This week, Lisa and David talk about Minneapolis Federal Prosecutors resign amid authoritarian pressure from Trump admin; Renee Good relatives hire George Floyd family lawyer; Trump admin ramping up efforts to have ICE agents generate video content for social media; Fed Chair Jerome Powell responds to DOJ investigation; Dan Bongino exits FBI; journalist Laura Jedeed says ICE offered her a job after a sloppy interview; ICE List website to expose ICE personnel faces Russian cyberattack; controversial cartoonist Scott Adams dead at 68; Greenland, NATO, and Trump’s New World map; appeals court upholds California’s Prop 50 redistricting maps; Trump admin posts using white supremacy imagery, experts say; FBI searches WaPo reporter’s home in classified documents probe; Clintons face contempt proceedings for no-show in House Epstein probe; Trump flips off autoworker at Ford plant who subsequently raises $1 million in GoFundMe; Migrant’s death at Fort Bliss detention center likely ruled homicide; and more.
Added Context For Whether Proud Boys Founder Enrique Tarrio Is An ICE Agent?
According to reporting, Enrique Tarrio is not an ICE agent or employee, and claims that a January 2026 leak “revealed” him as an ICE officer are false. The rumor grew out of a real leak of immigration-enforcement personnel data and a joking social media post, not any genuine hiring record.
The facts:
* A whistleblower leak exposed personal information for thousands of DHS and immigration-enforcement personnel on a site known as the “ICE List.”
* Social media users then circulated posts claiming Tarrio’s name appeared among ICE officers in that leaked material, asserting he was secretly an ICE agent.
* Publicly available entries for Tarrio on the “ICE List” site describe him as a “Propagandist; Agitator,” not as an ICE employee or officer and do not list him as agency staff.
Official statements and Tarrio’s own comments:
* A Department of Homeland Security/ICE spokesperson has stated that Tarrio has never been hired by ICE or worked for the agency.
* Tarrio responded to the rumor on X with a joking post about being “on a list,” then later clarified that he does not work for ICE and framed his earlier comment as satire.
Context: pardon and current status:
* Tarrio, a former Proud Boys leader, was sentenced to 22 years in prison for seditious conspiracy related to the January 6 attack.
* After Donald Trump returned to the presidency, a broad clemency action for January 6 defendants in January 2025 led to Tarrio’s release from federal custody, and he is now a private citizen living in Florida.
How Trump Gets Away With Selling Pardons and Other Unlawful Actions
Trump accepting money or other benefits in exchange for pardons or official favors is plainly bribery and would also look like a textbook emoluments problem if the value comes from foreign or domestic state-linked sources. The reason it currently is accepted in practice has much more to do with presidential immunity doctrine, weak enforcement, and political impunity than with the conduct being lawful.
What the law actually says:
* Federal bribery law (1818 U.S.C. § 201) makes it a crime for any public official to seek or accept “anything of value” in return for being influenced in the performance of an official act, which would include selling pardons.
* The Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause bars federal officials from accepting any present, emolument, office or title from a foreign state without congressional consent, and courts have rejected Trump’s effort to define “emolument” narrowly.
* Domestic emoluments principles (Article II “compensation” clause) and general anti-corruption norms are violated when a president’s private businesses or family vehicles are used to funnel benefits tied to official decisions.
On paper, there is no serious argument that outright pay‑for‑pardon schemes are substantively legal; they fit the core of what bribery and emoluments rules are meant to prevent.
Why it’s not being treated as illegal in practice:
* In Trump v. United States (2024), the Supreme Court held that presidents are absolutely immune from criminal prosecution for exercises of their “core” constitutional powers, explicitly including the pardon power.
* The majority described the pardon power as “conclusive and preclusive” and not regulable by Congress, and did not deny Justice Sotomayor’s warning that this logic shields a president who “takes a bribe for a pardon.”
* Because of that immunity, prosecutors cannot constitutionally charge the president himself for the bribe tied to the pardon, and even investigating his motives is severely constrained, which also makes it harder to prosecute the bribe‑payer.
Ultimately, the conduct matches the elements of bribery, but the Court has effectively carved the president out of criminal accountability when the bribe is tied to a core Article II act like clemency.
Emoluments and the second term:
* Before 2021, multiple suits alleged Trump violated the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses by taking foreign‑government and state‑linked money through his hotels and properties while in office.
* Lower courts accepted broad definitions of “emoluments” and allowed the cases to proceed, but the Supreme Court mooted them after Trump left office without ever ruling on the merits, leaving the constitutional questions unresolved.
* Ethics groups warn that, as long as Trump again refuses to divest, any continued flow of foreign or state‑linked money to his businesses while he exercises official power likely recreates the same emoluments problems in his second term.
In other words, there is a strong argument that these are constitutional violations, but there is no definitive Supreme Court holding enforcing that view and no current mechanism forcing divestment.
Why it feels lawless:
* The legal framework assumes impeachment and elections will check a president who abuses core powers, but partisan polarization has made impeachment an unreliable deterrent and ensured Senate acquittals in past Trump trials.
* The Court’s immunity doctrine, combined with its hostility to post‑hoc prosecution for official acts, removes the criminal backstop that would ordinarily make blatant bribery extremely risky for any other official.
* The result is a gap: conduct that is recognizably corrupt under statutes and constitutional clauses, but effectively insulated from enforcement against the president himself unless Congress or voters impose consequences.
Again, in the end, it is a violation of law and the Constitution in the substantive sense, but the Supreme Court and political institutions have made it almost non‑punishable for a sitting or former president when tied to core presidential powers.
Links:
Yergz Radio (yergzradio.com)
Dare Talk Radio (daretalkradio.com)
This Week in Outrage Substack (outrageoverload.net/twio)
George Floyd family lawyer representing Renee Good relatives (The Hill)
Statement from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell (Federal Reserve website)
Powell pushes back as Trump’s DOJ launches unprecedented investigation into Fed (PBS)
FBI picks career agent to replace Dan Bongino as deputy director (CNN)
Former Proud Boys leader falsely identified as an ICE officer (AP/Yahoo)
Dilbert creator Scott Adams, whose comic strip was cancelled over racist remarks, dead at 68 (CBC)
Trump issues a flurry of pardons, including for a woman whose sentence he commuted in his first term (AP)
Federal appeals court upholds California’s Prop 50 redistricting maps (USA Today)
Some Trump administration social media posts mirror extremist rhetoric (NBC News)
FBI searches a Washington Post reporter’s home as part of a classified documents investigation (AP)
Trump flipped off an autoworker at a Ford plant. The White House says it’s ‘appropriate’ (CNN)
Migrant’s death at Fort Bliss detention center likely ruled homicide (KFOX)
