• Check out Ken’s newsletter – https://www.popehat.com/
• Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8
• Support victims of the fire – votesaveamerica.com/relief
• What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcast

Follow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/

TRANSCRIPT

Jane Coaston: It’s Monday, February 17th. I’m Jane Coaston and this is What a Day, happy presidents day to all who celebrate. And since I’m not super into this particular president, I’m thinking about a president I like more like President James Garfield, who seems fine but died in 1881, not because he was shot by Charles Guiteau, but because a doctor named Doctor, yes, a doctor named Doctor didn’t wash his hands before messing around with the wound. So, Doctor, Doctor Willard Bliss killed a president. There’s a fun fact for you. [music break] On today’s show, thousands more federal workers are fired by the Trump administration. And phase two of the cease fire deal between Israel and Hamas is in doubt. But let’s start with the Department of Justice, because right now the DOJ is on a real and very serious crisis. Last week, the Justice Department ordered attorneys to drop corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Emil Bove, the acting U.S. deputy attorney general, issued a memo last Monday saying that the charges were getting in the way of Adams’s ability to fight illegal immigration and violent crime. In case you may have forgotten, those charges stemmed from allegedly improper gifts and illegal campaign contributions Adams got from various entities going back a decade. When federal prosecutors announced those charges in September, they made it clear that they believed those gifts were being made in exchange for preferential treatment from Adams. But according to the Trump administration, that’s all good now. No worries on taking the steeply discounted flights on Turkish Airlines. What really matters is whether or not Eric Adams can do what the Trump administration wants him to do. That’s the argument Danielle Sassoon, the former acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and a Trump appointee, made in her resignation letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi. She said that Adams’ attorneys wanted a clear quid pro quo. Drop the charges and Adams will do what Trump wants. According to anonymous sources who spoke with multiple media outlets when Bove referred the case to the DOJ’s Public Integrity section, those attorneys resigned too. In fact, it took until Friday afternoon when Bove demanded someone put their name on the dismissal documents or be forced out for one attorney to do so. As folks on the left and right have pointed out, this is the weaponization of law enforcement. Or as the conservative magazine National Review put it, the politicization of law enforcement. Because as The Wall Street Journal pointed out, the DOJ could still prosecute him after the 2025 mayoral elections, making it clear that if Eric Adams wants to stay out of jail, he has to do what the DOJ and the Trump administration want. The Justice Department now seems to operate on a policy in which friends of Trump or people who want to be can get special perks with big downsides. Here’s border czar Tom Homan with Adams on Fox and Friends on Friday. 

[clip of Tom Homan] If he doesn’t come through, I’ll be back in New York City and we won’t be sitting on a couch. I’ll be in his office up his butt saying, where the hell is the agreement we came to?

Jane Coaston: That seems like a political hostage situation to me. If the DOJ now works on a friends and family discount policy where all you have to do is just do what Trump wants and your charges magically go away. That’s bad. That’s bad for the department. That’s bad for its prosecutors. That’s bad for the rule of law. And that’s just bad for us as Americans. Period. So to explain more about the situation and what it means, I had to talk to Ken White. He’s a former federal prosecutor and current criminal defense attorney who writes the Pope Hat newsletter. Ken, welcome back to What a Day. 

Ken White: It’s good to be back here, even under these circumstances. 

Jane Coaston: Yeah. Speaking of that, more than half a dozen federal prosecutors resigned rather than sign their name to a motion to dismiss corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. As a former federal prosecutor, can you explain what a big deal that is? 

Ken White: Sure. That sort of thing just doesn’t happen very often at all. And it’s very reminiscent, of course, of the Saturday Night massacre during the Nixon administration, only far, far stupider. So the heart of this here was that the Trump administration had decided to dismiss the charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams. And its reasons for doing so were rather transparently bogus. And some of these federal prosecutors, none of them, you know, woke liberals, were not good with this. They did not feel comfortable putting their names to documents that made what they felt were misrepresentations to the court about the reasons that the case was being dismissed. So one after the other, they refused and some of them refused in pretty um extreme public terms that the current heads of the Justice Department did not take well at all. 

Jane Coaston: So stupider than the Saturday Night Massacre, how? Because obviously this is still a very big deal and the whole thing seems to be a again, it’s like extremely obvious quid pro quo. But can you explain that comparison a little? 

Ken White: Well, with the Saturday Night massacre for all those young whelps in the audience who weren’t around then uh was when Nixon ordered the various people acting as attorney general to fire the special prosecutor, and two of them refused uh and resigned. That was over a matter of principle of whether or not the president could fire the special prosecutor or whether he had the power to do so, particularly because the reason was that he was getting close to Nixon. This, though, is about whether or not prosecutors will sign their name to a transparently bogus explanation for why they are dismissing the criminal case against Eric Adams. That the narrative that the Justice Department has decided upon was that the this was retaliation for Eric Adams anti-immigration stance and that being prosecuted made it too difficult for him to serve as mayor and be an anti-immigration mayor. And for this, they wanted to dismiss the case without prejudice, with the understanding that would allow him to do his job. As the Trump administration sought. You hear a lot the word unprecedented, but I am aware of no other instance in American history where the federal government has held possible charges over the head of an elected state or local official saying, If you don’t do things our way, we will come back and continue this federal prosecution of you for unrelated conduct. It’s pretty much astounding. And I think it’s also largely a loyalty test. In other words, it’s a it’s a test of your capacity to pretend that the emperor has clothes. It’s a test of whether or not you will say, oh yes, there’s no quid pro quo. This is a good reason to dismiss when in fact it’s transparently clear that there is no good reason to dismiss and that this is purely political. 

Jane Coaston: Now, should I just start getting flowers together for Attorney General Pam Bondi so that I am not prosecuted? Because this seems to say something about how the Justice Department under Trump will be run, which is, for my friends, everything for my enemies, the law. What do you think it says? 

Ken White: I think it says that. And also it just says this is part of the the Trump administration emphasis on the supreme executive. Pam Bondi immediately she came in as AG, issued a memorandum that talked about prosecutors who wanted to make good faith objections to things they were asked to do. And what she said is there is no such thing. You’re here to do the president’s agenda, and if you don’t, you’ll be fired. But the thing is, the history of the Justice Department, the history of assistant U.S. attorneys is that they are supposed to serve the Constitution of the United States and America, the American people. They are not the president’s lawyers. They are not supposed to carry out a presidential agenda unless it’s like emphasis on different areas of what crimes should be emphasized to be prosecuted. But you basically say, no, you cannot object that what you’re being asked to do is unethical and your agenda is the president’s agenda. Your purpose is to serve the president, is a dramatic departure from history for the Justice Depart. 

Jane Coaston: DC’s interim U.S. Attorney Edward Martin Jr. also sent Elon Musk a letter earlier this month saying he would chase people who acted unethically to the ends of the earth. Can you unpack that for us? Specifically the part about acting unethically. 

Ken White: So this was a letter in response to some reports that people were more or less saying mean things about the juvenile sociopaths that Elon Musk has wandering around trying to dismantle parts of the government. The new U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin, sent this truly nauseating letter uh fawning over Elon Musk and one of his lieutenants calling him Elon, saying, thank you so much for referring this to me. And yes, anyone who commits a crime or does something unethical we’ll pursue them to the ends of the earth. A couple of things about that. First of all, the U.S. attorney doesn’t fawn over political figures like that in a normal world. That is gross. And the U.S. attorney does not pursue people for unethical things. They pursue them for federal crimes. And Congress can investigate unethical things. Offices of inspector general can do that if there are any left. But the U.S. attorney doesn’t investigate lack of ethics. This is pretty clearly just a saber rattling threat by this new U.S. attorney to say we’re on your side, we’re here to do anything you want. And it’s done just in such a nauseatingly obsequious way that every current or former assistant U.S. attorney I knew was just it turned our stomach. It’s terrible. 

Jane Coaston: We’ve also seen top Justice Department officials demand a list of employees who worked on the January 6th cases. There are fears that this could lead to the firing of as many as 5000 people. A few dozen DOJ prosecutors have already been dismissed for their work on January 6th cases. What would that kind of mass firing do to the functioning of the Justice Department as a whole? Because I think people don’t quite understand how big DOJ is. 

Ken White: Department of justice is huge, and it’s got thousands of lawyers and many more thousands of other employees. And yes, this could dramatically impair its ability to function, which may be a feature rather than a bug. So uh, you know, we’ve had before, pretty big sort of shifts in the priorities of the Justice Department. Notably, when I was a young lawyer, after 9/11, the Justice Department dramatically changed its priorities from white collar type stuff to more meat and potatoes, violent crime, drugs, immigration, that type of thing. So part of that is this change in agenda, but part of it is also just this pure for the king everything decision to retaliate against and expel people perceived to be as potentially disloyal because they worked on cases against Trump or against the January 6th rioters. And to the extent they carry that further than they already have with the firing of dozens of people, then, yes, it’s going to blow a big hole in the ability of the Justice Department to do the things it normally does. But again, with the Justice Department that has decided it is not going to go after corruption, it is not going to go after civil rights. It’s not going to go after environmental crime. It’s not going to go after police abuse. Maybe they don’t need all those attorneys if what they’re going to do is just go after the people they don’t like. 

Jane Coaston: I think a couple of top DOJ officials have basically said that people who were just carrying out duties and following orders from superiors face no risk of being fired. But, like, do we know how they’d be determining that? What’s the mood inside the agency, do you think? 

Ken White: Oh it’s terrible. And uh the mood inside the U.S. attorney’s offices is very glum, very grim. So these are offices that, you know, generally people don’t become an assistant U.S. attorney because they’re super progressive. It often goes more conservative, but it’s not Trumpist. Generally, they believe in the rule of law. They believe that you have to follow the law, that type of thing, otherwise they wouldn’t be there. And this sort of turn to the king can do anything he wants is very grim to them. Same with the FBI. The FBI has has and has always had its own issues, but it too, is very invested in the concept of the rule of law. And when you throw it out the window, it upsets them and makes them feel they don’t know what they’re doing. So all these people, with the exception of the appointed U.S. attorney for each district, all these people have civil service protections. The administration is just ignoring those and basically saying, sue us, we don’t care. And so that’s what’s going to start happening. A lot of lawsuits with this administration, I suspect, arguing that all these civil service protections are unconstitutional to the extent they limit the executive’s unrestrained right to do whatever he wants. 

Jane Coaston: We are not even a month into Trump’s second term, and already we’re using terms like constitutional crisis and referencing the Saturday Night Massacre. Going forward, what are your big fears for the DOJ if it continues to be run this way? 

Ken White: Well, we’re getting there awfully fast. We’re speed running this uh as we go through it. My concerns are when they start weaponizing DOJ against opponents. So they’ve done that in the sense of firing people. They have not yet started to do it in terms of prosecuting and investigating people, at least in a way that’s public. But there are signs that that could happen. We’ve already started to see glimmerings of that with the FCC, with the FCC under its new director going after CBS, going after a local station that broadcast news about local Ice activities, things like that. So that would be one really big concern. And of course, violence and the response to it is also a big concern. You know, this weekend, the president said, words to the effect of the president, you know, if it’s done to save the country, it’s not against the law, which is a very sort of, you know, uh fascist sentiment. And so the concern is that that’s not just a statement of what he’s going to do, but a signal to people who might use violence in support of the administration that they’re free to do so and they will not be restrained. Those are some of my biggest concerns. 

Jane Coaston: But are they not already kind of using the agency against their opponents? Bondi filed a lawsuit against New York, the governor, the attorney general, and yes, they said it’s over their immigration policies, but it doesn’t seem like a coincidence that AG Letitia James also won a big civil case against Trump and his businesses. 

Ken White: It’s not. But that one was an example of the way I hope it goes. A lot of bluster without much substance. In that case, Bondi came out and said, We’ve just filed charges against Letitia James and all these people. Now, what she actually meant is that they had filed a civil lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a New York statute. Now, that’s actually the way it should work. If the federal government thinks a state statute is unconstitutional and they should challenge it in court. That’s the rule of law. That’s the way we want it to work. And the court will sort it out. And that’s what we want to happen. 

Jane Coaston: Ken, as always, thank you so much for being here. 

Ken White: Thank you. It’s always a pleasure. 

Jane Coaston: That was my conversation with Ken White. He’s a former federal prosecutor and current criminal defense attorney who writes the pope hat newsletter. We’ll get to more of the news in a moment. But if you like the show, make sure to subscribe. Leave a five star review on Apple Podcasts. Watch us on YouTube and share with your friends. More to come after some ads. 

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: Here’s what else we’re following today. 

[sung] Headlines. 

[clip of Volodymyr Zelensky] I really believe the time has come. The armed forces of Europe must be created. 

Jane Coaston: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Saturday called on the European Union to establish its own military to defend itself against Russia. Zelensky made the remarks during a speech at the Munich Security conference. The war in Ukraine was top of mind for European leaders ahead of the three year anniversary of Russia’s invasion. But the Trump administration seems not super interested in what Ukraine has to say about ending Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and a team of U.S. diplomats are set to meet with Russian officials to start peace talks in Saudi Arabia this week. Zelensky said that Ukraine has not been invited to any upcoming negotiations with Russia and the U.S.. He talked about it in an interview with NBC that aired Sunday. 

[clip of Volodymyr Zelensky] I will never accept any decisions between the United States and Russia about Ukraine. Never. 

Jane Coaston: Rubio told CBS that Ukraine will eventually join the conversation. 

[clip of Marco Rubio] Ukraine will have to be involved because they’re the one that were invaded. 

Jane Coaston: Oh, Really? Huh. But back to the Munich Security Conference. Vice President JD Vance also addressed European leaders on Friday. And it was weird. Instead of focusing on the war in Ukraine like literally everyone else, Vance downplayed Russia’s invasion and he lectured officials about how they should be more concerned with immigration and restrictions on free speech. 

[clip of Vice President J.D. Vance] The threat that I worry the most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia, it’s not China. It’s not any other external actor. And what I worry about is the threat from within. 

Jane Coaston: Officials did not take kindly to Vance’s remarks. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz tweeted on Friday that he, quote, “expressly rejects the vice president’s speech.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a joint press conference with Secretary of State Rubio on Sunday. Netanyahu called President Donald Trump’s plan to remove Palestinians from Gaza, quote, “the only viable plan to enable a different future.” The conference in Jerusalem came just a day after Israel and Hamas finished their sixth trade of Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners. Three Israeli hostages and nearly 400 Palestinian prisoners were released. Two weeks remain in the first phase of the cease fire. Netanyahu said Sunday he’s working closely with Trump and that the dozens of hostages still held by Hamas will be released even if it takes the use of force. 

[clip of Benjamin Netanyahu] And we can’t always share the details of this strategy with the public, including when the gates of hell will be open, as they surely will if all our hostages are not released until the last one of them. 

Jane Coaston: President Trump said Sunday on the tarmac after attending the Daytona 500, that he’s given Netanyahu the green light to bring the remaining hostages back by any means necessary. 

[clip of President Donald Trump] I told Bibi. You do whatever you want. Because, you know, my statement was that they’ve got to come back now. 

Jane Coaston: The finalized deal for the second phase of the cease fire still hasn’t materialized. The next phase broadly calls for the release of the remaining Israeli hostages in exchange for more Palestinian prisoners and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. But the cease fire remains fragile. Marco Rubio said Sunday, Hamas, quote, “must be eradicated,” throwing the longevity of the deal into doubt. President Trump on Sunday asked the Supreme Court to let him fire the head of an agency that protects whistleblowers. The filing seeks to overturn a temporary restraining order that protects the U.S. Office of Special Counsel from Trump’s recent firings. Because there’s been a lot of them. Trump fired as many as 17 inspectors general just days after taking office, attributing their termination to, quote, “changing priorities.” These are people who investigate and audit federal agencies to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. Federal law is supposed to protect them from being fired for partisan reasons. A group of eight inspectors general filed a lawsuit last week claiming their firings were politically motivated and therefore illegal. One of the fired inspectors, Robert Storch, who used to work for the Defense Department, told CNN recently the firings are concerning. 

[clip of Robert Storch] Yeah, it’s very troubling, and particularly doing it in the widespread way they did. And without giving Congress um and through Congress, the American public, any rationale. 

Jane Coaston: But a Biden appointed federal judge ruled against the inspectors general on Friday. The lawsuit was thrown out primarily for procedural reasons, but their suit might still proceed on a slower timeline. The Trump administration laid off thousands of employees at the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health over the weekend. CDC staffers were notified on Friday that the agency is cutting 1300 jobs, about 10% of its workforce. The NIH laid off 1500 employees that same day, the layoffs targeted probationary employees at both agencies. These are typically new hires or existing employees who have recently been promoted. A federal official told the Associated Press that workers who were laid off will get a month of paid administrative leave. The verbal announcement came directly from the Department of Health and Human Services during a meeting with CDC leaders. The department said in a written statement on Friday that the job cuts were part of the Trump administration’s bigger mission to downsize the federal workforce and that the job cuts would, quote, “ensure that HHS better serves the American people at the highest and most efficient standard.” Because firing thousands of highly educated people who have devoted their lives to studying human disease and preventing disease outbreaks is absolutely what this country needs right now. And that’s the news. [music break]

[AD BREAK]

Jane Coaston: That’s all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe. Leave a review. Remember that if you’re going to mass fire people perhaps don’t mass fire the people in charge of the nukes. Then tell your friends to listen. And if you’re into reading and not just about how, yes, roughly 300 staff at the National Nuclear Security Administration were fired on Thursday. And then someone was like, wait, they handle our nuclear weapons stockpile. And currently the administration is trying to unfire them, like me. What a Day is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and subscribe at Crooked.com/subscribe. I’m Jane Coaston. And this moment would almost be kind of funny if it weren’t so fucking stupid and bad. [music break] What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It’s recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producers are Raven Yamamoto and Emily Fohr. Our producer is Michell Eloy. We had production help today from Tyler Hill, Johanna Case, Joseph Dutra, Greg Walters and Julia Claire. Our senior producer is Erica Morrison and our executive producer is Adriene Hill. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East. 

[AD BREAK]