The United States Department of Justice  has reached a humiliating but undeniably hilarious new low in its defense of Donald Trump's illegal efforts to create a massive new building on the White House grounds without approval from his Congressional landlords.. Are the president's balls really a matter of national security? Did three of the most important people in DOJ really just put their names on a filing which reads more like a Trutth Social post than a serious motion in a serious case? We waltz in for a closer look. <ol start="1"> <li> <a href= "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.287645/gov.uscourts.dcd.287645.60.0_3.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Judge Leon’s order staying ballroom construction</a> (3/31/2026) </li> <li> <a href= "https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.287645/gov.uscourts.dcd.287645.60.0_3.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Defendant’s Rule 62.1 Motion For An Indicative Ruling Staying the Court’s Injunction</a> (4/27/2026) </li> </ol>

Podurama

Home

Trending

Personal

Your Podcasts

New Episodes

My Files

Favourite Episodes

Tags (Folders)

Recently Played

Bookmarks

Followed Playlists

DOJ Asks Judge to Grant Trump an Emergency Ballroom

Opening Arguments

AI Chapters

AI Insights

Reviews