‘Authoritarian playbook': DHS accuses critics of assaulting officers when videos say otherwise
After New York City comptroller Brad Lander this week became the latest prominent Democrat to be arrested while monitoring and protesting US immigration authorities, the Trump administration trotted out a familiar refrain to justify his detention.
The mayoral candidate had 'assaulted' law enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) asserted, warning 'if you lay a hand on a law enforcement officer, you will face consequences'.
The accusation, which DHS has also recently leveled against a member of Congress and a high-profile union leader, have sparked consternation, particularly as videos of the incidents did not show the officials attacking officers and instead captured officers' aggressive behavior and manhandling of the officials.
In several cases, DHS's public accusations of assault were not followed by criminal charges. Civil rights advocates and scholars on policing say the government's assault claims against well-known members of the opposing party, and the repetition of those accusations, nonetheless are troubling indicators of rising authoritarianism. They argued the US government is blatantly misrepresenting events captured on footage in an effort to intimidate powerful officials and ordinary citizens alike who seek to challenge the White House's policies.
And Alec Karakatsanis, the founder of Civil Rights Corps, a nonprofit legal advocacy group, argued: 'By relentlessly telling the population that 'two plus two equals five', it helps determine who is willing to go along with 'two plus two equals five' and deny basic truths.
'It's also about a longer-term and more profound assault on the very notion of truth – to get people so confused that they don't know what is what,' said Karakatsanis, author of Copaganda, a book about false narratives promoted by police.
'This is the classic propaganda tactic of George Orwell's 1984,' he added
Lander was arrested by federal agents inside an immigration court building on Tuesday, as he asked officers whether they had a judicial warrant to detain an immigrant he was accompanying. He was released after four hours, and so far, no charges have been filed against him.
Video of the encounter shows plainclothes officers, some in masks, pinning Lander to a wall, handcuffing him and escorting him away. Lander had held on to the arm of the immigrant who was being targeted.
Still, DHS assistant secretary, Tricia McLaughlin, said in a statement to the press and on social media soon after the incident that it was Lander who had assaulted officers.
The accusations echo those against US congresswoman LaMonica McIver, a Democrat, who, DHS claims, assaulted and impeded law enforcement when she and two other representatives arrived at a privately run Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) detention center to inspect the facility on 9 May. Representatives are authorized to conduct this oversight without prior notice, and McIver said she wanted to ensure the facility was clean and safe and detainees had access to their attorneys.
Shaky videos of the encounter, some released by DHS, showed a chaotic scrum where McIver and others were surrounded by officers, some masked, as law enforcement and the representative pushed against each other. Soon after, she was given a tour of the facility, but a month later was indicted for assault, a charge she has strongly denied.
In Los Angeles, David Huerta, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) of California, was arrested on 6 June when he showed up to document an immigration raid at a garment factory. As he stood outside, blurry footage showed officers pushing him to the ground, with multiple agents on top of him as he was put in handcuffs.
US attorneys charged him with conspiracy to impede an officer. He was not charged with assault, but even after the complaint was filed, DHS has continued to respond to questions about his case with a statement that says: 'Huerta assaulted Ice law enforcement.' Huerta was hospitalized after his arrest, before being transported to jail.
And last week, California senator Alex Padilla was handcuffed and forcibly removed from a DHS press conference as he attempted to ask a question, with the FBI accusing him of 'resisting' law enforcement. He was not charged with a crime.
In a statement to the Guardian on Thursday, McLaughlin said Democratic politicians were 'contributing to the surge in assaults of our Ice officers through their repeated vilification and demonization of Ice', adding: 'This violence against ICE must end.'
DHS has repeatedly asserted in recent weeks that it has seen a major increase in assaults on its officers. Since May, the department has often cited the claim that Ice officers, who are part of DHS, are facing 'a 413% increase in assaults against them'.
Spokespeople for DHS have repeatedly refused to respond to questions about the source of the statistic, how many assaults have occurred and what time periods it was comparing. In April, a press release had referred to a '300% surge in assaults'.
McLaughlin, of DHS, said in an email late Thursday that Ice officers were 'now facing a 500% increase in assaults', but again did not respond to inquiries about the figure.
Some experts on US law enforcement said DHS's narratives were rooted in a long legacy of law enforcement demonizing its critics, though the Trump administration's claims seemed increasingly brazen in their deviation from the truth.
Andrea J Ritchie, co-founder of Interrupting Criminalization, a group of organizers that advocates against incarceration and other forms of criminalization, said US law enforcement has frequently prosecuted people who had been abused and injured by officers. 'How many videos exist of cops yelling, 'stop resisting', while someone has their hands up and the cops are beating them?' she said. Civil rights lawyers who take on police misconduct cases often refer to the 'trifecta' of charges – resisting arrest, assault on an officer and obstruction of justice, she said: 'The harder you get beaten, the more likely you'll get those charges.'
What's new under Donald Trump, she said, was the frequency of these kinds of accusations against high-profile figures.
Lauren Regan, an Oregon-based civil rights lawyer who has represented activists facing prosecution, said she saw arresting elected officials as part of an 'authoritarian playbook' designed to make people widely afraid that they, too, could be targeted, regardless of their backgrounds.
'You keep it chaotic and random so no one thinks they're safe,' said Regan. 'When elected officials with privilege, power, education and training get thrown to the ground and cuffed or jailed, then what is going to happen to us? Everyone is at risk.'
It's a point that wasn't lost on Padilla, who said after his detention: 'If they can do this to a United States senator who has the audacity to ask a question, just imagine what they're doing to so many people across the country.'
Indeed, since the recent protests against immigration raids began in LA, hundreds of demonstrators in southern California have been arrested by local police. Federal prosecutors have formally charged a handful of them assaulting officers – though soon after moved to dismiss two of the first cases they filed.
In an incident of two protesters arrested at a 7 June demonstration, a video of the chaotic scuffle showed one of the protesters being shoved by an agent just before the arrests, and officers taking both protesters to the ground. US prosecutors charged both men with assaulting officers, but filed a motion to dismiss the charges a week later after one of them told the Guardian he had not attacked the agents, and was himself severely injured in the confrontation.
Others have been blasted by DHS amid immigration enforcement actions in LA. Last week, the Los Angeles Times published video of border patrol agents detaining a 29-year-old US citizen outside his car repair shop. In the footage, the man repeatedly said he was an American citizen, but an agent pushed him into a metal gate. He was eventually released. After the LA Times published a story documenting rising 'fears of racial profiling', DHS sent out a press release calling it 'fake news', including a screenshot of video of the man's arrest, and saying: 'THE FACTS: 'The facts are a US citizen was arrested because he ASSAULTED US Customs and Border Protection Agents.'
DHS did not respond to the Guardian's questions asking for clarification on what constituted assault in these incidents, instead re-sending the statements it had originally posted and shared on social media in the immediate aftermath of the arrests.
Alex Vitale, sociology professor and coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College, said that while the public thinks of 'assault' as causing injury, in the context of arrests and prosecution, it can be a 'nebulous category' that includes 'unwanted physical conduct'.
Cases can drag on for months, he added, no matter the strength of the evidence the government is presenting: 'Police understand that the arrest and the process is the penalty even if there's no conviction in the end.'
Mike German, a former FBI agent and fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonprofit, said that the government's repeated misinformation about violence against officers risks backfiring: 'Officers do at times get assaulted, but if agencies continue to make patently false claims and suggest that any physical contact is an assault, you're going to undermine legitimate cases.'
He said he was also concerned about the impacts of officers using heavy force in arrests that don't require it: 'Three or four agents tackling a US senator clearly isn't necessary. That kind of force compels resistance. It's hard to let yourself be violently attacked without your natural reaction of trying to defend yourself, and then if officers say that's assault, that undermines public trust.'
Ritchie, author of Invisible No More, a book about police violence against women of color, said she was not surprised that out of the recent prominent arrests, the only politician who continues to be prosecuted for assault is McIver: 'Black women get punished for speaking up and it's framed as assault.'
She said it was crucial that communities continue to forcefully reject law enforcement narratives: 'They are trying to manufacture reality. It is upon us to say the government is lying to us. This is a message they are trying to send and we're not accepting it and certainly not normalizing it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Multiple full-time jobs': Inside the life of young parents in Congress
WASHINGTON — Just one week after Texas Rep. Brandon Gill's wife had given birth to their second child, the first-term Republican boarded a plane to Washington, D.C., to vote on a crucial markup for President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' It wasn't Gill's plan to return to the Capitol so soon. In fact, the 31-year-old father had left town on paternity leave and wasn't expected to return for a few weeks. But as opposition grew among Republican lawmakers, the framework was threatened with failure in the House Budget Committee markup — requiring all hands on deck to return and salvage the measure. 'We got to the point where … it's time for this bill to get voted out of committee, and they needed my vote,' Gill told the Deseret News in an interview. But even with Gill's return, the bill still failed to make it out of the committee, resulting in several negotiations over the weekend between GOP leadership and fiscal conservatives to get Trump's tax bill passed. The committee ultimately advanced the package during a rare Sunday night meeting that Gill once again had to leave his wife and children to attend. 'I flew back immediately after (the Friday meeting), and then came in for a Sunday night meeting, and did the same thing,' Gill recalled. 'And we were able to get it done.' The back-and-forth underscores the difficulty for parents in Congress who must balance the demands of raising a family with the chaotic nature of being a lawmaker in Washington, D.C. Take Utah Rep. Blake Moore, for example. Because of his duties on Capitol Hill, the father of four was forced to miss the birth of his youngest son as well as his first two birthdays. But even on average weeks, Moore's absence is felt by both him and his family. For instance, chauffeuring kids from school to sports practices and back home again can be challenging for his wife, who must juggle the competing schedules on her own. 'It's a huge sacrifice,' Moore said. 'It's really tough.' Moore says he likens the experience to a military deployment of sorts — reflecting on the sacrifice made by those in the armed services. 'To some degree, that makes it a little bit easier to go through this. But it's still hard,' Moore said. 'I've chosen this. My wife and I have decided we're in this together.' Moore, who was first elected in 2020, notes the difficulties of navigating a public profile don't end when your children become slightly more independent. As their kids become older and more politically aware, it opens the door for them to witness attacks against their parents — whether it's negative news coverage or protests outside campaign events. 'They can see what some of the commentary is. I don't read the comments anymore, but the commentary is mostly negative,' Moore said. 'That's something that I knew was a part of it, but my kids were so young when I first ran for Congress. Now they are a little bit more aware, and it's like, oh, they're gonna see people say some really, really rude (and) hateful things about me.' But despite the challenges, the job does allow lawmakers to carve out some time to spend with their families. Moore, for instance, spends Saturdays at home coaching his sons' little league teams. Gill similarly dedicates time to his family when he is home, telling the Deseret News: 'My top priority is my wife and kids.' 'Whenever I'm home, I try to be fully engaged with my family,' said Gill, who has two young children. 'So whenever I'm in D.C., we absolutely pack the schedule to be as productive as possible, to free up time whenever I'm at home. I would say that it's kind of like multiple full-time jobs.' And that effort doesn't stop when lawmakers board their planes to come to the office. As members spend time on the campaign trail or fulfill their duties in Washington, their family members are often right by their sides. 'It is definitely a lot to juggle, but we try to keep the family involved as much as possible,' Gill said. 'So whenever Danielle and the kids can come up here, they do. They travel with me. So it adds a little bit more chaos, but it's a good chaos.' Several members often bring their children to Capitol Hill, even occasionally bringing them along to vote on legislation. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., who gave birth to her only child in August 2023, is often seen wheeling a stroller into the House chamber during votes throughout the week. Rep. Brittany Pettersen, D-Colo., regularly carries her 6-month-old son to votes and press conferences. Just one month after giving birth, Pettersen suprised her colleagues by returning to Washington to oppose a key vote on Republicans' budget plans. The proposal ultimately passed, albeit by the slimmest of margins, but Pettersen said the effort was worth it. 'We went back and forth on if I could leave Sam, what that would look like, but we didn't know how long I'd be stuck there. And you can't just leave your newborn baby for days,' Pettersen recalled. 'It was terrifying, it was overwhelming, but I knew that too many lives are on the line in my district, and I was not going to not be there.' Pettersen made headlines as she held Sam in her arms while she cast her vote against the proposal. As a result, her son has become somewhat of a micro-celebrity. 'He's been in so many pictures of people visiting my office, and you know, they'll shake my hand and say, 'Oh, hi, nice to meet you.' And then they'll see Sam, and it's 'I can't believe Sam's here,'' Pettersen said in an interview. 'So everyone's very excited when they get to see Sam in the office.' Since being born in January, Sam has traveled with Pettersen every time she has returned to Washington — a total of 18 flights so far, Pettersen told the Deseret News. 'I remind myself that while some of the pieces of my job are unique, it's being in Congress, obviously, but I'm doing what moms and parents across America do,' Pettersen said. 'You have to somehow make it work, and every day you have to figure out what that looks like.' Moore says his sons enjoy coming with him to vote on the House floor, especially when they get to mess around with their dad's colleagues. 'There's a video of my son, sort of kicking (New York Rep.) Andrew Garbarino in the shins. And he may have been directed to do that by me or not,' Moore said with a chuckle. 'They love (Iowa Rep.) Randy Feenstra because they've gone skiing with him before.' 'I think the biggest positive is being able to have my kids experience things that you wouldn't otherwise get to experience,' he added. Although the presence of children in the chamber has become more commonplace in recent years, it hasn't always been that way. Up until a few decades ago, Congress mostly consisted of older men who didn't have young children at home. That demographic has begun to shift in recent years, especially after Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., became the first female senator to give birth while in office in 2018. Since then, there's been somewhat of a baby boom on Capitol Hill — followed by increased efforts to make the country's deliberative body more accessible to young families. Those efforts reached a head earlier this year when Luna and Pettersen forged a rare bipartisan coalition, pressing GOP leaders to allow new mothers to vote remotely while taking maternity leave at home. The pair managed to freeze action on the floor and force a deal with leadership, who ultimately agreed to a watered-down rule change to cancel out absent votes. 'Thanks to POTUS and his support of new moms being able to vote when recovering from child (birth) as well as those who worked hard to get these changes done,' Luna said in a statement when the rule was finalized in April. 'If we truly want a pro-family Congress, these are the changes that need to happen.' But the system still contains flaws that make that system difficult in practice, Pettersen said. For example, shortly after the 'vote pairing' resolution was adopted, Pettersen told the Deseret News she reached out to her Republican colleagues to cancel out her vote so she could return home for her maternity leave. 'Of course, nobody would, because it was a Republican priority bill,' Pettersen said. 'It's just unworkable. And so there is so much more that we need to do.' While that may start with increased accommodations for young parents, Pettersen said, it should extend to making daily schedules more adaptable for lawmakers with children. 'We have schedules that are not made for for regular people, for young parents with young kids,' Pettersen said. 'It's a system that's created for retired, older, wealthier individuals, and so we need to modernize the way that our schedule looks.' Most lawmakers agree that Congress should be more convenient for those with children at home, arguing it would be beneficial for younger adults to influence policy. While it is difficult, 'it's doable,' they say. 'It's far more doable if you're a representative from Virginia or North Carolina or Pennsylvania than if you are from Utah or North Dakota,' Moore said. 'I think it's just an overall good trend that you're seeing more of it, and people are realizing it's possible. But the challenges are still very — they're insurmountable in some cases.' 'I do think it's a really good thing for us to be more accessible to parents, partly because that helps allow people who are a little bit younger to be here, which is a good thing,' Gill added. 'It adds a little bit of representation that maybe wasn't here before.'
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's tax and spending cuts bill clears key test vote in Senate as Republicans race to get measure to president's desk
WASHINGTON (AP) — Trump's tax and spending cuts bill clears key test vote in Senate as Republicans race to get measure to president's desk. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court Abets Trump's Defiance of Court Orders
A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM's Morning Memo. Sign up for the email version. As Josh Kovensky reported yesterday, the Supreme Court's order pausing a preliminary injunction against Trump's policy of third-country removals without due process will undoubtedly fire up his brutal deportation machine, and embolden administration officials to continue to flout court orders restraining it. The case, Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D., involves a challenge to the Trump administration policy directing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to round up noncitizens the government previously was unable to deport to their home country, and then remove them to a third country without warning, due process, or consideration of the conditions they might face there. The preliminary injunction in the case, which the administration evaded and defied on several occasions, required the government to provide plaintiffs with notice and time to challenge their removal. Shockingly, the Supreme Court stayed that injunction pending final resolution of the case, offering the administration carte blanche to continue third-country removals in the meantime. Worse, it gave the administration a very big cookie by pausing a court order that the administration already had defied. Lawfare's Quinta Jurecic has a detailed, maddening account of each step of the government's 'legalistic noncompliance' with court orders in this and similar immigration cases, which involves 'delaying implementation of court orders, adopting hyper-technical interpretations of judicial rulings in order to engineer loopholes, and asserting ignorance and confusion whenever something goes wrong.' D.V.D., she notes, 'stands out as a chronicle of noncompliance from the very beginning—a cascade of sloppiness and calculated misunderstandings on the government's part that has resulted in potentially serious danger for a gay Guatemalan man removed from the United States, along with the continued detention of eight men at a U.S. military base in Djibouti.' The ruling is 'disastrous,' according to legal scholar Steve Vladek. 'For the Court to not only grant emergency relief in this case, but to offer nary a word of explanation either in criticism of the government's behavior, or in defense of why it granted relief notwithstanding that behavior, is to invite—if not affirmatively enable—comparable defiance of future district court orders by the government.' After the Trump administration attempted to fire remaining Voice of America (VOA) staffers en masse on Friday, the judge in the pending case challenging the evisceration of the agency, Royce Lamberth, ordered the parties to appear in court yesterday. Lamberth, a Ronald Reagan appointee, had issued a preliminary injunction against the U.S. Agency for Global Media, and VOA's parent agency, in April, finding 'defendants are likely in violation of numerous federal laws' in their quest to slash the news service, mostly by terminating virtually all of its journalists. When Lamberth asked the government's counsel, Brenda Gonzalez Horowitz, why he had not been notified of Friday's layoff letters, she protested that they had been complying 'in good faith' with his April order. 'I don't think so,' was his reply, before ordering the government to file an update on how it is complying with the injunction by Friday. To commemorate today's anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, overturning the constitutional right to an abortion, the Christian right is pressing the Trump administration to restrict use of the abortion pill mifepristone. As part of a 'day of fasting and prayer for life' hosted by the Family Research Council, the organization urges followers to 'Pray for the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] to revoke the dangerous policy of the Biden administration regarding mifepristone and chemical abortion regulations, and to reinstate safety standards that prioritize the health and safety of mothers and their unborn children.' Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has asked the FDA to review mifepristone's safety, following the unscientific claims of Christian right organizations opposed to abortion. Yesterday the Washington Post published an op-ed by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, giving her space to expound on her ongoing commitment to barring foreign students from Harvard. Her opening paragraph baselessly charged that 'school leadership has not complied with the Department of Homeland Security's lawful oversight duties, has fostered antisemitic extremism and used taxpayer money to collaborate with an American adversary.' Harvard political scientist Steven Levitsky, co-author of 'How Democracies Die,' called the piece 'extraordinarily authoritarian' and a 'whiff of fascism.' Noem's concluding sentence proves Levitsky's point. 'Harvard must decide whether it wishes to be a partner to the United States,' Noem wrote, 'or an adversary to American values.' Last night, a federal judge in Boston, Allison Burroughs, blocked Trump administration efforts to bar foreign students from Harvard for the second time in a week. Tomorrow the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold confirmation hearings on Trump's nomination of his former personal attorney, Emil Bove, to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. As Trump's acting Deputy Attorney General, Bove was notoriously at the center of the corrupt withdrawal of the federal corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Justice Connection, a group of Department of Justice alumni, has also released a scathing video explaining why Bove is wildly unqualified for the bench. An account by a DOJ attorney fired by the Trump administration, Erez Reuveni, provides even more damning details. According to Reuveni's account, Bove openly pressed for the government to violate court orders in immigration cases. 'Bove stated that D.O.J. would need to consider telling the courts 'fuck you' and ignore any such order,' Reuveni revealed in a document submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee and the DOJ Inspector General yesterday, the New York Times reports. Even the Wall Street Journal editorial board questions Bove's fitness for a lifetime appointment, writing that 'his reputation lately is as a smashmouth partisan who wields the law as a weapon.' Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has tallied just some of the cost of the assault on our federal government by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). It found DOGE cuts to medical research 'could amount to an estimated $10 billion loss in economic activity, and a loss of approximately 44,000 jobs a year;' that U.S.-based organizations contracting with the U.S. Agency for International Development lost $28.9 billion in funding; and that $500 billion will be lost to the Internal Revenue Service owing to DOGE's elimination of staff and programs there. These figures are just the tip of the iceberg, and do not include DOGE's assaults on other agencies. Nor can we compute other kinds of losses, including America's international soft power, the public's trust in government, and countless non-monetary societal benefits accruing from a functional government staffed by nonpartisan experts in their fields. The New Yorker's Charles Bethea offers a look at Joe Gebbia, thought to be a possible successor to Elon Musk as head of DOGE. Bethea's doozy of a lede contains most of what you probably need to know: Who will help lead the Department of Government Efficiency now that Elon Musk has left the scene? News reports have mentioned Joe Gebbia, a Tesla board member and a co-founder of Airbnb, as a possible replacement. Gebbia is forty-three. Like Musk—his close friend—he is a billionaire, a resident of Austin, Texas, and the rumored recipient of a hair transplant. Gebbia formally announced his political conversion on X in January, posting that, after years of supporting Democrats, he finally 'did [his] own research' and concluded that Donald Trump 'deeply cares about our nation.' His feed has a MAHA flavor: Big Food exposés ('The truth about Ketchup') alternate with digs at liberals suffering from 'TDS,' or Trump Derangement Syndrome. With or without Gebbia at the helm, DOGE continues to be a danger to democracy, health and safety, privacy, the civil service system, checks and balances–you know, everything. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), who has never met a Trump action he didn't like, brushed off questions from reporters about whether he would bring a bipartisan resolution, co-sponsored by California Democrat Ro Khanna and Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie, to require Trump to seek Congressional approval for further military intervention in Iran. (Trump purported to expel Massie from the MAGA movement over his co-sponsorship of the measure, calling him a 'pathetic LOSER.') 'It's all politics,' Johnson said, his characteristic diversionary tactic. 'This is not a time for politics.' Or, apparently, as ever, congressional oversight. Media critic Mark Jacob offers eight suggestions for the media to avoid turning war with Iran into the sort of entertainment loop Trump craves. Mother Jones reporter Anna Merlan digs into all the bogus investigations FBI Director Kash Patel and his deputy Dan Bongino have promised, but never delivered on. The piece is filled with eye-rolling details of all the ridiculous conspiracies that Trumpland chases, hoping to feed the base's voracious appetite for new diabolical content about their perceived enemies, from Joe Biden to James Comey to the Chinese Communist Party. But for Patel and Bongino, who have their positions precisely because of their proximity to that world, there's a serious catch: Today, with the conspiracy world full of ever more competing storylines, theories, and hoped-for outcomes, the idea of disclosure remains a singular focal point of longing; that someone high up, somewhere, will finally tell us what we are desperate to know. Against that backdrop, Bongino, Patel, and other Trump figures are still awkwardly trying to transition from demanding to know the truth to being the people in a position to provide it. In the meantime, Bongino and other Trump figures are continuing to create content by churning out endless tweets, sending performatively verbose press releases, and making appearances on partisan news channels, all aimed at heightening their own profile and shifting blame from anything they have not yet achieved. Where before they cast themselves as independent investigators calling on a shadowy government to reveal its secrets, now they're forced to play new roles, as dedicated and diligent public servants. This is, of course, boring: 'I gave up everything for this,' Bongino lamented recently on Fox & Friends. Of course, as with all things Trump, the absurdity is part of the point. And, as always, that does not at all diminish how radically dangerous it is for this to be the conduct of the director of the FBI.
