The Daily Fuckup

President Donald Trump on February 25, 2025, signed a White House memorandum aimed at Covington & Burling LLP lawyers who assisted former special counsel Jack Smith. The order directed the attorney general and other agency heads to take steps, consistent with applicable law, to suspend any active security clearances held by Peter Koski and other members, partners and employees of the firm who worked on Smith’s behalf, pending review of their roles and responsibilities, if any, in what the memo called the “weaponization of the judicial process.” It also directed agencies to end engagements with the firm where permitted by law and to review government contracts involving Covington & Burling. ([whitehouse.gov](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/suspension-of-security-clearances-and-evaluation-of-government-contracts/))

The memorandum did not make a final finding that the lawyers had done anything wrong. Instead, it ordered agencies to move first and sort out the details later. That distinction matters. Security clearances affect access to sensitive information, and government contract reviews can have immediate practical consequences, but the document itself frames those steps as provisional and tied to a further determination. The White House also said the directive should be carried out under applicable law, and that it was not meant to create a right enforceable against the government. ([whitehouse.gov](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/suspension-of-security-clearances-and-evaluation-of-government-contracts/))

Koski’s connection to Smith had already been public. The broader point of the memorandum was not subtle: it treated work performed for a former special counsel as a basis for official scrutiny. Critics quickly described the move as retaliatory, while the White House presented it as part of a larger campaign against what it calls government weaponization. Both things can be true as descriptions of the politics around the order; the record, however, is narrower than the rhetoric. What happened on February 25 was a directive for review, suspension and contract evaluation — not a completed adjudication of misconduct. ([whitehouse.gov](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/suspension-of-security-clearances-and-evaluation-of-government-contracts/))