The Dictatorship
How defendant in Minnesota went free because of turmoil…
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The federal prosecutor’s office in Minnesota has been gutted by a wave of career officials resigning or retiring over objections to Trump administration directives. Because of the turmoil, 12-time convicted felon Cory Allen McKay caught a break.
With a three-decade record of violent crime that includes strangling a pregnant woman and firing a shotgun under a person’s chin, McKay was scheduled to stand trial next month on methamphetamine trafficking charges that could have locked him up for 25 years. Instead, he walked free after the prosecutor on his case retired.
The Trump administration says its aggressive immigration enforcement in Minnesota has improved public safety. Left in its wake, though, is a greatly weakened U.S. attorney’s office, where many prosecutors resented the way President Donald Trump’s political appointees at the Justice Department managed them.
Offices in other states, from New York to Virginia, have also been affected by resignations as prosecutors object to what they see as the politicization of decision-making under Trump. But Minnesota has been hit especially hard.
A growing number of defendants are beginning to escape accountability, as the remaining prosecutors are forced to dismiss some cases, kill others before charges are filed and seek plea agreements and delays.
Local officials worry the office will be unable, at least temporarily, to bring charges against some of the state’s most serious offenders.
“The result will be a diminished ability to target dangerous fraudsters, sexual predators, violent gangs and drug traffickers,” said John Marti, a Minneapolis lawyer who was a longtime fraud prosecutor in the office until 2015.
After asking for a delay to find someone to take McKay’s case, the office led by Trump appointee Daniel Rosen dropped it so abruptly McKay’s lawyer didn’t learn about the move until after her client had been released.
“This was completely surprising to me,” said McKay’s lawyer, Jean Brandl. While she hasn’t been able to reach him, “I can guarantee you he’s happy about it.”
An exodus of prosecutors
Over the past year, the number of assistant U.S. attorneys in Minnesota has fallen from more than 40 prosecutors before Trump retook office to fewer than two dozen. That’s according to a former federal prosecutor who wasn’t authorized to discuss personnel matters and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.
The exodus began last year as several prosecutors “saw the writing on the wall” that their jobs — and the government’s definition of justice — were going to be different under the new administration, the former federal prosecutor said.
It accelerated after Trump appointees in the Justice Department intervened to block a joint state-federal investigation into the Jan. 7 fatal shooting of Renee Good by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer Jonathan Ross. While Trump officials called Good a “domestic terrorist” and argued Ross fired in self-defense, some in the office viewed the killing as a potential murder.
Career prosecutors also objected to directives that they divert much of their resources to immigration cases, and they chafed at repeated violations of court orders by ICE that angered judges.
“They could not in good conscience participate in what they have seen,” according to a letter released last week by eight former permanent or acting U.S. attorneys in Minnesota.
On Wednesday, a federal judge in Minnesota took the rare step of finding a DOJ lawyer in contempt of court over the government’s failure to comply with an order to return identification documents to an immigrant who challenged his detention.
Among the many who left last month were the office’s former acting leader, Joe Thompsonand its criminal division chief Harry Jacobs. Thompson was a Justice Department veteran known for high-profile fraud investigations. He and Jacobs had helped uncover the $300 million Feeding Our Future scheme in which more than 75 defendants have been charged with defrauding a COVID-19-era child nutrition program.
Each time an experienced attorney leaves, leaders assess that prosecutor’s caseload and make decisions about how many of their cases can be reassigned to remaining staff and which will be dropped due to diminished resources.
Court records show the office has been operating in crisis mode, bringing in prosecutors from other states, asking judges to delay hearings, and trying to make some cases go away through dismissals and plea agreements. Defense lawyers are seeking to capitalize by demanding speedy trials for clients and filing other motions that require responses from prosecutors.
The Justice Department and the U.S. attorney’s office did not respond to requests for comment. The office’s former spokesperson, prosecutor Melinda Williams, was among those who left.
Drug trafficking cases dismissed
McKay, 47, isn’t the only drug trafficking defendant to benefit.
The office last month also dropped a case against a man who was arrested in September after investigators said they found him in possession of a stash of drugs set to be trafficked in the Twin Cities that included 7,600 fentanyl pills and 15 pounds of cocaine.
A third dismissed case involved a man who was charged with conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine after police in Rochester found three pounds of the drug in a search of his vehicle in January 2025.
“With everybody leaving there, it’s presenting some challenges for everyone around the state,” said Clay County Sheriff Mark Empting, who said McKay would present “a big public safety concern” if he returns to Moorhead.
10 pounds of highly pure meth
The case against McKay dated to 2024, when FedEx employees in Fargo, North Dakota, discovered a package containing nearly 10 pounds of highly pure meth arriving from California and addressed to McKay. Police estimated the street value at $80,000.
A detective posing as a FedEx employee delivered the package to McKay, who was arrested. Investigators say they searched cellphones, and found text messages linking McKay to other suspected drug traffickers in Minnesota, California, Chicago and Mexico.
McKay was jailed for nearly a year awaiting trial on state charges, before a federal grand jury returned an indictment in May 2025 charging him with two methamphetamine distribution charges. The indictment included a sentencing enhancement because he had more than two prior violent felonies.
Those include aggravated assault in 2013, domestic assault by strangulation in 2017 and assault causing substantial bodily harm in 2021. Prosecutors said he had at least a dozen felony convictions, dating to when he was 16 and fired a short-barreled shotgun under the chin of a victim.
An offender jailed, then set free
Longtime assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Hollenhorst argued last summer that McKay was too dangerous to be released before trial, even to a substance abuse program, saying his history of violence would “put countless people at risk.”
A judge agreed, noting McKay had repeatedly failed to show up for court proceedings, given police false names and had his probation revoked for violations.
But last month, the U.S. attorney’s Office noted that Hollenhorst was “retiring unexpectedly” and asked for a delay. A judge moved the trial date from Feb. 12 to March 2. The office still dropped the case days later in a filing that offered no explanation. A judge ordered McKay’s immediate release. Hollenhorst declined comment.
On Jan. 31, McKay walked out of the Sherburne County Jail in Elk River, 30 miles outside Minneapolis. Attempts by AP to reach him were unsuccessful.
Brandl, McKay’s lawyer, said that while the outcome was a victory for her client, Hollenhorst’s retirement after 40 years with the Justice Department was “a huge loss.”
“He was a very good prosecutor,” she said. “He was reasonable and saw our clients as human beings, not just numbers.”
___
Foley reported from Iowa City, Iowa.
BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Thursday halted President Donald Trump’s executive order that sought to create a federal voter list and limit who can receive a mail ballot.
U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani, who was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama, sided with a coalition of nearly two dozen states that challenged the Republican president’s order in granting a summary judgment. Her ruling applies to this year’s midterm election cycle.
Plaintiffs argued in two lawsuitsboth filed in federal court in Boston, that Trump’s order should be found unconstitutional because the states and Congress, not the president, have the power to set election rules. The judge agreed, saying in her ruling that the provisions of Trump’s order seeking to create a federal list of eligible voters and using the U.S. Postal Service to determine who can receive a mail ballot are “legally void” because they “unconstitutionally violate the separation of powers.”
It was the second ruling in as many days against executive orders Trump has signed seeking oversight of the nation’s elections. A separate ruling Wednesday prohibited an executive order he had signed last year that would have required people to show documents proving their citizenship when registering to vote.
Order targeted mail voting, administration likely to appeal
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, whose state was among the plaintiffs, celebrated the court’s decision.
“Millions of independents, Republicans and Democrats across Arizona have voted by mail for decades,” she said in a statement, noting that nearly 80% of ballots in the state are cast by that method.
Mayes, a Democrat, singled out military families, voters in the state’s rural expanses and Native Americans who cast ballots from tribal lands.
“Donald Trump’s executive order targeted all of these voters,” she said. “But today, the courts affirmed what the Constitution makes clear: States run their elections, not the President.”
AP AUDIO: Federal judge halts Trump’s election executive order seeking to create a federal voter list
AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports President Trump has suffered a legal setback for a second straight day in his bid to get oversight of the nation’s elections.
The White House stood by Trump’s executive order and indicated the administration would appeal the ruling. The order, said spokeswoman Abigail Jackson, “lawfully protects our elections, and we are confident that we will ultimately prevail in its implementation.”
The administration, in its motions to dismiss the lawsuits challenging the order, argued that the motions were premature and that plaintiffs lacked the legal basis to bring their claim based on the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies develop and issue regulations.
But in an interim order before Thursday’s ruling, Talwani said the motions pertaining to this year’s election cycle were relevant: “In light of the EO’s specific deadlines over the next three months, and the reality that elections will be occurring throughout this period with the November 3, 2026 midterm occurring in just five months, postponing judicial review is impracticable and may inflict significant hardship on Plaintiffs,” she wrote. That order denied the Trump administration’s motion to dismiss the challenges.
Executive order sought to give Postal Service a central role in elections
Trump’s executive order, the second one aimed at elections during his second term, comes as he continues to raise the specter of widespread voting by noncitizens as a reason to change election rules. But states already have detailed processes aimed at keeping their voter rolls accurate, and voting by noncitizens has been shown to be rare. It also is a felony that can be punishable by deportation.
Trump issued his second order in March after a bill he supported to overhaul voting stalled in Congress. The order would have had the federal government — through the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the commissioner of the Social Security Administration — create a “state citizenship list” of eligible voters. It then directed the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to those on the list.
Election officials argued that it was ripe for abuse and could cause chaos.
The Postal Service has published a proposed rule required by Trump’s executive order in the Federal Register. Among other things, the rule would not apply to primary elections or overseas ballots.
Postal Service workers have pushed back against the order, saying they are not equipped to determine who is eligible to vote in each state. After Trump issued his order last spring, the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association said forcing its members into such a role “risks politicizing one of the nation’s most trusted public institutions.”
Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat whose state was among the plaintiffs, said the executive order illustrated how Trump was attempting to “abuse power in previously unthinkable ways” to interfere in elections.
She said it “strains credulity” to think the U.S. Postal Service could set up a workable system for pre-screening individual voters to determine whether they would be allowed to vote by mail, adding that it would be “a shocking violation of American constitutional rights.”
The Postal Service did not immediately respond Thursday to requests for comment.
Trump’s second election executive order faces multiple legal challenges
The lawsuit seeking summary judgment was filed by Democratic attorneys general representing 22 states and the District of Columbia. Also signing on were attorneys representing Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, which has a Republican attorney general.
The states also told the court that the move imposes a costly burden on election officials to comply and would spread fear about the possibility of prosecution. Stephen Pezzi, a lawyer for the Trump administration, had argued that no one would be prosecuted for violating the order.
The other lawsuit filed in Talwani’s court was by the League of Women Voters and other voting rights groups, which have sought a preliminary injunction against the executive order.
In yet another lawsuit filed against the executive order, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., in May agreed with the Trump administration that it was too early to block the order because it had yet to be implemented. That lawsuit was brought by Democratic and civil rights groups, which have appealed.
Since his 2020 presidential election loss to Democrat Joe BidenTrump has groundlessly claimed mail voting is rife with fraud and has launched a federal investigation into that year’s vote, even though repeated audits and investigationsincluding ones run by Republicansfound it was free of widespread fraud. Trump also has said he wants to “take over” election administration in Democratic areas.
___
Barrow reported from Atlanta and Hanna from Topeka, Kansas.
California voters will consider a controversial proposal in November to temporarily raise taxes on billionaires after the labor union backing the measure announced Thursday it would forge ahead despite pressure from critics to withdraw it.
The proposal, backed by the Service Employees International Union Healthcare Workers West, would impose a one-time 5% tax on individuals whose net worth exceeds $1 billion and who were living in the state as of Jan. 1, 2026. The goal is to generate $100 billion in revenue, mainly to fund the state’s Medicaid system after federal cuts.
“I am all in on this,” union President Dave Regan said on a Zoom call, adding that opponents of the proposal are “totally out of touch.”
Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and many traditional allies of the union oppose the measure. They argue it is a temporary fix for an ongoing problem and that it would push the ultrawealthy to leave the state, taking the money they would contribute in income taxes with them. Newsom, who is considering a presidential run as he prepares to leave office in January, has generally opposed tax increases during his time as governor.
A coalition of healthcare, education and housing groups — including the California Medical Association and California School Boards Association — banded together last week to fight the tax.
“The dangerous wealth tax directly threatens vital funding for education and schools, healthcare and clinics, public safety, and infrastructure projects by making California’s revenue even more volatile,” the coalition said in a statement.
Brian Brokaw, a Newsom political adviser who is leading a political committee opposing the tax, said it would “make California’s biggest challenges worse.”
“Driving away the state’s sustainable tax base for a one-time grab is bad policy and an even worse deal for 40 million Californians who will be left holding the bag,” he said in a statement.
Under the proposal, the state would spend the money generated from the tax over multiple years. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the proposal would generate tens of billions of dollars in the first few years, but that income tax revenues would subsequently decline by hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Many of the Silicon Valley tech moguls who oppose the measure have already moved their assets to other states or threatened to do so to avoid the possible tax. They have also spent millions to try to defeat it.
Since the proposal was announced in October, Google co-founder Sergey Brin has donated $82 million to a political committee called Building a Better California that backs a variety of initiatives designed to blunt the billionaire tax proposal. It has raised more than $118 million, counting Brin’s contributions, from fewer than a dozen donors.
California relies on its top 1% of earnersfor nearly half of its personal income tax revenue.
The union offered to scale back its proposal last week, asking Newsom to back a 2% tax on billionaires instead. But the governor’s office said the lower rate didn’t change his stance.
The proposed tax may have piqued the interest of many Democrats because it comes at a time when they are particularly concerned about affordability, income inequality and federal cutbacks to government programs, said Martin Gilens, a political science professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.
“There’s kind of a perfect storm that sort of bolsters preexisting inclinations to be sympathetic to the idea of raising taxes on the well-to-do,” he said.
But there’s a catch. Support for ballot initiatives often declines as the election nears, and if the measure passes, it’s likely to face legal challenges, Gilens said.
Since taking office one week ago, Bill Pulte, the acting director of national intelligence, has busied himself on social media posting flattering photos of President Donald Trump, trivia about a former counterintelligence agent and praising his current staff.
What the Trump loyalist with no intelligence experience has not done is address the public about his plans, or calm the unease and confusion inside the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which is being described by top officials as “chaotic” amid firings of senior personnel with threats of more to come.
One image posted to the official X account of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, apparently artificial intelligence-generated, features Trump raising a clenched fist in the air with two B-2 stealth bombers in the sky behind him. Another is an image of the president, his fist clenched, glowering as he stands behind the Oval Office’s Resolute Desk.
In another post, Pulte, who was expected to gut the workforce of the National Counterterrorism Center, instead declared the staff there “true professionals and American patriots” after he said he spent time with them, adding “it is a privilege to work beside them.”
And in an apparent attempt at levity, Pulte reposted a message reminding Americans that Tuesday was “National Typewriter Day” and informing them of the role that a former Army counterintelligence agent played.
“Fun CI fact,” the post reads. “Former Army CI Special Agent Leroy Anderson composed ‘The Typewriter’ on October 9, 1950.”
But Pulte’s arrival has sparked anxiety and fear among the office’s workforce, three former U.S. intelligence officials told MS NOW, granted anonymity to address a sensitive topic.
They said that a half dozen political appointees were removed from their posts and several dozen staffers were sent back to their home intelligence agencies. Beyond that, little else is known about Pulte’s plans.
Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, told MS NOW that his requests for more information from the office, known by the acronym ODNI, have been rebuffed.
“I’ve been calling over there all day and can’t get my calls returned,” said Himes.
He later said, “I spoke directly to their office of congressional affairs. They said they had nothing for me.”
“It seems like it’s totally chaotic at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence,” Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on a podcast Wednesday. “There was word that there was going to be firings and then he said he changed his mind. We don’t know.”
Marc Polymeropoulos, a former senior CIA official and now an MS NOW contributor, said that staff in the intelligence community do not know what to think.
“Everyone is in the same boat and unsure of what is going on,” he said. “That said, there is no love lost for the DNI, as many believe that there is redundancy that does need to be cut.”
The other former U.S. intelligence officials said they agree that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence is in need of reform. The agency was created after a lack of information sharing among U.S. intelligence agencies played a role in the failure to stop the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. ODNI’s mission is to ensure that the country’s now 18 different intelligence agencies share information with one another.
But the former intelligence officials said Pulte is patently unqualified to design or carry out those reforms.
“As with many things Trump alights upon, there is a sliver of truth here but he goes about addressing it in the worst possible way,” a former senior U.S. intelligence official told MS NOW, granted anonymity over concerns of retaliation. “But mass firings without any kind of sense of what you are trying to accomplish is addressing it in the most ham-handed way.”
That former official, as well as Warner and Himes, have said they fear that Pulte’s mission is to use his position as the nation’s top intelligence official to help Trump interfere in the midterm elections in November.
Pulte, who simultaneously serves as the Trump administration’s top federal housing official as head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, used government mortgage information to file several criminal referrals against Democrats whom Trump considered enemies, including Sen. Adam Schiff of California and New York State Attorney General Letitia James. None of Pulte’s referrals have resulted in criminal convictions.
One fear expressed by Warner and some former intelligence officials is that Pulte may try to falsely claim that his office has found evidence that foreign governments are secretly funding Democratic candidates.
One way he could do that, they say, is by falsely claiming foreign actors have hacked U.S. voting machines and altered vote totals in favor of Democrats. And Pulte and FBI agents could seize voting machines, ballots and election records in November — as Gabbard did in Fulton County, Georgia, last year at Trump’s behest — as part of voter fraud investigations that please the president.
“I have to tell you, I was extraordinarily concerned about the former director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, interfering in our election,” Warner told NPR earlier this month. “The concerns I had with Tulsi Gabbard now, upon reflection, look small versus the concerns I have with Bill Pulte.”
David Rohde is the senior national security reporter for MS NOW and a two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. Previously he was the senior executive editor for national security and law for NBC News.
- Former Stars and Stripes ombudsman sues Pentagon over firing
- Planned Parenthood launches new midterm investment
- Trump rips former national security adviser after guilty plea: “Hopefully, he will be dealt with harshly!”
- Federal government permits release of Anthropic’s Mythos model to select companies
- Megyn Kelly after Supreme Court TPS decision: ‘Go back to f—ing Haiti’
- Former Stars and Stripes ombudsman sues Pentagon over firing
- Iran set to progress at World Cup
- The “Pride Match” that wasn’t
- Congressional Black Caucus blasts Slotkin over her calls for new leadership in the House
- Why Belgium’s prime minister isn’t cheering on the Red Devils
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words