I attended an afternoon hearing Wednesday in D.C. federal court, where Judge Richard Leon declined to block President Trump’s $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” — but in a way that might actually have some teeth. I joined Executive Editor John Light on Substack Live after leaving the courtroom to talk about what went down and why it might be a pyrrhic victory for the administration.
I want to share a few more thoughts about yesterday’s news out of the defunct Broadview Six case, specifically the all-but-unprecedented release of the transcript of the grand jury sessions from which the indictments came. This was always a case of wild over-charging at a minimum. And that raised the question of just how prosecutors managed to get the case through a grand jury, even with how low a bar that usually is. Well, now we know. They cheated. They wouldn’t take no for an answer.
As David Kurtz notes here, this case seemed fuzzier than most of the other Trump retribution prosecutions. While the indictments singled out a Democratic candidate and lawmaker and those closely associated with them, none of those were high-profile Trump “enemies” like Tish James or James Comey. The prosecutor who initially led the case showed no signs of being especially Trumpy. Defense attorneys tried from the beginning to pry free evidence of White House and/or DOJ interference or direction in bringing the case. But prosecutors said they looked and there was no communication about it. The judge accepted that statement at face value.
It was almost certainly false.
I attended an afternoon hearing Wednesday in D.C. federal court, where Judge Richard Leon declined to block President Trump’s $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” — but in a way that might actually have some teeth. I joined Executive Editor John Light on Substack Live after leaving the courtroom to talk about what went down and why it might be a pyrrhic victory for the administration.
I want to share a few more thoughts about yesterday’s news out of the defunct Broadview Six case, specifically the all-but-unprecedented release of the transcript of the grand jury sessions from which the indictments came. This was always a case of wild over-charging at a minimum. And that raised the question of just how prosecutors managed to get the case through a grand jury, even with how low a bar that usually is. Well, now we know. They cheated. They wouldn’t take no for an answer.
As David Kurtz notes here, this case seemed fuzzier than most of the other Trump retribution prosecutions. While the indictments singled out a Democratic candidate and lawmaker and those closely associated with them, none of those were high-profile Trump “enemies” like Tish James or James Comey. The prosecutor who initially led the case showed no signs of being especially Trumpy. Defense attorneys tried from the beginning to pry free evidence of White House and/or DOJ interference or direction in bringing the case. But prosecutors said they looked and there was no communication about it. The judge accepted that statement at face value.
It was almost certainly false.
Be sure to see Josh Kovensky’s write-up of the grand jury transcript from the Broadview Six case which was released today. It’s as bad as predicted. A federal prosecutor, clearly under instructions to get an indictment no matter what, committed repeated instances of prosecutorial misconduct to get an indictment. That included telling the grand jurors to simply take her word for it that it was a good case and not worry if they didn’t actually have evidence that showed that. She also ejected two grand jurors who seemed adamant that they didn’t have a case. “I heard this case like last week and I thought it was a crock of shit then and I still think it is,” one hold-out grand jury told prosecutor Sheri Mecklenburg. Check out Josh’s piece which includes the transcript itself, which you can read.
Where Things Stand last night covered what seems to be the beginning of the 2026-specific flooding of the “zone” with “shit,” to use Steve Bannon’s infamous terminology. (I am distinguishing these state- and primary-specific attacks from the more general muck of election conspiracy theories we have been wading in daily for the better part of a decade.) The conspiracy theory machine is off and running, fueled by conservative dismay that reality TV star-turned-dilettante politician Spencer Pratt (R) will not advance to the November general election against LA Mayor Karen Bass (D). Perhaps making it more painful is that he was in recent days supplanted in second place by Nithya Raman, a DSA-backed Democrat. The AP projected Monday that Raman and Bass will face off in November.
JD Vance is the latest person to get involved with spinning false narratives from conservatives’ ire. “Do you trust this election?” a grinning Jesse Watters asked Vance last night on Fox, teeing him up.
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Kate and Josh break down primaries in Maine and South Carolina, GOP election denialism in California and the stunning transcripts from the Broadview Six case in Chicago.
TPM Publisher Joe Ragazzo is joined by TPM Executive Editor John Light as they talk about The News, literally, figuratively, and even kind of spiritually.
Kate and Josh discuss primaries in Iowa and California, the latest Graham Platner headache and the mask-off Supreme Court.
Josh and Joe are joined by Tom Kludt, special correspondent at Vanity Fair and a former TPMer.
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
