Pam Bondi ousts ethics watchdog amid DOJ purge
Why it matters: The ethics director was fired on the same day that Bondi dismissed more than 20 employees involved in various investigations of President Donald Trump, reflecting an ongoing purge of personnel at the department.
Context: On Monday, former director Joseph Tirrell confirmed on LinkedIn that he had been fired from the position without being given a reason for his removal.
Tirrell has worked for the DOJ for 16 years, and became director of the departmental ethics office in July of 2023, according to his official staff profile.
In the LinkedIn post, Tirrell said he was responsible for "ensuring that the 117,000 Department employees were properly advised on and supported in how to follow the Federal employee ethics rules."
The Department of Justice declined to comment on why Tirrell was dismissed.
The intrigue: Tirrell advised Special Counsel Jack Smith on ethical considerations during his criminal prosecutions of President Trump, according to Bloomberg Law.
That included approving approximately $140,000 in pro bono legal assistance from Covington & Burling law firm, which Smith disclosed after conducting his investigation into the president.
Zoom out: The staffers ousted on Friday were identified during an internal investigation carried out by the "Weaponization Working Group," which Bondi established to review"unethical prosecutions" amongst other things in February.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DOJ Asks Judge to Release Epstein Grand Jury Testimony
The mug shot of Jeffrey Epstein, 2019. Credit - Kypros/Getty Images The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Friday asked a federal judge to release the transcripts of grand jury testimony made against Jeffrey Epstein years ago, as the Trump Administration faces a wave of criticism from lawmakers and the public over its handling of the late sex offender's case. The move comes after President Donald Trump said he asked Attorney General Pam Bondi 'to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval,' amid the heightened interest in the Epstein case. In its filing, the DOJ writes that even after it and the FBI concluded their review of the case, 'the public's interest in the Epstein matter has remained.' 'Given this longstanding and legitimate interest, the government now moves to unseal grand jury transcripts associated with Epstein,' the filing reads. It adds that officials will 'redact all victim-identifying information' before releasing any documents. The renewed interest in the case involving the convicted sex offender and disgraced billionaire financier began earlier this month, after the DOJ and FBI released a memo in which investigators concluded that Epstein didn't have a 'client list' of co-conspirators and that his 2019 death in jail was a suicide. Epstein has been the subject of conspiracy theories for years, particularly among Trump's MAGA supporters. Trump and his Administration have since tried to dismiss concerns about the Epstein case, sparking anger and frustration from many of the President's own supporters over how he has handled the case. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have called for transparency, demanding a full disclosure of the Epstein files. Amid the outcry, Trump's years-long relationship with Epstein has drawn heightened attention. The request by the DOJ comes on the same day that Trump filed a lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal's parent firms Dow Jones and News Corp, its owner Rupert Murdoch, and two reporters after the Journal published an article alleging that Trump sent a 'bawdy' letter to Epstein in 2003. Trump has denied writing the letter, telling the Journal, 'It's not my language. It's not my words.' Contact us at letters@
Politico
24 minutes ago
- Politico
What could we learn from Epstein grand jury docs? And other key questions, answered.
Many legal experts, however, said they thought the requests in New York would be handled by what's known as the 'Part 1' judge on duty in the district, which rotates on a schedule, and it's unclear whether the requests could get transferred to such a judge. Until Saturday, that is U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas, a Biden appointee, and next week it's scheduled to be U.S. District Judge Ronnie Abrams, an Obama appointee. Will a judge actually unseal the grand jury docs? The fact that the Epstein investigation was based in New York may actually affect the outcome of Trump and Bondi's unsealing push because of the disparate ways courts handle grand jury material. Records of grand jury investigations are some of the most closely held secrets in government and rarely yield to public interest except in extraordinary circumstances. Courts say that secrecy is necessary to protect the integrity of criminal investigations, witnesses who may provide sensitive testimony, victims who may be identified and the grand jurors themselves. There are a handful of narrow exceptions written into federal rules allowing for their release. Courts have split, however, over whether judges have their own discretionary power to release grand jury material for reasons that aren't on the list — such as the historical significance of the secret records. For example, the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. has concluded that judges do not have discretion to release material outside the written rules. But in New York federal courts, where the Epstein and Maxwell grand jury investigations and prosecutions took place, the guiding precedent is looser. Instead, judges are required to balance a slew of factors to determine whether grand jury material can be released: the historical significance of the records at issue, the amount of time that has elapsed since the investigation, whether the DOJ supports or opposes release, the specificity of the requested unsealing, whether any witnesses or victims are still alive and whether any of the material has previously been made public. Those factors, applied to the Epstein saga, appear muddled at best. Trump has called for 'pertinent' grand jury records to come out. And one of the arguments DOJ previously made against disclosures was that it could damage the purported victims of Epstein's alleged sex trafficking conspiracy, many of whom are still alive. In the guiding case that New York federal courts rely on, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that a lower-court judge — U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin, a Clinton appointee — had properly denied a researcher's bid to access records of a McCarthy-era grand jury proceeding. Though the court agreed that district judges have broad discretion to order such releases, the judges pointed to Scheindlin's concern that 'the current disclosure would involve some witnesses who are still alive.' The panel emphasized that 'in some situations historical or public interest alone could justify the release of grand jury information,' but it cited the examples of grand jury investigations related to John Wilkes Booth or Aaron Burr, noting that the long-term public interest in those cases could 'overwhelm' the need for secrecy. What has DOJ previously said about the risks of releasing the Epstein files? In 2017, the celebrity and entertainment news website Radar Online sued for the FBI's files on its investigation into Epstein up to that point. The outlet won access to some information, but most was withheld on various grounds, primarily the then-ongoing criminal case against Maxwell.
CNBC
24 minutes ago
- CNBC
Justice Department asks court to unseal Epstein, Maxwell grand jury transcripts
The Department of Justice on Friday asked federal judges to unseal grand jury transcripts in the criminal cases of notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his convicted procurer of young girls, Ghislaine Maxwell. The formal requests came one day after President Donald Trump said he asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to "produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval." Trump suggested he was taking that step in order to tamp down on the growing pressure from his own supporters to release the so-called Epstein files. "This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!" he wrote in a Truth Social post at the time. Less than two weeks earlier, the Justice Department said in a memo that it would not disclose any more information related to Epstein's federal sex trafficking case after conducting an "exhaustive review." But since then, "there has been extensive public interest in the basis for the Memorandum's conclusions," Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche wrote in separate court filings in the Epstein and Maxwell cases in Manhattan federal court. "While the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation continue to adhere to the conclusions reached in the Memorandum, transparency to the American public is of the utmost importance to this Administration," Blanche wrote. "Given the public interest in the investigative work conducted by the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation into Epstein, the Department of Justice moves the Court to unseal the underlying grand jury transcripts," subject to appropriate redactions, he wrote. Those redactions encompass "victim-related and other personal identifying information," Blanche wrote. A footnote in the identical documents says that a similar request will be filed in federal court in southern Florida. Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 in Florida to soliciting an underage prostitute. Epstein was arrested in 2019 and killed himself in prison weeks later. Maxwell, his longtime confidant, was convicted in 2021 of acting as a recruiter of young girls who would later be abused by Epstein. She is currently serving a 20-year sentence in a federal prison in Florida. Earlier Friday afternoon, Trump filed a defamation lawsuit against media giant Rupert Murdoch and multiple Wall Street Journal journalists, hours after they reported that a collection of birthday letter to Epstein in 2003 included a "bawdy" message signed by Trump. The president has denied penning the message.
