by Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. - attorney, law professor emeritus, and author of Federal law
At the end of May 2026 Judge Waverly Crenshaw, of the Federal District Court, District of Tennessee, *dismissed* the administration's criminal charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia, ruling that the DOJ's prosecution of him had been retaliatory and vindictive. In fact the term "vindictive" appears *49 times* in Judge Crenshaw's order. (I wrote this up for you back then, including the order, and you can revisit that post here: https://annepmitchell.substack.com/p/yes-judge-dismisses-indictment-against )
You may recall that this Trumped-up (see what I did there?) indictment was created by them re-opening a *traffic stop* in Tennessee that had happened back in *2022*. They were now claiming that the traffic stop led to probable cause that he had been smuggling illegal immigrants into the country.
The reality is that Abrego Garcia showed the administration up after they illegally sent him to El Salvador's notorious CECOT prison, and Judge Boasberg ordered him returned, and they had to return him. Trump hates that. (If you want to refresh your memory about the whole thing, Notes from the Front members can go to our archives and search "Kilmar" here to pull up every post about him and his situation: https://annepmitchell.substack.com/archive )
So anyway, Judge Crenshaw *dismissed* the criminal case based on that traffic stop as being *clearly* vindictive prosecution. Make no mistake, that's unusual - you have to *try really, blatantly hard* to be found guilty of vindictive prosecution. So much winning for Blanche. In fact, Blanche is such a winner that in the opinion Judge Crenshaw called it "Blanche’s tainted investigation"!
Well, not even 3 months later, this past week the DOJ filed *an appeal* of the dismissal. That's right, they are trying to get the Court of Appeals to *reverse* the dismissal and reinstate their bogus prosecution of Abrego Garcia.
AND I HAVE THE FLIMSY EVIDENCE THEY ARE TRYING TO USE! AND I'M GOING LIVE WITH IT!
How flimsy is it?
It's flimsier than the flimsiest of nighties made out of used tissue paper.
And I'm going live with it tomorrow (Wednesday, 8/19) at 2pm Eastern / 11am Pacific.
("But Anne," I can hear some of you saying, "isn't that just your opinion?" It is my opinion, but not just mine. In this case I ran this by my friend and colleague Ty Cobb and asked him for his thoughts - having *worked* at the DOJ for years in the Criminal Division, and *then* having worked in the Trump I administration - well, he's da man. I have a huge amount of respect for his knowledge and experience as a lawyer, and the highest regard for him as a person. And he had even choicer words for it than did I. (If you aren't following Ty you absolutely should be, he's the ultimate used-to-be-insider-now-using-his-powers-outsider! I promise I'm going to have him on a show for you some day!)
I hope you can join us tomorrow for this live expose of this massive bogosity they are using to try and frame this man!
Tune in at 2pm Eastern tomorrow (Wednesday, 8/19) here:
https://open.substack.com/live-stream/326594
P.S. Notes from the Front members: if you can't make the live show the instant replay video of it will be sent to you later in the afternoon.
P.P.P.P.S. If you actually read all the way to the bottom please leave a sentence in a comment that includes the word "bogosity" *and* let me know if you are going to try to make the show. It will show me that my efforts aren't in vain and that people actually *do* read these things, and it will drive those who just skim crazy wondering just why everyone is talking about bogosity! ;~)
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.