HINDSIGHT - WRITE SOMETHING WORTH READING ABOUT OR DO SOMETHING WORTH WRITING ABOUT
Thursday, June 25, 2026
Tuesday, June 23, 2026
A Malicious Chapter in the History of American Justice
A Malicious Chapter
in the History of American Justice
June 21, 2026
By David French
Opinion
Columnist
An unusual tweet caught
my eye last week.
It was from Josh
Gerstein, Politico’s senior legal affairs reporter, and it said this: “NEW:
Trump admin takes rare step to quell controversy over prosecutorial misconduct
in dropped criminal case against Chicago-area anti-ICE protesters. Feds won’t
fight defense demand to pay bill for activists’ legal fees.”
Here’s why it’s so
notable. In our legal system, prosecutors rarely pay a criminal defendant’s
legal fees, even when the government loses its case. Defendants tend to be
reimbursed only when they can prove serious prosecutorial
misconduct. It’s even rarer for prosecutors to agree to pay those fees. Experienced
lawyers will read that tweet and know a single, simple truth.
Something very bad went
down in Illinois.
Why, you might wonder,
would I write about a criminal case in Chicagoland when the world is convulsed
by so many seismic events? Last week alone, Trump capitulated to Iran, the
United States cut some of its defense commitments to Europe, and Ukraine hit Moscow
with what appears to be its largest drone attack of the war.
We’re living in a moment
when every week seems to bring a new development of global importance.
But the Chicago case is indicative of
the fight for justice in the Trump administration. For every high-profile case
that goes to the Supreme Court, there are dozens of other, smaller cases in
federal courts across the country in which the Trump administration lies, bends
the rules, slanders innocent citizens and otherwise abuses the legal system to
persecute its political opponents.
And that brings us to
the story of the Broadview Six.
On Oct. 23, 2025, a
federal grand jury indicted a group of six protesters, including
current and former Democratic public officials, charging them with conspiring
to “injure” a federal officer “in his person or property.” The indictment
claimed that they, among other things, “banged aggressively on the government
vehicle’s side and back windows, hood and other vehicle body parts; crowded
together in the front and side of the government vehicle and pushed against the
vehicle to hinder and impede its movement.”
The indictment also
claims the defendants scratched the word “PIG” on the government vehicle.
The indictment was
important enough that Todd Blanche, then the deputy attorney general, announced the charges,
and they fit perfectly with a MAGA narrative that the real problem on the
streets wasn’t with rogue federal officers but with out-of-control leftist
activists — the all-powerful antifa of right-wing fever dreams.
To put this indictment
in context, it was announced around the same time that the administration
was debating whether to invoke the Insurrection Act to
use the military to crush anti-immigration protests.
In fact, the same day
that Blanche announced the charges, Will Scharf, the White House staff
secretary, wrote his boss, Susie Wiles, the White House chief of
staff, warning against using the Insurrection Act. And it was just a few months
later, in January, that the vice president, JD Vance, urged invoking the
Insurrection Act after federal agents shot and killed Renee Good and Alex
Pretti in Minnesota.
But then, in March, the strangest
thing happened in Illinois. The government dismissed its own case.
The government dropped
charges against two of the defendants, and the Broadview Six became the
Broadview Four. The government also dropped the felony charges against the
remaining defendants.
Here’s where things get
really interesting (and a little complicated). As Eric Columbus explained in
an excellent rundown of the case
in Lawfare, the defense attorneys filed a motion asking the court
for permission to see the grand jury transcripts in the case, to make sure that
the grand jury had been properly instructed about the law before it issued its
indictment.
The prosecutors, it
turns out, had already handed the judge a redacted copy of the transcripts. In
other words, they had blacked out key portions of the proceedings. This
prompted the federal judge in the case, April Perry, to require the government
to produce unredacted copies and to require any prosecutor “who participated in
the decision to redact portions of the grand jury transcripts” to appear before
her in person.
The unredacted
transcripts were damning. The judge found that federal prosecutors had behaved
improperly in at least three ways. They’d engaged in the forbidden practice of
“vouching,” in which prosecutors essentially tell grand jurors to trust them,
that the case is stronger than it seems. Vouching implies the existence of
secret proof. But grand juries are supposed to make decisions based on the
evidence put before them, not their personal trust in prosecutors.
Prosecutors had also impermissibly
spoken to grand jurors outside the jury room, an act that could place
additional pressure on grand jurors to yield to the prosecution’s version of
events.
And finally, prosecutors
had dismissed from deliberations those grand jurors who had disagreed with the
government’s case. Once again, the prosecution was improperly placing its thumb
on the scales of justice.
To make matters worse,
prosecutors had redacted all this evidence. There was an obvious cover-up. The
judge declared herself “incredibly shocked” and said that she had “never seen
the types of prosecutorial behavior before a grand jury that I saw in those
transcripts.”
She then said words no
lawyer wants to hear. She raised the possibility of “sanctions for
prosecutorial misconduct and for potential ethical violations, including lack
of candor to the court.”
Moments later, after a
brief recess, the government moved to dismiss the case against the remaining
defendants, with prejudice (meaning that the government can’t charge them again
for the same offense). The court immediately granted the motion — and a malicious
chapter in the history of American justice came to a righteous end.
Don’t think for a moment that the Trump administration’s
corruption and incompetence were confined to that case alone.
The Chicago
Sun-Times maintains a database of
criminal charges related to Operation Midway Blitz, the Trump administration’s
immigration crackdown in Chicago, and it’s astounding. Out of more than 30
cases filed so far, two resulted in guilty pleas, five resulted in deferred
prosecution agreements (slaps on the wrist), and two are still pending.
Twenty-four other cases have failed. Twenty were dismissed. Grand juries
refused to indict in at least three, and one resulted in acquittal.
This is a terrible
record in court, and the facts of the cases are sometimes egregious. In the
most notorious case, a federal agent shot a woman five times, and the
administration publicly accused her of being a domestic terrorist,
then charged her with assault —
only to dismiss the case after
an overwhelming amount of evidence (including body camera footage) contradicted
the government’s account.
The Chicago cases are collapsing just as the federal government is
announcing a new round of
criminal indictments, this time against protesters in Minnesota. Last Tuesday,
for example, the Department of Justice announced that it had charged 15 members
of a group called Direct Action Minnesota with, among other things, assaulting
federal officers, interstate stalking and interstate threats.
We don’t yet know enough
to evaluate those cases, but one thing is clear: The federal government has
lost the benefit of the doubt. Or, as Judge Perry said in Chicago, “I do
believe deeply in the presumption of regularity and that most government
attorneys are doing the best they can to do the right thing. That trust has
been broken.”
But there is a silver lining in the
dark cloud. In Chicago, the Trump administration has blinked. It’s not just
refusing to contest the payment of attorneys’ fees; U.S. Attorney Andrew
Boutros — the same person who presided over these corrupt prosecutions — has
changed his tune.
In May, he announced a
series of “sweeping reforms” to
his office’s grand jury procedures as part of a “remediation plan” to prevent
future misconduct.
When I’m in my more
optimistic moments, I think we’ll look back at last year as the high-water mark
of Trumpism, when the combination of arrogance after Trump’s victory and the
inherent authoritarianism of the Trumpist project led to a unique period of state
violence and legal corruption.
And now, my optimistic
self says, the justice system is reasserting itself. The combination of
personal courage, legal persistence and judicial independence is preserving due
process and the American system of justice.
But optimism is no cause
for complacency. Federal prosecutors in Illinois may be chastened, but Todd
Blanche, the man who announced the bogus prosecution of the Broadview Six in
the first place, is Trump’s nominee to replace Pam Bondi as the attorney general
of the United States.
If he is confirmed,
expect more vindictive prosecutions. Expect more prosecutorial misconduct. And
expect more federal judges (and more American citizens) to say, along with
Judge Perry in Illinois, that their trust is broken.
Why? Because the Trump administration
is the nation’s chief threat to the rule of law.
Monday, June 22, 2026
ONE ANGRY MAN
 |
All the ink spilled and lies spewed about the corrupt refurbishing of the Reflecting Pool, the court-ordered removal of Donald Trump’s name from the Kennedy Center, the taxpayer bill of $307 million for the “privately funded” ballroom are distractions.
Each is a worthy outrage for citizens who continue to watch the bar on this presidency fall to new lows. But for those who closely monitor Trump, including some members of Congress, these distractions may be part of a much bigger and perhaps more menacing plot.
Regular readers of this Substack know that Steady has long been reluctant to write about the many stories regarding plots that swirl around the internet and various podcasts. But there is a current one that may be worth attention.
Jamie Raskin, a high-ranking Democratic congressman from Maryland, knows Trump well. He was one of the House managers who led Trump’s second impeachment for inciting a violent insurrection against the Constitution. That impeachment failed in the Republican-dominated Senate.
Raskin is currently the ranking minority member on the House Judiciary Committee. He also served on the January 6 Select Committee. Though Democrats are in the minority and have had negligible power to stop Trump, Raskin has remained a vocal critic. And as cracks in the MAGA coalition widen, more people are listening to him and taking him seriously.
Last month, Raskin introduced legislation to block the $1.8 billion slush fund created to pay Trump’s allies and to nix the immunity deal shielding the president and his family from any past or future criminal, civil, or tax prosecution.
The fund was the eyebrow-raising “settlement” in the frivolous $10 billion suit Trump brought against the IRS. You’ll recall the stories about the president suing himself, and, no surprise, he won! $1.8 billion.
In a recent, wide-ranging interview with Puck, Raskin explained the need for the legislation, even though acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told a congressional hearing that the fund was “not going forward, period.”
Here’s the most important part. The congressman believes Trump “wants a political slush fund for his movement to turn that January 6 army into a permanent private militia for future political entanglements.” Once the former insurrectionists are paid, they will be beholden to Trump.
He could call them up to “monitor” midterm voting or intimidate his perceived rivals. We’ve already heard Trump talk about using ICE or other federal law enforcement to ensure election integrity for the midterms. Many of the now-pardoned insurrectionists would be ready to go again for their guy.
On the pro-democracy website Fulcrum, ethics lawyer James Kobak writes, “Controlling sources of compensation, whether through the slush fund settlement or some other means, gives Trump a new tool from the autocrat’s playbook: rewards for the insurrectionists and encouragement for them to do it again. This time, they would be primed in advance and would have other administration-appointed allies. This time, compensation from the slush fund would allow them to be well-resourced and well-armed. This time, they might succeed.”
“Everybody can see what’s going on here,” Raskin told Puck. He clarified that the fund is not only sinister but illegal. “The vast majority of Americans and members of Congress say no, the president cannot act as the legislature and appropriate $1.776 billion to give away to his political foot soldiers in MAGA, and the Proud Boys, and Oath Keepers, and Three Percenters, to pay them for their service working for insurrection against the government.”
When the slush fund was announced last month, Republicans got to Trump and convinced him what a terrible idea it was, especially so close to the midterms. He uncharacteristically heeded their advice and dropped it. Or did he? Is funding for the slush fund just on pause?
Last week, a federal judge requested that the Department of Justice provide the court with a written declaration confirming that “they will not take any action to create or operate the Anti-Weaponization Fund, and that the Anti-Weaponization Fund will not proceed in any manner, or under any name.”
Blanche, Trump’s former personal defense attorney, refused to put anything in writing, pointing to his congressional testimony, promising the fund was dead.
That may not be enough for senators who must vote on Blanche’s confirmation as attorney general next month. He is making the rounds on Capitol Hill to assuage any concerns lawmakers might have. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), who is up for reelection, described her meeting with Blanche as “very good.”
“We had an extensive discussion on the Anti-Weaponization Fund, which he has assured me with no equivocation at all that he is not for it, will not pursue it, that it will not exist,” she told Politico.
Collins was famously assured by Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was “settled law,” and he would not touch it. As we know, Justice Kavanaugh did in fact join five other justices in overturning Roe. Earlier this month, Collins said she did not regret her vote to confirm Kavanaugh.
Trump’s corruption-laden vanity projects, including the slush fund, are diverting our attention from Trump’s bigger failures and grifts: losing his war against Iran, his multifaceted criminal enterprise operating with impunity, and the president’s most recent executive order about voter identification that could disenfranchise tens of thousands of Americans.
The throughline for all of these things is Trump’s mounting rage as he is backed further into corners. Anyone who has been following his presidency knows Trump is an angry man. Angry men often become violent men.
Trump goaded an angry mob of his supporters to storm the Capitol when he lost the 2020 election. He ordered the destruction of unarmed boats in the Caribbean Sea, killing dozens. He promised to end all foreign wars and then started an unnecessary and unprovoked one. He seems to relish the role of an angry, dangerous man. Just look at his increasingly vitriolic and sometimes downright unhinged rhetoric toward Iran.
Five weeks into the war, he posted on social media, “There will be nothing like it!!! Open the F****in’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.”
A few weeks later, he threatened to send Iran “back to the stone age where they belong,” and posted an AI-generated image of himself carrying an assault rifle with the caption, “NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!”
On Sunday, effectively derailing the negotiations, he said, “We may take over the Strait if we have to. I’ll blow the s--t out of them,” he told Fox (News).
When not blowing up at the Iranians, Trump turned his ire on Raskin. “Jamie Raskin, a Loser in Life, who worked endlessly during my First Term to impeach me, will guaranteed be [SIC] trying to do it again despite one of the most successful Presidencies in history.”
Raskin says that if the Democrats reclaim the majority, nothing is off the table, including impeachment. But this time, it is about so much more than that. It is about accountability. It is about corruption and graft. As Raskin added, “We have a number of different mechanisms for checking the corruption and lawlessness that have overtaken our country.”
NEW INC. MAGAZINE COLUMN BY HOWARD TULLMAN
Your
Customers’ Biggest Problems Aren’t Unique. Use This 1 Simple AI Method to Fix
Them Fast
The most valuable data-centric
businesses today understand that the game has changed again.
EXPERT OPINION BY HOWARD TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH INVESTORS @TULLMAN
Jun 22, 2026
Time is the scarcest
resource in our lives. Data may be the oil of the digital economy, but the
timeliness and contextual delivery of that data is what creates real value. One
of the things I learned in my first business—providing market-based vehicle valuations
to auto insurers—is that it didn’t matter how fresh and accurate our data was
or how quickly we responded to inbound inquiries. What mattered is whether the
folks asking for the answers were accessible and available when we got back to
them with the information. The when and where of the data delivery (context)
was just as important as the what (content) in the final analysis.
Driving our people crazy
to meet certain performance standards, arbitrary operating metrics, turnaround
times, or other contractually mandated service levels was simply stupid if the
results didn’t matter to the customers. Not everything needed to be instantly
available or made into a crisis or a fire drill if no one was going to
appreciate, recognize, or compensate us for the extra effort. Youthful and
aggressive enthusiasm eventually led to painful experiences.
It took a while to get
the flow and timing correct in that business, but the core offering–real-time
and precise valuation information as opposed to the stale, generalized
historical data that was the industry standard–radically changed the way in
which claims for lost or stolen vehicles were settled in the auto insurance
game. Today, 44 years later, that business, CCC Intelligent Solutions, is still operating as the unquestioned industry leader,
works with every major insurer, and is worth billions. The most important
lesson we learned is that a one-dimensional emphasis on the speed of delivery
or the quantity of the data alone often creates more undue stress rather than
building value.
Today, the most valuable
data-centric businesses understand that the game has changed again. Now,
the key and central concern is capturing vast amounts of data regarding
relevant activity—in the moment, at the edge and from both employees and their customers—and
then converting and communicating it back to the team members as immediate,
actionable instruction. The clearer and more immediate that any strategic
inputs can be, the more accurate and valuable the decisions relying upon them
will become. The only right time is real time and right now.
And, with considerable
assistance from AI tools, we’re seeing the emergence of companies like Pulse that are developing systems to provide real-time data
flow, extensive and timely analysis and actionable feedback that can be used
effectively to inform and improve employees’ qualitative behaviors
rather than simply their quantitative decisions.
These new systems
function as intelligent filters, flow managers, and ranking agents so that, by
the time the often overwhelming and unmanageable volume of customer feedback
data is parsed, parceled, and prioritized, any business can turn
scattered, duplicative and unhelpful volumes of customer inputs from multiple
sources spread across their entire organization into sorted, identified,
consolidated and actionable categories and clear, next-step instructions and
directions.
These new systems
reinforce what we’ve known for decades but help to organize and deliver better,
more timely and comprehensive solutions. Three key areas of addressing customer
issues and concerns really stand out, and I believe that they are true of almost
every business.
A small number of
recurring problems and errors cause the bulk of issues with customers
As many times as you
tell your team how, when and what to say, they still forget, quit, freelance,
get bored, and get upset or distracted. Automated and interactive scripts,
dynamic checklists, sidebar chats and prompts can constantly provide and
reinforce the right messages, paths and online responses to issues and
objections. Training and practice are helpful, but not as valuable or effective
as real-world experiences and immediate feedback.
Problems are rarely
unique to individual, unhappy customers. Solutions need to address root
causes and then be quickly circulated to the entire team
Solving one-off problems
with unhappy customers is necessary, but it’s not sufficient in the long run as
a strategy for overall improvements in deficient processes and unsatisfactory
behaviors and/or product performance. Even more importantly, once a broader fix
is determined and in place and applicable to all customers, it’s critical that
the solution (either what’s working or what’s not working) be immediately
transmitted to the entire team and incorporated in all of the supportive tools
and materials, all future interactions, and all new changes and product
enhancements and improvements.
All of us are smarter
than any one of us
It’s hard to overstate
the value of aggregated, collated, and carefully analyzed data collected from
literally millions of conversations, transactions, interactions and
dispositions when you’re trying to continually enrich and enhance the
customers’ experience and your product or service’s brand, reputation,
consistency, and value. Tools like Pulse’s Feedback Intelligence OS put all of
this accumulated knowledge and experience directly and immediately and
intelligently into the hands of your key decision-makers with actionable
instruction and guidance.
The goal today is to
make all your people smart as fast as possible and Pulse may be one of the best
and most cost-effective systems out there to move your business quickly down
the path to improved results and better satisfaction inside and outside of your
business.
You are either gonna get with it or get lost.
You are either gonna get with it or get lost.
‘It’s where we are in society,’ Plum tells Fast Company. ‘You are either gonna get with it or get lost.’
[Photos: Getty Images]
BY Mya Copeland
Listen to this ArticleMore info
0:00/4:22
Fresh off a historic 40-point performance in the finals of the Unrivaled season, WNBA player Kelsey Plum is taking a different shot: an AI twin.
Fans can now voice call with a digital version of the Los Angeles Sparks star. Plum announced the twin on her personal Instagram account on March 6, asking her AI self for advice on her ponytail and coffee versus energy drink.
Plum is the first professional female athlete to launch a verified AI digital twin. It’s a move that’s earning plaudits as a way for women in sports to take control of their image and expand their reach.
“The opportunity to have a twin that can connect with fans, with young people, people that love basketball, people that are just interested in sports. The range is endless,” Plum says. “It’s where we are in society, and I think you are either gonna get with it or get lost.”
Collaboration With Talk2Me
Plum created the twin in partnership with Talk2Me, an AI communications company that creates verified digital humans. CEO Randy Adams considers himself to be on the leading (or bleeding) edge of innovation like this often. He’s a self-described serial entrepreneur—coinventor of Adobe PDF, cofounder of digital comedy brand Funny or Die, and now working on digital AI twins.
“[Kelsey has] moved things from a business standpoint. She’s moved things first from a cultural standpoint,” he says. “We need to find people who are willing to take the risk to go out there and do this. And she’s been willing to do it. And we’re very honored that she is.”
From a technical standpoint, the goal is to get the personality right based on what the celebrity wants. For Plum, that means interacting with fans when she can’t.
“In the arena, I can only talk to so many people, so many fans at one time, and so I think the next best thing would then be to log on and have a one-on-one conversation,” Plum says. “I think it’s just a great opportunity to reach more people and obviously, too, we’re gonna be able to see what people are asking and wanna see, and we’ll be able to grow from there.”
Maximizing reach
Athletes finding ways to connect with fans off the court isn’t new. OK Tomorrow founder and CEO Nilesh Ashra is an expert on the intersection of AI and creativity. He says a move like this is helpful for celebrities like Plum because they’re looking for ways to maximize their reach.
“Old world was they write a book. Recently, new world was create a coaching program,” he says. “Brand-new world is a digital twin.”
And it is a bit of a brand-new world. Because Plum is one of the first to step into this kind of AI digitization, she admits there might be learning curves with some of the twin’s responses. Those potential distortions are where Ashra hesitates.
“I think there is a benefit to interactivity. I think the risks are on unexpected behavior,” he says. “All AI models are nondeterministic. You actually don’t know how they’re going to respond until they’re in that context.”
He’s not the only skeptic. Since Plum’s Instagram launch, commenters haven’t been shy about voicing their concerns about this use of AI.
Some words of caution
“Big fan here in cybersecurity . . . please, you’re teaching it, it’s learning every second and personal interactions add specifity to you besides what it’s gathered about you from the cloud, the IoT, etc.,” one Instagram user wrote.
Many of the comments are from users expressing their support for Plum as an individual and player but opposing the use of AI due to environmental and cybersecurity concerns.
Others are supportive. “I’ll just do your post exit interview with your AI twin, I’ll let you know what the feedback is,” Unrivaled CEO Alex Bazzell joked.
Plum knows the twin isn’t a replacement for her. She’s passionate about mental health and connecting young people with community. But while she’s taking care of business on the court, she wants her AI version to connect with fans in the meantime.
“I just think it gives a way . . . to connect, and that’s a cool thing,” Plum says. “Obviously, we use basketball . . . but I think using a twin in and outside of a basketball lane is something that will be special for people.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)