Arizona’s acting special agent in charge for HSI, Matthew Murphy, told the state attorney general’s office [last month] that his office was now probing the 2020 election in Arizona, according to a person familiar with the details of the meeting. A state investigator asked why the government was scrutinizing the results, given that they had already been litigated and investigated. Murphy made clear that he was acting on “direction from D.C.,” the person told us, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. The HSI investigation in Arizona, which has not previously been reported, comes as the FBI has embarked on a separate election probe in the state. “This is not a joint investigation” with HSI, a person familiar with the FBI investigation told us. HSI headquarters and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General at the Department of Justice are coordinating the investigation, which is focused on identifying alleged voter-fraud activity and related potential enforcement actions, according to a person familiar with the effort.
Mass Deportation Watch
- WaPo: White House tells House GOP to avoid mass deportation talk ahead of midterms
- CBS News: DOJ’s Alex Pretti shooting probe excludes prosecutors who specialize in civil rights cases, sources say
- Politico: Judges say ICE, DOJ leaders are putting rank-and-file lawyers in ‘an impossible position’
Pam Bondi Moves Onto Military Base
Attorney General Pam Bondi joins the growing list of Trump II officials who have moved to military housing in the D.C. area due to threats against them, the NYT reports.
You Don’t Say?
TPM’s Josh Kovesnky has reported extensively on the Trump DOJ’s use of Kyle Shideler of Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy as an expert witness in the Texas “antifa” case. Now The Intercept reports that on cross examination during the trial Shideler admitted that he “provided language that prosecutors used” in the indictment in the first-ever domestic terrorism case against a purported antifa cell. “I told them what I believed to be an accurate definition of antifa, and they used it,” Shideler said.
‘You Go to War With the Army You Have’
- ProPublica: The US Built a Blueprint to Avoid Civilian War Casualties. Trump Officials Scrapped It.
- Politico: Hegseth gutted offices that would have probed Iran school strike
- MSNow: DOJ losing experienced counterterrorism minds at a critical time
- CNN: How Trump and Musk’s spending cuts are hampering US government readiness amid the Iran war
Whoa If True
The inspector general for the Social Security Administration is investigating whether a then-DOGE employee took possession of two highly sensitive databases (and kept one on a thumb drive) and planned to use them at his new job with a federal contractor, the WaPo reports.
The allegations against the unnamed DOGE bro came from an anonymous whistleblower who has subsequently spoken to the WaPo, which also reviewed the whistleblower’s written complaint, which was filed with the inspector general in January :
According to the complaint, he allegedly told the whistleblower that he needed help transferring data from a thumb drive “to his personal computer so that he could ‘sanitize’ the data before using it at [the company.]” The engineer told colleagues that once he had removed personal details from the data, he wanted to upload it into the company’s systems. He told another colleague, who refused to help him upload the data because of legal concerns, that he expected to receive a presidential pardon if his actions were deemed to be illegal, according to the complaint.
Before the inspector general began investigating the claims, the Social Security Administration itself dismissed them as “false based on evidence and investigations by all involved.”
When GOP Senators Actually Try
Enough opposition emerged among Senate Republicans, led by Sen. John Curtis (R-UT), to sink the nomination of political commentator Jeremy Carl as assistant secretary of state for international organization affairs. Carl wrote a 2024 book titled “The Unprotected Class: How Anti-White Racism Is Tearing America Apart” and claimed that it is white people who have faced persistent discrimination and been “erased” from American history, Politico reports. Carl withdrew his candidacy while lamenting the lack of unanimous support from Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Hot tips? Juicy scuttlebutt? Keen insights? Let me know. For sensitive information, use the encrypted methods here.
The boy can’t help himself.
As per the post to Morning Memo yesterday - thank you, but dammit, dinner is ready . . .

Facts Only

Ed Martin, former acting D.C. U.S. Attorney, faces a two-count disciplinary case from the D.C. Bar for threatening Georgetown University and obstructing the investigation.
Martin allegedly pressured Georgetown Law School Dean William M. Treanor and later the university's president and board of directors.
He sent multiple letters to the D.C. Court of Appeals chief judge during the probe, earning repeated admonishments for ex parte communications.
The Trump DOJ defended Martin and is promoting a rule to subordinate state bar investigations of DOJ attorneys to the attorney general.
Smartmatic, a voting machine company, claims vindictive prosecution in a corporate bribery case after being added to a superseding indictment by the Trump DOJ.
Smartmatic cooperated with the initial Biden administration investigation but was later charged under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the first such case in 15 years.
Fox News is reportedly using the criminal charges to gain leverage in Smartmatic's defamation lawsuit.
Homeland Security Investigations is probing Arizona's 2020 election results, citing "direction from D.C.," separate from an FBI investigation.
The White House advised House Republicans to avoid mass deportation rhetoric ahead of midterms.
Attorney General Pam Bondi moved to military housing due to threats, joining other Trump officials.
A former DOGE employee allegedly took sensitive Social Security Administration databases, planning to use them at a federal contractor.
Senate Republicans blocked Jeremy Carl's nomination over his book claiming anti-white racism, leading to his withdrawal.

Executive Summary

The article highlights several ongoing legal and political controversies involving former Trump administration officials and entities. Ed Martin, the former acting D.C. U.S. Attorney, faces a two-count disciplinary case for allegedly threatening Georgetown University and obstructing the D.C. Bar's investigation. The Trump DOJ defended Martin, while also pursuing a rare Foreign Corrupt Practices Act case against Smartmatic, a voting machine company embroiled in defamation lawsuits with Fox News and Trump allies. Meanwhile, Homeland Security Investigations is conducting a separate probe into Arizona's 2020 election results, raising questions about its timing and motives. Other developments include concerns over mass deportation rhetoric, threats against Trump officials leading to military housing relocations, and allegations of data mishandling by a former DOGE employee. The piece also notes Senate Republicans blocking a controversial nominee over racially charged claims.
The narrative underscores tensions between political appointees and institutional norms, with multiple cases suggesting potential weaponization of legal processes. While some actions appear to align with partisan agendas, others reflect broader institutional struggles, such as the DOJ's counterterrorism staffing shortages and the Social Security Administration's data security concerns. The piece leaves open questions about the extent of coordination versus individual overreach in these controversies.

Full Take

The strongest version of this narrative highlights systemic tensions between political appointees and institutional integrity. Ed Martin’s disciplinary case exemplifies how individual overreach can escalate into broader institutional conflicts, while Smartmatic’s vindictive prosecution claim suggests potential politicization of enforcement. The Arizona election probe, framed as "direction from D.C.," echoes patterns of centralized control over local processes, raising questions about motive and transparency. These cases collectively paint a picture of institutions under strain, where legal and bureaucratic mechanisms are increasingly weaponized for partisan ends.
Patterns detected: ARC-0024 Ambiguity (vague "direction from D.C." framing), ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey (DOJ's selective enforcement of FCPA), ARC-0012 False Equivalence (implied parity between institutional accountability and partisan retaliation).
Root cause: The paradigm driving these narratives is the erosion of normative boundaries between political loyalty and institutional duty. The unstated assumption is that legal and bureaucratic systems are now arenas for partisan combat rather than neutral arbiters. This echoes historical patterns of administrative state capture, where appointments and enforcement become tools of ideological consolidation.
Implications: Human agency is constrained when institutions lose credibility, as public trust in justice and governance diminishes. The beneficiaries are those who can navigate or exploit these systems, while the costs fall on marginalized groups and the broader public, who face arbitrary enforcement and diminished accountability. Second-order consequences include normalized institutional dysfunction and the potential for retaliatory cycles across administrations.
Bridge questions: How might these cases reflect broader trends in the politicization of justice systems? What safeguards could prevent the weaponization of legal processes while preserving legitimate enforcement? Would evidence of non-partisan motives in these investigations change your assessment of their legitimacy?
Counterstrike scan: A coordinated influence campaign would amplify narratives of institutional corruption while downplaying individual accountability, framing all actions as politically motivated. The actual content partially aligns with this pattern—particularly in the framing of Smartmatic’s case and the Arizona probe—but stops short of outright fabrication, instead relying on selective emphasis of controversial actions. The presence of verifiable facts (e.g., Martin’s admonishments, Smartmatic’s cooperation history) suggests journalistic rigor rather than pure propaganda.

Sentinel — Human

Confidence

The article exhibits strong human stylistic markers, including sarcasm, digressions, and a distinct narrative voice, with no significant signs of synthetic generation.

Signals Detected
low severity: High sentence length variance and idiosyncratic phrasing (e.g., 'Well done, sir, well done.') suggest human authorship.
low severity: Strong narrative voice with digressions (e.g., 'Apologies if I left out any other titles.') and emotional tone ('real comedy is') inconsistent with AI-generated balance.
Human Indicators
Colloquialisms and sarcasm ('good ol’ Ed', 'ham-handed efforts')
Erratic paragraph structure with abrupt transitions
Personalized commentary ('Let me zero in on Count II')
Direct reader engagement ('Hot tips? Juicy scuttlebutt?')