Trump DOJ Launches INVESTIGATION in ICE after VIDEO LEAKS | It's Complicated

Two ICE enforcement and removal operations (ERRO) officers falsely claimed they were attacked by Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna and Julio Cesar Sosa Cis with a shovel and broom, respectively, leading to one officer firing a shot that wounded Mr. Sosa Ciss. This fabricated account, initially supported by a public statement from Christy Gnome, was contradicted by video evidence and eyewitness testimony. A third Venezuelan man, Gabriel Alejandro Hernandez Leiddesma, was also arrested and allegedly removed to prevent him from being a material eyewitness. The United States Attorney in Minnesota ultimately filed a motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice, acknowledging the evidence was 'materially inconsistent' with the officers' allegations.

The officers' sworn affidavit detailed a violent attack, including claims of being hit in the face with a broomstick. However, video evidence and eyewitnesses contradicted this, showing the men retreating or throwing objects while fleeing, not attacking. The US Attorney's motion to dismiss explicitly stated 'newly discovered evidence in this matter is materially inconsistent with the allegations in the complaint affidavit.'

A motion filed in Fulton County seeks the return of seized property, alleging that the FBI agent's affidavit used to authorize the search warrant was based on 'misleading, inaccurate, or false' probable cause. The affidavit reportedly relied on speculative 'if this was done intentionally, this would be a crime' scenarios rather than concrete evidence of intentional wrongdoing. The agent's claims were based on six witnesses whose accounts were either resolved or described normal election occurrences, lacking actual probable cause for a crime.

The motion to return property details that 'every single piece of quote unquote probable cause that was presented in the affidavit... was misleading, inaccurate, or false.' The original affidavit used 'a lot of these ifs' and 'hypothetical scenario[s]' instead of establishing probable cause that a crime was committed.

The hosts emphasize a significant shift where courts are increasingly unwilling to grant the 'presumption of regularity' to government agencies. This presumption, which historically assumed government officials acted in good faith and followed proper procedures, is being challenged by repeated instances of alleged dishonesty and misconduct, particularly within the Trump administration.

Host Asha Rangappa states, 'the government goes into court normally... until this Trump administration... has always enjoyed a certain presumption that they have gone through normal... fact-finding and investigation and... what they're presenting is is a credible account.' She adds, 'these are specific examples that get to why we are seeing in case after case that courts are increasingly unwilling to grant that presumption of regularity.'

During congressional testimony regarding the Epstein files, the Attorney General exhibited a 'petulant teenager' demeanor, personally insulting members of Congress. More alarmingly, her binder contained notes revealing that the DOJ was tracking the search terms and activities of congressional members viewing the Epstein files on DOJ computers, raising concerns about improper surveillance and potential violations of the Speech and Debate Clause.

The Attorney General's testimony was described as 'outrageous' and 'personally insulting.' Her binder visibly showed 'search results for' specific congressional members, indicating the DOJ was 'tracking what the House members were searching what the search terms were and what they were doing as a way of getting fodder on them.'