Yesterday the realization that Elon Musk and his DOGE bandits are dead set on stealing our Social Security hit home for millions of Americans. Perhaps some of the MAGA cultists are still lying to themselves, but plenty of Trump voters now know they made a huge mistake.
Two days ago, Maryland District Judge Ellen Hollander ordered the acting head of the Social Security Administration Leland Dudek to stop DOGE bandits from accessing recipients’ personal information. Dudek responded by threatening to shut down the agency entirely.
March 20 (Reuters) – A federal judge said on Thursday the Social Security Administration likely violated privacy laws by giving tech billionaire Elon Musk‘s aides “unbridled access” to the data of millions of Americans, and ordered a halt to further record sharing.
U.S. District Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander of Maryland said Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency was intruding into “the personal affairs of millions of Americans” as part of its hunt for fraud and waste under President Donald Trump.
“Really, I want to turn it off and let the courts figure out how they want to run a federal agency,” he said….
Earlier on Thursday, Judge Hollander, in her ruling, said: “To be sure, rooting out possible fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the SSA is in the public interest. But, that does not mean that the government can flout the law to do so.”
The case has shed light for the first time on the amount of personal information DOGE staffers have been given access to in the databases, which hold vast amounts of sensitive data on most Americans.
The SSA administers benefits for tens of millions of older Americans and people with disabilities, and is just one of at least 20 agencies DOGE has accessed since January.
Hollander said at the heart of the case was a decision by new leadership at the SSA to give 10 DOGE staffers unfettered access to the records of millions of Americans. She said lawyers for SSA had acknowledged that agency leaders had given DOGE access to a “massive amount” of records.
“The DOGE Team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion. It has launched a search for the proverbial needle in the haystack, without any concrete knowledge that the needle is actually in the haystack,” Hollander said….
One of the systems DOGE accessed is called Numident, or Numerical Identification, known inside the agency as the “crown jewels,” three former and current SSA staffers told Reuters. Numident contains personal information of everyone who has applied for or been given a social security number.
After a new order from Judge Hollander, Dudek has backed down on his threat to shut down the Social Security Administration.
Acting Social Security commissioner Leland Dudek threatened Thursday evening to bar Social Security Administration employees from accessing its computer systems in response to a judge’s order blocking the U.S. DOGE Service from accessing sensitive taxpayer data.
Less than 24 hours later — after the judge rejected his argument and the White House intervened — Dudek is saying he was “out of line.”
Lucy Almey Bird, A good book
Dudek initially told news outlets, including in a Friday interview with The Washington Post, that the judge’s decision to bar sensitive data access to “DOGE affiliates” was overly broad and that to comply, he might have to block virtually all SSA employees from accessing the agency’s computer systems. But Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, who issued the order, said in a letter that Dudek’s assertions “were inaccurate.”
“Employees of SSA who are not involved with the DOGE Team or in the work of the DOGE Team are not subject to the Order,” Hollander wrote in the letter on Friday sent to lawyers involved in the case. “ … Moreover, any suggestion that the Order may require the delay or suspension of benefit payments is incorrect.”
In response to Hollander’s letter, Dudek said in a statement that the court clarified its guidance and “therefore, I am not shutting down the agency.”
Dudek, in a follow-up interview Friday afternoon with The Post, thanked Hollander for the clarification, adding, “The president is committed to keeping the Social Security offices open to serve the public.” He then acknowledged that this was an about-face from his stance in an interview with The Post earlier in the day.
“[The White House] called me and let me know it’s important to reaffirm to the public that we’re open for business,” he said. “The White House did remind me that I was out of line and so did the judge. And I appreciate that.”
Yeah, right. I’m sure King Trump is very concerned about us peons who need Social Security to live.
Hollander issued a two-week temporary restraining order Thursday that prohibits Social Security officials from sharing personally identifiable information with Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service, which has been empowered to carry out cost-cutting across the government.
Hollander, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, wrote that DOGE “essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA, in search of a fraud epidemic, based on little more than suspicion” and “never identified or articulated even a single reason for which the DOGE Team needs unlimited access to SSA’s entire record systems.”
To top all that, yesterday a video surfaced of Trump’s Commerce Secretary, billionaire Howard Lutnick, claiming that seniors who missed a social security check wouldn’t miss it and anyone who complained was a “fraudster” “stealing” from the government. I don’t think Lutnick understands that Social Security is funded by the payments made by recipients all of their working lives.
Rachel Maddow spent much of her show last night talking about Lutnick’s clueless statement.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said his 94-year-old mother-in-law wouldn’t be worried if she didn’t receive her Social Security check one month.
Lutnick argued that the only people upset about DOGE head Elon Musk targeting Social Security are fraudsters abusing the system.
“Let’s say Social Security didn’t send out their checks this month. My mother-in-law, who’s 94, wouldn’t call and complain,” he said during a Thursday appearance on the All-In podcast. “She just wouldn’t. She’d think something got messed up and she’ll get it next month.”
Public records suggest that his mother-in-law, Geri Lambert, lives with Lutnick and his wife Allison, at his Upper East Side townhouse in Manhattan. If that is the case, she is unlikely to be relying on Social Security for rent or mortgage payments.
Lutnick, who was nominated to the role by President Donald Trump, amassed a fortune worth around $1.5 billion over more than 30 years as the CEO of the investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald. He stepped down from the position in February when he was confirmed as commerce secretary.
“A fraudster always makes the loudest noise screaming, yelling, and complaining,” the commerce secretary continued. “Elon knows this by heart… The easiest way to find the fraudster is to stop payments and listen, because whoever screams is the one stealing.”
It isn’t the first eyebrow-raising statement Lutnick has made in support of Musk—even this week.
On Wednesday, Lutnick appeared on Fox News and urged viewers to “buy Tesla” stock, which has been plummeting amid protests against Musk’s efforts to reshape the federal government. Musk is the CEO of the electric vehicle manufacturer.
He called Musk “probably the best person to bet on I’ve ever met,” saying: “It’s unbelievable that this guy’s stock is this cheap.”
Advocates warn these sweeping moves could lead to seniors and people with disabilities having a harder time getting help with their crucial benefits.
Already, getting assistance can be burdensome.
“My first phone call that I made to Social Security, I was on hold for 3 hours and 15 minutes before I spoke to somebody,” Aaron Woods, who’s been trying for months to help his mother sort out her Social Security and Medicare benefits, told NPR.
Read more about Woods’ case at the link. These problems existed before DOGE got involved.
For years, advocates say the Social Security Administration has struggled to keep up with its growing workload. Besides retirement services, the agency runs programs that provide survivor benefits and disability benefits and supplemental income for the very poor.
“There simply have not been enough workers to administer the benefits timely,” said Kristen Dama, a managing attorney at Community Legal Services of Philadelphia, which helps people navigate the benefits process. “To make sure that mistakes aren’t made. And then when people get disconnected, whether it’s for financial reasons or for mistakes, there’s just not enough people … to allow recipients to get reconnected easily.”
And problem-solving could get harder as the agency plans to cut 7,000 jobs — though its current staffing of about 57,000 is already at a 50-year low….
The agency also announced it would undergo a massive restructuring by eliminating six out of its 10 regional offices, which Dama said would significantly affect her organization’s ability to sort out problems for her clients.
“For legal aid advocates, both at my organization and across the country, the regional offices are really the fixers, are the quality control, and they play that role also for constituent service staff, social services organizations,” she said. “They are really the place where problems that can’t be solved get escalated.”
There’s much more information at the link. This is a great article.
Veronica Taylor doesn’t know how to turn on a computer, let alone use the internet.
The 73-year-old can’t drive and is mostly housebound in her mountainous and remote West Virginia community, where a simple trip to the grocery store can take an hour by car.
New requirements that Social Security recipients access key benefits online or in person at a field office, rather than on the phone, would be nearly impossible to meet without help.
“If that’s the only way I had to do it, how would I do it?” Taylor said, talking about the changes while eating a plate of green beans, mac and cheese and fried fish with a group of retirees at the McDowell County Senior Center. “I would never get nothing done.”
The requirements, set to go into effect March 31, are intended to streamline processes and combat widespread fraud within the system, according to President Donald Trump and officials in his administration.
Time to Oneself, Marcella Cooper
Bullshit.
They say that’s why it’s vital for people to verify their identity online or in person when signing up for benefits, or making a change like where the money is deposited.
But advocates say the changes will disproportionately impact the most vulnerable Americans. It will be harder to visit field offices in rural areas with high poverty rates. Often these are the same areas that lack widespread internet service.
Many Social Security field offices are also being shut down, part of the federal government’s cost-cutting efforts. That could mean seniors have to travel even farther to visit, including in parts of rural West Virginia.
At least now the efforts to kill Social Security are out in the open. I guarantee you if there is a missed payment the public reaction will shock self-satisfied billionaires like Howard Lutnick, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump.
Meanwhile, Musk is throwing a tantrum about judges who are simply interpreting U.S. laws.
In the days after a federal judge ruled Elon Musk’s dismantling of USAID likely violated the constitution, the world’s richest person issued a series of online attacks against the American judiciary, offered money to voters to sign a petition opposing “activist judges”, and called on Congress to remove his newfound legal opponents from office.
“This is a judicial coup,” Musk wrote on Wednesday, asking lawmakers to “impeach the judges”.
Musk, who serves as a senior adviser to Donald Trump, posted about judges who ruled in opposition to the administration more than 20 times within 48 hours this week on X, the social network he owns, repeatedly framing them as radical leftist activists and seeking to undermine their authority. His denunciations came as his so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) faces sweeping and numerous legal challenges to its gutting overhaul of the government, which has involved firing thousands of workers and gaining access to sensitive government data.
Doge is the subject of nearly two dozen lawsuits, which in some cases have already resulted in judges imposing more transparency on Musk’s initiative or reversing parts of its rapid-fire cuts at federal agencies. The legal pushback poses one of the most significant challenges to Musk’s plans, which for weeks after inauguration day involved operating with expansive powers and little evident oversight.
While Musk posts online, he is also directing some of his immense wealth towards those who support his cause. Musk donated funds to seven Republican members of Congress who called for impeaching judges, the New York Times reported, giving the maximum allowable donation of $6,600 to their campaigns.
Musk also launched a petition on Thursday against “activist judges” via his political action group America Pac, which offered registered voters in Wisconsin $100 if they signed. Musk’s Pac has funneled millions of dollars into the state’s 1 April supreme court race, in which he is backing a former Republican attorney general in another attempt to reshape the country’s courts.
How is that legal? But he got away with it in Pennsylvania during the 2024 election when he offered 1 million prizes for people who signed a petition.
By Laura El
Musk is also furious about “leakers” who have talked to the press about his DOGE meddling.
The pervasive fear and anger that have been rippling through federal agencies over Elon Musk’s slashing approach to shrinking government deepened even further on Friday over the billionaire tech mogul’s threat to root out and punish anyone who is leaking to the media.
They’ve already taken every precaution they can for fear of retaliation: setting Signal messages to automatically disappear, taking photos of documents they share instead of screenshotting, using non-government devices to communicate. But disclosing the chaos caused by Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, for many, outweighs the risks that come with leaking.
Following Thursday’s New York Times report that Musk was set to receive a Pentagon briefing about a confidential contingency plan for a war with China, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO posted on his social media platform X that leakers “will be found” and, he intimated, punished.
“I look forward to the prosecutions of those at the Pentagon who are leaking maliciously false information to NYT,” Musk wrote in his post.
Oooooh! How scary!
But Musk’s post is not having the chilling effect on leakers he’d intended, according to conversations with more than half a dozen government employees who had previously spoken to POLITICO. If anything, it might be the other way around.
“We are public servants, not Elon’s servants,” said one Food and Drug Administration employee who, like all people interviewed for this story, was granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal dynamics. “The public deserves to know how dysfunctional, destructive, and deceptive all of this has been and continues to be.”
“Leakers are patriots,” said one Agriculture Department employee. Helping the media report on problems or concerns inside agencies, the USDA employee added, is motivated by a desire for greater transparency — the same goal Musk has said undergirds his own work through DOGE….
Musk’s comments may not have caused a major shift in how federal workers view sharing information with reporters, one federal employee at a health agency said, citing group chats with other employees.
But even before Musk’s comments this week, the prevailing atmosphere inside many federal agencies — from constant threats of firing and being labeled enemies of the public to ousting them for following orders from previous administrations — have left employees feeling vulnerable, increasingly incensed and concerned about their physical safety.
There’s quite a bit more at the Politico link.
By Rakhmeet Redzhepov
Musk is also paying a price in attitudes toward his EV company Tesla. He and his rich buddies think attacks on Tesla locations and individual cars is a conspiracy, but it is really organic. Let me say up front that I don’t condone violence or vandalism.
Law enforcement officials and domestic extremism experts say they have found no evidence that a series of attacks on Tesla vehicles and dealerships are coordinated despite such claims from Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump.
At least 10 Tesla dealerships, charging stations and facilities have been hit by vandals, many of whom have lit cars on fire, while a growing collection of videos posted to social media have shown people defacing and damaging Tesla vehicles. One website appeared to encourage people to target Tesla vehicles, publishing a map with the information of dozens of Tesla owners and Tesla facilities. It’s unknown who started the site.
The attacks have come as Musk has emerged as one of the brightest flashpoints of an already tumultuous second Trump administration, leading a sweeping effort to cut large swaths of the federal government. Musk has decried the attacks on Teslas, and on Thursday claimed on his social media platform X that the attacks were “coordinated.” He did not provide evidence….
Trump has also claimed the attacks have been coordinated. In an interview Wednesday on Fox News, he said without evidence that “people that are very highly political on the left” are paying the vandals.
Trump has called the destruction of Tesla property domestic terrorism, and Attorney General Pam Bondi announced charges on Thursday against three people accused of vandalizing Tesla properties in Oregon, South Carolina and Washington state.
Publicly available court documents for the three people make no mention of coordination, an NBC News review found.
Experts and law enforcement officials nationwide from the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the two federal agencies investigating the attacks, all told NBC News they have found no evidence of any coordination around the attacks.
More details at NBC News.
I’m just heartened by the rising public anger over Trump and Musk working to destroy our democratic form of government and turn our country into a dictatorship.
Entering the magnificent great hall of the US Department of Justice, Donald Trump stopped for a moment to admire his portrait then took to a specially constructed stage where two art deco statues, depicting the “Spirit of Justice” and “Majesty of Justice”, had been carefully concealed behind a blue velvet curtain.
The president, who since last year is also a convicted criminal, proceeded to air grievances, utter a profanity and accuse the news media of doing “totally illegal” things, without offering evidence. “I just hope you can all watch for it,” he told justice department employees, “but it’s totally illegal.”
Cat Lady on a Couch, by Sharon Bursic
Trump’s breach of the justice department’s traditional independence last week was neither shocking nor surprising. His speech quickly faded from the fast and furious news cycle. But future historians may regard it as a milestone on a road leading the world’s oldest continuousdemocracy to a once unthinkable destination.
Eviscerating the federal government and subjugating Congress; defying court orders and delegitimising judges; deporting immigrants and arresting protesters without due process; chilling free speech at universities and cultural institutions; cowing news outlets with divide-and-rule. Add a rightwing media ecosystem manufacturing consent and obeyance in advance, along with a weak and divided opposition offering feeble resistance. Join all the dots, critics say, and America is sleepwalking into authoritarianism.
“These are flashing red lights here,” Tara Setmayer, a former Republican communications director turned Trump critic. “We are approaching Defcon 1 for our democracy and a lot of people in the media and the opposition leadership don’t seem to be communicating that to the American people. That is the biggest danger of the moment we’re in now: the normalisation of it.”
Much was said and written by journalists and Democrats during last year’s election campaign arguing that Trump, who instigated a coup against the US government on January 6, 2021, could endanger America’s 240-year experiment with democracy if he returned to power. In a TV interview he had promised to be “dictator” but only on “day one”. Sixty days in, the only question is whether the warnings went far enough.
The 45th and 47th president has wasted no time in launching a concerted effort to consolidate executive power, undermine checks and balances and challenge established legal and institutional norms. And he is making no secret of his strongman ambitions.
Trump, 78, has declared “We are the federal law” and posted a social media image of himself wearing a crown with the words “Long live the king”. He also channeled Napoleon with the words: “He who saves his country does not violate any law.” And JD Vance has stated that “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power”.
Trump quickly pardoned those who attacked the US Capitol on January 6, placed loyalists in key positions within the FBI and military and purged the justice department, which also suffered resignations in response to the dismissal of corruption charges against New York mayor Eric Adams after his cooperation on hardline immigration measures.
The president now has the courts in his sights. Last weekend the White House defied a judge’s verbal order blocking it from invoking the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law meant only to be used in wartime, to justify the deportation of 250 Venezuelan alleged gang members to El Salvador, where they will be held in a 40,000-person megaprison.
Read the rest at The Guardian.
That’s it for me today. What’s on your mind?
Did you like this post? Please share it with your friends:
Attention, Germany!Russian propagandist Solovyev says that if Germany supplies Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine, "it will not have a chance to exist as a state this time."
The Vermonter and New Yorker each brought their pro-worker stump speeches to the southwestern purple states on Thursday, day one of a three-day tour.
The pair’s Las Vegas stop drew over a thousand people, per the Las Vegas Review-Journal, with supporters chanting “primary Chuck” during AOC’s speech, referring to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. In Tempe, Arizona, the duo addressed a crowd of more than 15,000 between an arena and overflow attendees outside, the senator said on social media.
Speaking in Arizona, Sanders, whose “Fighting Oligarchy Tour” has already touched down in Wisconsin and Michigan, homed in on the billionaires he says are tightening their grip on the country.
“We will not allow you to move this country to an oligarchy. We’re not going to allow you and your friend Mr. Musk and the other billionaires to wreak havoc on this country,” Sanders told rallygoers. “We’re not a poor country. There is no excuse on God’s earth for people to have to choose between food and the medicine they need to stay alive.”
Ocasio-Cortez brought a similar but more optimistic message, championing universal healthcare, a living wage and other progressive reforms while peaking out against the Trump administration.
“I want to live in an America that guarantees healthcare to every person. I want to live in an America that has a living wage for every person. I want to live in an America where you have free speech to express yourself and not be afraid of being put on a list or deported,” she told the cheering crowd.
Six Voice of America journalists sued Kari Lake and the Trump administration on Friday, alleging their moves to shut down the U.S.-funded network were unlawful and unconstitutional.
The journalists say that the government’s acts violate their First Amendment rights on free speech grounds and usurp the U.S. Congress’s control of the power of the federal purse.
More than 900 full-time network employees were placed on indefinite leave last weekend; 550 contractors were terminated from their jobs. Most employees at the federal parent, U.S. Agency for Global Media, were also placed on indefinite leave.
The lead plaintiffs include Patsy Widakuswara, until recently Voice of America’s White House bureau chief and Jessica Jerreat, its press freedom editor. Four other journalists sued anonymously as John Does. Kathryn Neeper, the director of strategy and performance assessment at the U.S. Agency for Global Media, is also a named plaintiff. She was also placed on leave.
US military officials are scrambling to develop a “Golden Dome” defense system that can protect the country from long-range missile strikes and have been told by the White House that no expense will be spared in order to fulfill one of President Donald Trump’s top Pentagon priorities, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
“Golden Dome” is the Trump administration’s attempt to rebrand vague plans for developing a missile defense system akin to Israel’s Iron Dome.
At a time the Pentagon is looking to cut budgets, the Trump administration has ordered military officials to ensure future funding for “Golden Dome” is reflected in new budget estimates for 2026 to 2030 – but the system itself remains undefined beyond a name, the sources said.
“Right now, Golden Dome is, it’s really an idea,” one source familiar with internal discussions about the project said, adding there may be technology in the pipeline that, if ever scaled up, could apply to it, but as of now discussions are purely conceptual.
That makes projecting future costs nearly impossible, the source added, though it would likely cost billions of dollars to construct and maintain.
Trump has repeatedly insisted the US needs a missile defense program similar to Israel’s Iron Dome, but the systems are orders of magnitude apart. In practical terms, the comparison is less apples to oranges, and more apples to aircraft carriers.
Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system selectively protects populated areas from short-range threats in a country the size of New Jersey; Trump wants a space-based missile defense system capable of defending the entire United States from advanced ballistic and hypersonic missiles.
I will never forget the head of Cantor Fitzgerald (not sure it was Lutnick) boo-hooing on teevee in 2001 when their World Trade Tower office was attacked and 658 employees were lost. What was he boo-hooing about? That they couldn’t pay out for employee pension, etc. etc. Please send us money!!!!! It was sickening.
Wanna help stop some shit, here you go! (This came from an attorney)
For everything being destroyed and attacked by this administration, the most terrifying (as an attorney), is the rule of law and the federal judges doing their best to maintain it. The DOJ, from Bondi on down through senior admin is making the argument, publicly and *in court, that the judiciary cannot restrain the executive branch. That any licensed attorney would make such a public pronouncement, let alone take such a position in a courtroom, is astonishing.
This is the basis of our Constitutional order – ultimately, the judiciary has the final say on what is and what is not, under the law, unless and until Congress changes the law or the country as a whole changes the Constitution.
Any government attorney making the public statement or argument in court that the judiciary cannot restrain the executive branch is violating their oath, as well as a multitude of rules of ethics and professionalism of their respective Bar Associations.
Want to stop this shit? Start filing Bar complaints against these people, every one of them. From Bondi on down, they are all members of a State Bar Association, the Federal Bar in whatever district in which they practice, and in many cases the US Supreme Court Bar. Rudy was disbarred by the NY Bar after pushing election denial lies. What these people are doing is far, far worse. You do *not have to be a client or opposing party in an active case to file a Bar complaint.
Bar Association rules of ethical and professional conduct and discipline procedures are not governed by statutes. They are ‘internal’ rules every licensed attorney agrees to be bound by for the *privilege of being permitted to practice in that jurisdiction. While a disciplinary action that goes as far as a formal hearing is heard by a sitting judge, and those decisions are appealed through state/fed courts, the judges make those decisions based on those internal rules and existing case law. We police our own.
The American Bar Association released a statement recently condemning the current state of affairs, however the ABA is a ‘professional organization’ and not a licensing body. They’re lobbyists. They do not regulate the practice of law. The individual State and Federal Bar Associations do.
It’s more than just a phone call. You need a full name, Bar number (searchable on their site), and a specific act or statement to point to. Bondi was on Fox saying ‘How DARE a judge tell this President what he can’t do?’ Down the ranks it will probably take quotes from transcripts like we’ve been seeing from these hearings.
Anyone within that attorney’s jurisdiction or who is impacted by the attorney’s actions/statements/arguments *should be able to file a complaint. Every formal complaint receives a response – even if it’s to say ‘this is not actionable under our rules’. And as a general rule, the attorney reported is notified even if non-actionable. If someone on the disciplinary committee finds the complaint actionable, the reported attorney’s life becomes a living hell for a while as they respond to the complaint and go through the resolution process, if not hearings and appeals. Disbarrment is a viable option in eggregious cases.
One of the biggest responsibilities Bar Associations have is to protect the public perception of the profession. Intentionally influencing the public with misinformation undermining the rule of law (Bondi), or knowingly making absurdly frivilous and unconstitutional arguments in a hearing (down ranks), should be brought to the respective Bar’s attention.
Pick a name, do a Google search. Find out where they are licensed. Go to those respective Bar Association websites, and start filing Bar complaints against them all on the basis of violating their Oath of Attorney, Oath of Office, and subversion of the Constitution.
A former Judge and attorney friend added this info which is really practical.
“From ChatGPT: “Pam Bondi is a member of The Florida Bar, with the bar number 886440. She has been admitted to practice law in Florida since June 24, 1991, and is currently eligible to practice law in the state. “Bondi received her Juris Doctor from Stetson University College of Law in 1990. She served as Florida’s 37th Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. “As of February 2025, Bondi serves as the United States Attorney General. She is also a partner at Ballard Partners’ Washington, D.C. office, where she chairs the firm’s corporate regulatory practice. ”Bondi’s brother, Brad Bondi, a corporate defense lawyer, is running for president of the DC Bar, a mandatory organization for 120,000 lawyers in Washington, D.C.” ADDITIONAL INFO: To file a complaint about a member of The Florida Bar who you believe is violating their professional oath or engaging in unethical conduct, you must submit the complaint to The Florida Bar’s Attorney Consumer Assistance Program (ACAP) or the Division of Lawyer Regulation. Here’s how to proceed: 1. File Online: You can file a complaint electronically using The Florida Bar’s online form. 2. File by Mail: You can also download a complaint form and mail it to: The Florida Bar Attn: ACAP – Intake 651 East Jefferson Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 3. Call for Guidance: You can contact ACAP at: Toll-Free: 1-866-352-0707 Hours: Monday–Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m.”
“Here’s a draft complaint you can tailor and submit to The Florida Bar. This version is written formally and focuses on potential violations of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, particularly Rule 4-8.4 (Misconduct), Rule 4-3.3 (Candor Toward the Tribunal, by analogy), and Rule 4-8.2 (Statements Concerning Judges and Legal Officials): ⸻ [Your Name] [Your Address] [City, State ZIP] [Phone Number] [Email Address] [Date] To: Attorney Consumer Assistance Program (ACAP) The Florida Bar 651 E. Jefferson Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 Re: Complaint Against Attorney Pamela Jo Bondi (Bar #886440) Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing to file a formal complaint against Pamela Jo Bondi, a member of The Florida Bar, Bar Number 886440. Ms. Bondi has repeatedly made public statements asserting that the judiciary does not have the authority to impede actions taken by President Trump. She has made such statements during televised interviews and/or in other public forums, including the following: • March 15, 2025: Following U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s order temporarily blocking the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act, Bondi criticized the decision, stating it “disregards well-established authority regarding President Trump’s power” and “puts the public and law enforcement at risk.” • March 17, 2025: In a Fox News interview, Bondi labeled Judge Boasberg’s order an “intrusion on the president’s authority” and pledged to continue deportations irrespective of judicial rulings. She asserted that the administration would “absolutely” proceed with the expulsions, emphasizing the president’s designation of these individuals as foreign terrorists under the Alien Enemies Act. • March 19, 2025: Bondi further challenged judicial oversight by stating that Judge Boasberg “has no right to ask those questions” regarding deportation flight details and “has no power” to halt the administration’s actions. She accused judges of “meddling in our government,” underscoring her stance that the judiciary should not interfere with executive decisions in this context. These statements reflect Bondi’s position that the courts lack the authority to impede certain executive actions undertaken by President Trump, particularly concerning national security and immigration matters. These statements are not only legally incorrect but are misleading to the public and appear to violate her professional obligations as a licensed attorney. As a member of The Florida Bar and a former Attorney General of Florida, Ms. Bondi has an obligation to uphold the rule of law and to refrain from knowingly misrepresenting the authority of the judicial branch. Her statements ignore the fundamental constitutional principle of judicial review, established in Marbury v. Madison and affirmed throughout American jurisprudence. Such conduct appears to violate the following Rules Regulating The Florida Bar: • Rule 4-8.4(d): Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, particularly when an attorney uses their platform to undermine public confidence in the judiciary by making knowingly false legal claims. • Rule 4-8.2(a): Making statements that impugn the integrity or qualifications of judges or the judicial system without factual basis. • Rule 4-3.3(a)(1): While directed toward court advocacy, this rule underscores an attorney’s duty of candor regarding the law. These statements, made by a member of The Florida Bar in good standing, are inconsistent with the responsibilities of a legal professional and risk eroding public trust in the constitutional separation of powers. I respectfully request that The Florida Bar investigate this matter and take appropriate disciplinary action if warranted. Please let me know if additional information is required. Sincerely, [Your Full Name]”
"We call on the judiciary, bar associations, law firms, and individual lawyers to speak out against this dangerous assault on the legal profession and the rule of law."
“President Trump on Friday night rescinded the security clearances of former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, several members of the Biden administration, and other prominent Democrats.
The move comes after Mr. Trump had already announced last month that he was revoking former President Joe Biden’s security clearance. In a memo Friday, the president said he was also rescinding the security clearances of the entire Biden family.
Also losing their access to classified information and their security clearances were former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, New York Attorney General Letita James, Manhattan Attorney General Alvin Bragg, former White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, former Rep. Elizabeth Cheney, former White House Russia expert Fiona Hill, former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, former U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic Norman Eisen, and attorney Mark Zaid, who was a lawyer for the whistleblower who reported concerns about the Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine in his first White House term.
Several of those named, including James and Bragg, had already had their clearances revoked earlier this month by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard as part of a purge of dozens of clearances for current and former officials.
Friday’s memo applies to “receipt of classified briefings, such as the President’s Daily Brief, and access to classified information held by any member of the Intelligence Community by virtue of the named individuals’ previous tenure in the Congress.”
“One young man sobbed when a guard pushed him to the floor. He said, ‘I’m not a gang member. I’m gay. I’m a barber.’ I believed him. *** He “began to whimper,” as his head was roughly shaved, “folding his hands in prayer as his hair fell.” He “asked for his mother & cried as he was slapped again.”
The Sky Dancing banner headline uses a snippet from a work by artist Tashi Mannox called 'Rainbow Study'. The work is described as a" study of typical Tibetan rainbow clouds, that feature in Thanka painting, temple decoration and silk brocades". dakinikat was immediately drawn to the image when trying to find stylized Tibetan Clouds to represent Sky Dancing. It is probably because Tashi's practice is similar to her own. His updated take on the clouds that fill the collection of traditional thankas is quite special.
You can find his work at his website by clicking on his logo below. He is also a calligraphy artist that uses important vajrayana syllables. We encourage you to visit his on line studio.
peej
Carissa
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Griffin Eckstein at Salon: “Throw these bums out”: AOC and Bernie Sanders take their campaign against “oligarchy” out west.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders hit the road this week to rally Democrats to fight back against President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk’s “move to an oligarchy.”
The Vermonter and New Yorker each brought their pro-worker stump speeches to the southwestern purple states on Thursday, day one of a three-day tour.
The pair’s Las Vegas stop drew over a thousand people, per the Las Vegas Review-Journal, with supporters chanting “primary Chuck” during AOC’s speech, referring to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. In Tempe, Arizona, the duo addressed a crowd of more than 15,000 between an arena and overflow attendees outside, the senator said on social media.
Speaking in Arizona, Sanders, whose “Fighting Oligarchy Tour” has already touched down in Wisconsin and Michigan, homed in on the billionaires he says are tightening their grip on the country.
“We will not allow you to move this country to an oligarchy. We’re not going to allow you and your friend Mr. Musk and the other billionaires to wreak havoc on this country,” Sanders told rallygoers. “We’re not a poor country. There is no excuse on God’s earth for people to have to choose between food and the medicine they need to stay alive.”
Ocasio-Cortez brought a similar but more optimistic message, championing universal healthcare, a living wage and other progressive reforms while peaking out against the Trump administration.
“I want to live in an America that guarantees healthcare to every person. I want to live in an America that has a living wage for every person. I want to live in an America where you have free speech to express yourself and not be afraid of being put on a list or deported,” she told the cheering crowd.
David Folkenflik at NPR: Voice of America staff sue Trump administration for shutting down network.
Six Voice of America journalists sued Kari Lake and the Trump administration on Friday, alleging their moves to shut down the U.S.-funded network were unlawful and unconstitutional.
The journalists say that the government’s acts violate their First Amendment rights on free speech grounds and usurp the U.S. Congress’s control of the power of the federal purse.
More than 900 full-time network employees were placed on indefinite leave last weekend; 550 contractors were terminated from their jobs. Most employees at the federal parent, U.S. Agency for Global Media, were also placed on indefinite leave.
The lead plaintiffs include Patsy Widakuswara, until recently Voice of America’s White House bureau chief and Jessica Jerreat, its press freedom editor. Four other journalists sued anonymously as John Does. Kathryn Neeper, the director of strategy and performance assessment at the U.S. Agency for Global Media, is also a named plaintiff. She was also placed on leave.
CNN: Trump wants a ‘Golden Dome’ capable of defending the entire US: ‘Strategically, it doesn’t make any sense.’
US military officials are scrambling to develop a “Golden Dome” defense system that can protect the country from long-range missile strikes and have been told by the White House that no expense will be spared in order to fulfill one of President Donald Trump’s top Pentagon priorities, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
“Golden Dome” is the Trump administration’s attempt to rebrand vague plans for developing a missile defense system akin to Israel’s Iron Dome.
At a time the Pentagon is looking to cut budgets, the Trump administration has ordered military officials to ensure future funding for “Golden Dome” is reflected in new budget estimates for 2026 to 2030 – but the system itself remains undefined beyond a name, the sources said.
“Right now, Golden Dome is, it’s really an idea,” one source familiar with internal discussions about the project said, adding there may be technology in the pipeline that, if ever scaled up, could apply to it, but as of now discussions are purely conceptual.
That makes projecting future costs nearly impossible, the source added, though it would likely cost billions of dollars to construct and maintain.
Trump has repeatedly insisted the US needs a missile defense program similar to Israel’s Iron Dome, but the systems are orders of magnitude apart. In practical terms, the comparison is less apples to oranges, and more apples to aircraft carriers.
Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system selectively protects populated areas from short-range threats in a country the size of New Jersey; Trump wants a space-based missile defense system capable of defending the entire United States from advanced ballistic and hypersonic missiles.
I will never forget the head of Cantor Fitzgerald (not sure it was Lutnick) boo-hooing on teevee in 2001 when their World Trade Tower office was attacked and 658 employees were lost. What was he boo-hooing about? That they couldn’t pay out for employee pension, etc. etc. Please send us money!!!!! It was sickening.
I’m sure they got bailed out one way or another.
Enheduanna
Via BeadBear
Wanna help stop some shit, here you go! (This came from an attorney)
For everything being destroyed and attacked by this administration, the most terrifying (as an attorney), is the rule of law and the federal judges doing their best to maintain it. The DOJ, from Bondi on down through senior admin is making the argument, publicly and *in court, that the judiciary cannot restrain the executive branch. That any licensed attorney would make such a public pronouncement, let alone take such a position in a courtroom, is astonishing.
This is the basis of our Constitutional order – ultimately, the judiciary has the final say on what is and what is not, under the law, unless and until Congress changes the law or the country as a whole changes the Constitution.
Any government attorney making the public statement or argument in court that the judiciary cannot restrain the executive branch is violating their oath, as well as a multitude of rules of ethics and professionalism of their respective Bar Associations.
Want to stop this shit? Start filing Bar complaints against these people, every one of them. From Bondi on down, they are all members of a State Bar Association, the Federal Bar in whatever district in which they practice, and in many cases the US Supreme Court Bar. Rudy was disbarred by the NY Bar after pushing election denial lies. What these people are doing is far, far worse. You do *not have to be a client or opposing party in an active case to file a Bar complaint.
Bar Association rules of ethical and professional conduct and discipline procedures are not governed by statutes. They are ‘internal’ rules every licensed attorney agrees to be bound by for the *privilege of being permitted to practice in that jurisdiction. While a disciplinary action that goes as far as a formal hearing is heard by a sitting judge, and those decisions are appealed through state/fed courts, the judges make those decisions based on those internal rules and existing case law. We police our own.
The American Bar Association released a statement recently condemning the current state of affairs, however the ABA is a ‘professional organization’ and not a licensing body. They’re lobbyists. They do not regulate the practice of law. The individual State and Federal Bar Associations do.
It’s more than just a phone call. You need a full name, Bar number (searchable on their site), and a specific act or statement to point to. Bondi was on Fox saying ‘How DARE a judge tell this President what he can’t do?’ Down the ranks it will probably take quotes from transcripts like we’ve been seeing from these hearings.
Anyone within that attorney’s jurisdiction or who is impacted by the attorney’s actions/statements/arguments *should be able to file a complaint. Every formal complaint receives a response – even if it’s to say ‘this is not actionable under our rules’. And as a general rule, the attorney reported is notified even if non-actionable. If someone on the disciplinary committee finds the complaint actionable, the reported attorney’s life becomes a living hell for a while as they respond to the complaint and go through the resolution process, if not hearings and appeals. Disbarrment is a viable option in eggregious cases.
One of the biggest responsibilities Bar Associations have is to protect the public perception of the profession. Intentionally influencing the public with misinformation undermining the rule of law (Bondi), or knowingly making absurdly frivilous and unconstitutional arguments in a hearing (down ranks), should be brought to the respective Bar’s attention.
Pick a name, do a Google search. Find out where they are licensed. Go to those respective Bar Association websites, and start filing Bar complaints against them all on the basis of violating their Oath of Attorney, Oath of Office, and subversion of the Constitution.
A former Judge and attorney friend added this info which is really practical.
“From ChatGPT: “Pam Bondi is a member of The Florida Bar, with the bar number 886440. She has been admitted to practice law in Florida since June 24, 1991, and is currently eligible to practice law in the state. “Bondi received her Juris Doctor from Stetson University College of Law in 1990. She served as Florida’s 37th Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. “As of February 2025, Bondi serves as the United States Attorney General. She is also a partner at Ballard Partners’ Washington, D.C. office, where she chairs the firm’s corporate regulatory practice. ”Bondi’s brother, Brad Bondi, a corporate defense lawyer, is running for president of the DC Bar, a mandatory organization for 120,000 lawyers in Washington, D.C.” ADDITIONAL INFO: To file a complaint about a member of The Florida Bar who you believe is violating their professional oath or engaging in unethical conduct, you must submit the complaint to The Florida Bar’s Attorney Consumer Assistance Program (ACAP) or the Division of Lawyer Regulation. Here’s how to proceed: 1. File Online: You can file a complaint electronically using The Florida Bar’s online form. 2. File by Mail: You can also download a complaint form and mail it to: The Florida Bar Attn: ACAP – Intake 651 East Jefferson Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 3. Call for Guidance: You can contact ACAP at: Toll-Free: 1-866-352-0707 Hours: Monday–Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 5:30 p.m.”
“Here’s a draft complaint you can tailor and submit to The Florida Bar. This version is written formally and focuses on potential violations of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, particularly Rule 4-8.4 (Misconduct), Rule 4-3.3 (Candor Toward the Tribunal, by analogy), and Rule 4-8.2 (Statements Concerning Judges and Legal Officials): ⸻ [Your Name] [Your Address] [City, State ZIP] [Phone Number] [Email Address] [Date] To: Attorney Consumer Assistance Program (ACAP) The Florida Bar 651 E. Jefferson Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300 Re: Complaint Against Attorney Pamela Jo Bondi (Bar #886440) Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing to file a formal complaint against Pamela Jo Bondi, a member of The Florida Bar, Bar Number 886440. Ms. Bondi has repeatedly made public statements asserting that the judiciary does not have the authority to impede actions taken by President Trump. She has made such statements during televised interviews and/or in other public forums, including the following: • March 15, 2025: Following U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s order temporarily blocking the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members under the Alien Enemies Act, Bondi criticized the decision, stating it “disregards well-established authority regarding President Trump’s power” and “puts the public and law enforcement at risk.” • March 17, 2025: In a Fox News interview, Bondi labeled Judge Boasberg’s order an “intrusion on the president’s authority” and pledged to continue deportations irrespective of judicial rulings. She asserted that the administration would “absolutely” proceed with the expulsions, emphasizing the president’s designation of these individuals as foreign terrorists under the Alien Enemies Act. • March 19, 2025: Bondi further challenged judicial oversight by stating that Judge Boasberg “has no right to ask those questions” regarding deportation flight details and “has no power” to halt the administration’s actions. She accused judges of “meddling in our government,” underscoring her stance that the judiciary should not interfere with executive decisions in this context. These statements reflect Bondi’s position that the courts lack the authority to impede certain executive actions undertaken by President Trump, particularly concerning national security and immigration matters. These statements are not only legally incorrect but are misleading to the public and appear to violate her professional obligations as a licensed attorney. As a member of The Florida Bar and a former Attorney General of Florida, Ms. Bondi has an obligation to uphold the rule of law and to refrain from knowingly misrepresenting the authority of the judicial branch. Her statements ignore the fundamental constitutional principle of judicial review, established in Marbury v. Madison and affirmed throughout American jurisprudence. Such conduct appears to violate the following Rules Regulating The Florida Bar: • Rule 4-8.4(d): Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, particularly when an attorney uses their platform to undermine public confidence in the judiciary by making knowingly false legal claims. • Rule 4-8.2(a): Making statements that impugn the integrity or qualifications of judges or the judicial system without factual basis. • Rule 4-3.3(a)(1): While directed toward court advocacy, this rule underscores an attorney’s duty of candor regarding the law. These statements, made by a member of The Florida Bar in good standing, are inconsistent with the responsibilities of a legal professional and risk eroding public trust in the constitutional separation of powers. I respectfully request that The Florida Bar investigate this matter and take appropriate disciplinary action if warranted. Please let me know if additional information is required. Sincerely, [Your Full Name]”
Trump revokes security clearances of Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton and other prominent Dems
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-revokes-security-clearances-of-kamala-harris-hillary-clinton-and-other-prominent-dems/?intcid=CNR-02-0623
“President Trump on Friday night rescinded the security clearances of former Vice President Kamala Harris, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, several members of the Biden administration, and other prominent Democrats.
The move comes after Mr. Trump had already announced last month that he was revoking former President Joe Biden’s security clearance. In a memo Friday, the president said he was also rescinding the security clearances of the entire Biden family.
Also losing their access to classified information and their security clearances were former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, retired Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, New York Attorney General Letita James, Manhattan Attorney General Alvin Bragg, former White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, former Rep. Elizabeth Cheney, former White House Russia expert Fiona Hill, former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, former U.S. Ambassador to the Czech Republic Norman Eisen, and attorney Mark Zaid, who was a lawyer for the whistleblower who reported concerns about the Mr. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine in his first White House term.
Several of those named, including James and Bragg, had already had their clearances revoked earlier this month by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard as part of a purge of dozens of clearances for current and former officials.
Friday’s memo applies to “receipt of classified briefings, such as the President’s Daily Brief, and access to classified information held by any member of the Intelligence Community by virtue of the named individuals’ previous tenure in the Congress.”