Oh, I’m not referring to the second consecutive failure of Elon Musk’s SpaceX Starship this year. He can blow up all his capital and burn down his future space freight contracts.
I’m referring to this:
Why have are our FAA resources, reduced as they are after Elon Musk took a DOGE-ian chainsaw to them recently, been forced to scramble to protect civilian and commercial aircraft from yet another “rapid, unscheduled disassembly“?
Why wasn’t the FAA given enough advance notice of the possible (and likely) threat from debris so that flights could be re-routed or delayed BEFORE the launch attempt?
Photographs and videos posted on the social media site X by users saying they were along the Florida coast showed the spacecraft breaking up. The falling debris disrupted flights at airports in Miami, Orlando, Palm Beach and Fort Lauderdale, and as far away as Philadelphia International Airport.
In other words, most of the eastern U.S. affected — no big deal. But that’s likely an understatement; you know the cascade of effects must have been wider given how tightly planes are scheduled.
Why are any other persons outside of SpaceX forced to change their activities without advance notice because Musk is such a selfish fuck-up of a business manager?
This is particularly galling:
In a Department of Transportation all-hands meeting late last week, Duffy responded to a question about DOGE’s role in national airspace matters, and without explicitly mentioning the new employees, suggested help was needed on reforming Notice to Air Mission (NOTAM) alerts, a critical system that distributes real-time data and warnings to pilots but which has had significant outages, one as recently as this month. “If I can get ideas from really smart engineers on how we can fix it, I’m going to take those ideas,” he said, according to a recording of the meeting reviewed by WIRED. “Great engineers” might also work on airspace issues, he said.
As if NOTAM wasn’t already a concern, Musk’s SpaceX blows up a rocket without ensuring adequate notice. It’s not as if the launch was scheduled in advance or anything, as if a flight path for the rocket — and its debris — wasn’t predicted well before launch.
Engineers who work for Elon Musk’s SpaceX have been brought on as senior advisers to the acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), sources tell WIRED.
On Sunday, Sean Duffy, secretary of the Department of Transportation, which oversees the FAA, announced in a post on X that SpaceX engineers would be visiting the Air Traffic Control System Command Center in Virginia to take what he positioned as a tour. “The safety of air travel is a nonpartisan matter,” Musk replied. “SpaceX engineers will help make air travel safer.”
Count the errors in the last two sentences of that excerpt. One party doesn’t give a shit about Musk’s manifold conflicts of interest or his unelected status as shadow president, the same party also doesn’t see the problem with giving Musk free rein to trash the regulatory agency which kept his space freight company from making even more explosive mistakes.
Imagine letting Elon’s SpaceX management habits reengineer infect the U.S. air traffic control systems, especially with his clueless if not utterly indifferent attitude about his mistakes.
“Some of the things that I say will be incorrect and should be corrected. So nobody can bat 1,000,” he said, adding that he would act quickly to correct errors.
He acknowledged DOGE could be making errors as well.
“We are moving fast, so we will make mistakes, but we’ll also fix the mistakes very quickly,” Musk said.
A plane crash isn’t a mistake one can fix, quickly or otherwise. US air travel demands zero defects; it’s not a series of test launches which can inconvenience people with few repercussions to the individuals responsible for failures.
What will it take before the spineless GOP congressional caucus, in thrall to the current administration, snaps out of its sleepwalking submission to Musk’s Department of Gawdawful Errors?
Will it take the crash of a plane carrying some of its members before it realizes oversight by a separate but equal branch of government is absolutely necessary to their own fucking safety?
Somehow I don’t think it will be enough to wake them up, because they haven’t batted an eye at Musk’s other business failure, the “Deadliest Car Brand in America.”
Sen. Mitch McConnell’s sister-in-law couldn’t be rescued from her swamped Tesla in no small part because of its design, and yet this wasn’t enough to give the GOP congressional caucus pause about Musk in any way. They continue to share the road with these vehicles on a daily basis.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/SpaceX_Starship-Launch-Flt8_06MAR2025_crop.jpg10001500Raynehttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngRayne2025-03-07 08:38:292025-03-07 09:15:51DOGE: Department of Gawdawful Errors
There have been a few stories in the wake of last week’s effective town halls about Trump’s efforts to reach out to increasingly uncomfortable Republicans.
First, HuffPo got a number of Republicans to express concern about Trump’s latest trade war with its closest trading partners. While “Most Republicans in Congress, however, either said Trump’s tariffs were a good idea or offered only muted criticism,” Chuck Grassley and House Ag Committee Chair Glenn Thompson expressed confidence farmers would be protected somehow.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) suggested he would be seeking an exemption for his state, which is a leading producer of corn, soybeans and pork in the United States. Farmers in Iowa and other states rely heavily on Canadian potash, a key fertilizer ingredient, for their crops.
“Potash coming from Canada would be 25% higher,” Grassley said. “I assume I’m going to hear from farmers to contact the secretary of commerce to try to get a waiver.”
[snip]
Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.), chair of the House Agriculture Committee, said he believed Canada and Mexico had already stepped up border security. Canada had announced a $1 billion border security plan that included new helicopters, while Mexico said it would deploy 10,000 national guardsmen.
“I’m not sure what additional, like — the 25% tariffs of Canada — they’ve really stepped up. So has Mexico, actually, on the border. But I’m not a part of those negotiations, so I don’t know exactly what the president is trying to extract additionally,” Thompson told HuffPost.
The farm sector exports a lot of produce and is uniquely vulnerable in a trade war. When Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese imports during his first term, and the Chinese government retaliated with tariffs on U.S. exports in kind, the Trump administration bailed out agriculture producers with nearly $30 billion worth of direct payments.
Thompson said if there’s another protracted trade war, the government would once again help out farmers.
“I’m hoping that we won’t find ourselves in a situation of sustained retaliatory tariffs on our farmers. If we are, we’ll be prepared to deal with that.” he said.
Aside from one lawsuit seeking to force the government to restore access to climate information, I know of no lawsuits representing the many farmers whom Trump’s freeze on Inflation Reduction Act spending has harmed, though many risk bankruptcy because approved spending has not been reimbursed. These comments suggest that farmers imagine they’ll be made whole via other means, political favors.
There’ve already been signs that Trump has placated Republicans whose own constituents were targeted by his rash cuts. For example, it didn’t take long for elimination of Indian Heath Services that would have disproportionately hit Alaska, Oklahoma, and South Dakota to be reversed. By offering cuts and waivers, Trump uses preferential treatment for Republicans to sustain support for actions that harm the entire country.
Yesterday, Trump took a similar approach with DOGE, sending Elon Musk to meet with Republican Senators and House members (but not Democrats) to placate them on DOGE cuts. The reports from the Senate meeting reveal how meek key, purportedly powerful, Senators were in the meeting with Musk, begging that he adopt a more considered approach.
“Every day’s another surprise,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said of the daily bombshells from Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
“It would be better to allow Cabinet secretaries to carefully review their departments and then make surgical, strategic decisions on what programs and people should be cut and then come back to Congress for approval,” she said.
Collins argued a methodical approach to reforming government would be better than what she called Musk’s “sledgehammer approach.”
A second GOP senator said colleagues raised concerns about Musk’s leadership of DOGE and shared stories about how funding freezes and firings have impacted constituents.
“They were presenting some of the compelling stories and some of them shared about terminations at VA hospitals and how it impacted constituents and how there was no answer” from Musk’s team, the senator said.
“Another question was, ‘Who do we bring it to when we have these issues?’” the source added.
One of the Republican senators digging for answers is Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chair Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), who told The Hill he’s trying to find out whether the firing of 2,400 probationary VA employees would impact services for veterans.
“We’re asking that question,” he said. “We want to know [what] positions [are affected]. We’ve been reassured that it doesn’t affect direct care, but we’re looking for more information.
[snip]
“If I get confirmed as the head of an agency, a Cabinet-level position, [and] I’ve got somebody else that is pretending — or that is acting as my boss, that’s a real problem,” [Thom Tillis] added. “At the end of the day, you’ve got to have all those employees thinking that you’re looking out for the agencies and their best interests.”
Tillis said that if Trump’s Cabinet officials “want to be viewed as the heads of these agencies,” they need to balance Musk’s recommendations to cut staff with their missions to provide services and advance U.S. interests.
“They need to say, ‘This is all good stuff, but now it has to go into the context of everything else I’m doing to run this agency, not just efficiencies.’ Because you’ve still got to keep the lights on, you’ve still got to provide acceptable service levels for the people that you’re tasked with serving,” he said.
Other reports describe suggestions, started by Rand Paul, to codify all DOGE’s cuts in a recission package.
“I love what Elon is doing. I love the cutting of the waste. I love finding all the crazy crap that we’re spending overseas. But to make it real, to make it go beyond the moment of the day, it needs to come back,” the Kentucky Republican said.
Musk huddled behind closed doors with House Republicans on Wednesday evening and spelled out DOGE’s efforts to uncover wasteful spending, an initiative that many Republicans applauded.
But others emerged with a more skeptical view.
“When you have a very small group with a broad set of powers, able to inflict dramatic change on institutions without a lot of knowledge, that means the process of cleaning up afterwards is going to be extensive,” said Representative Frank Lucas of Oklahoma.
Senate Republicans said Musk, a top adviser to Trump, was “elated” by Paul’s suggestion that the White House request congressional approval to rescind spending through a legislative process that would circumvent the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster.
“He was, like, so happy,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, who chairs the Senate Budget Committee.
“What we’ve got to do as Republicans is capture their work product, put it in a bill and vote on it. So, the White House, I’m urging them to come up with a rescission package,” the South Carolina Republican added.
None of this is surprising: That Trump is placating Republicans with doubts about his destructive attack on the US with direct outreach. Indeed, we’ve seen hints that it has been going on this entire time.
For now, it’s simply confirmation that even the most powerful Republicans, like Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, are asking for no more than this, meekly suggesting that maybe Cabinet Members should be allowed to act like Cabinet Members. And also confirmation that more members of Congress are willing to share, under their own name.
Thus far, Trump is making a sustained attack on the United States and Republican Members of Congress are still easily bought off with tailored exemptions rather than policies that serve the common good. That may change, but thus far, Article I remains solidly and easily co-opted.
Update: I should have included this story, which focuses more in House members, including this wisdom from House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole:
“With all due respect to Mr. Musk, he doesn’t have a vote up here. … [Give] courtesy to the members. They’re the ones that have to go home and defend these decisions, not you. So why don’t you give them a heads-up,” Rep. Tom Cole (Oklahoma) said Tuesday before the meeting. “You are certainly complicating the lives of individual members, and you might be making some mistakes and hurting some innocent individuals in the process.”
[snip]
Cole, who as chair of the House Appropriations Committee is responsible for funding the government, said that while he believes DOGE has “uncovered some amazing things,” he has observed that some staffers “clearly don’t know what [they’re] talking about” based on some fiscal decisions he has seen them make.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-27-at-14.25.40.png422502emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-03-06 05:16:462025-03-06 06:58:52Trump’s Article I Management
Yesterday, arguably for (at least) the second time, Trump declared fealty to Vladimir Putin.
As I contemplated the awful but in no way surprising developments (here’s a good podcast, featuring Marc Polymeropoulos, Doug Lute, and Rosa Brooks), I thought about the various ways Trump is sabotaging the United States, based on apparently different motivations.
But we only assume those motivations are different because we (or much of the legacy press, anyway) accept the claimed motivation Trump offers. When you look at all of them together, you simply can’t rule out they’re all part of the same effort to capitulate to Putin.
Project 2025
There’s a consensus that Trump is following the plan mapped out in Project 2025. This Politico report, from early February, laid out how Executive Orders Trump had signed implemented plans to attack diversity and LGBTQ protections, attack migrants, and protect disinformation. It focuses on fossil fuel plans that have mostly defunded renewable energy without raising fossil fuel exploitation (in part because it was already so high under Biden).
Even if that were the only thing going on or if that were really what was going on, it would raise real questions about foreign influence. Last year, Casey Michel mapped out how Viktor Orbán used the Heritage Foundation as a beachhead for his influence peddling in the US (which I discussed in this post on Trump’s attempt to distance himself from Project 2025).
While much attention has understandably focused on Heritage’s so-called “Project 2025,” which provides a roadmap for Trump to seize as much power as he can, such a shift has extended to foreign policy. This has been seen most especially in Heritage leading the effort to gut funding for Ukraine. But it’s also evident in the way Heritage has endeavored to anchor its relations with Orbán, making Budapest once more America’s preferred partner in Europe—regardless of the cost.
Much of that shift is downstream from Heritage’s leadership, overseen by Kevin Roberts. Appointed as Heritage’s president in 2021, Roberts immediately began remaking Heritage’s priorities with a distinctly pro-Orbán bent—and began opening up Heritage as a vehicle for Hungarian influence in the U.S.
Part of that involved things like last week’s confab, one of many meetings between Roberts and Orbán. (After one 2022 sit-down, Roberts—who, among other things, has said he doesn’t think Joe Biden won the 2020 election—posted that it was an “honor” to meet with Orbán, praising his “movement that fights for Truth, for tradition, for families.”) But the relationship is structural as well: Heritage finalized what they refer to as a ‘landmark’ cooperation agreement with the Danube Institute, a Hungarian think tank that appears to exist only to praise Orbán’s government.*
The Budapest-based Danube Institute is largely unknown in the U.S., but it has transformed in recent years into one of the premier mouthpieces for propagating Orbánist policies. While it is technically independent, it is, as Jacob Heilbrunn notes in his new book on the American right’s infatuation with dictators, located “next to the prime minister’s building and funded by Orbán’s Fidesz party.” Indeed, the Hungarian think tank is overseen by a foundation directly bankrolled by the Hungarian state—meaning that the Danube Institute is, for all intents and purposes, a state-funded front for pushing pro-Orbán rhetoric.
A spokesperson for the Heritage Foundation told The New Republic that their arrangements with the Danube Institute is “restricted to carrying out educational research and analysis, as well as related events—none of which involved any financial commitment from either party” and that “at no point did Heritage receive funds from or pass funds to the Danube Institute, the Hungarian government, or the prime minister’s office.”
The Danube Institute claims it is dedicated to “advocat[ing] conservative and national values and thinking,” which almost always ends up with the institute praising Orbán’s pronouncements. It has become, according to Hungarian journalists at Atlatszo, “one of the main tools of the Orbán government’s ideological expansion abroad”—and one of the “main vehicles” to “building a political network in the United States.
So even if this was just about implementing Project 2025, that would best be described as replacing American democracy with Orbanist authoritarianism — adopting the model from a key Putin puppet.
DOGE infiltration and destruction of US government
There have been a slew of stories about how DOGE provided cover for Russ Vought and Stephen Miller to implement Project 2025. Wired, for example, described how Stephen and his wife Katie, who is formally on the DOGE team, serve as gatekeepers to Elon and use Elon to carry out their dirty work.
Meanwhile, Stephen Miller has, along with Project 2025 coauthor and Office of Management and Budget director Russell Vought, became one of Musk’s closest allies in the administration, The New York Times reported earlier this month. WIRED has learned that the relationship is far closer, and more complicated, than has been previously known publicly.
In many ways, Musk’s targeting of federal agencies is perfectly in sync with the aims of Miller, who has championed DOGE’s work internally and even helped in making a lot of it possible. (In public, Miller has equated federal workers with “radical left Communists” and “criminal cartels.”) Still, sources tell WIRED that Trumpworld is more comfortable with Musk taking the heat for the recent federal cuts rather than the less famous—and, in their view, far less telegenic—Miller.
Yet through their actions so far, the Millers and Musk have developed a MAGA version of the Pet Shop Boys adage from the song “Opportunities (Let’s Make Lots of Money)”: You’ve got the brawn / I’ve got the brains. Stephen Miller’s knowledge of the federal apparatus, Katie Miller’s contacts on Capitol Hill, and the couple’s good standing among Trump loyalists, coupled with Musk’s relentless ambition and effectively infinite resources, made the scale of the DOGE government takeover possible. Musk is not the independent actor he’s often portrayed as and taken to be, in other words, but is rather carrying out actions essentially in concert with the man to whom the president has delegated much of the day-to-day work of governance.
“Stephen is kind of the prime minister,” one of three Republicans close to Trump and familiar with the situation tells WIRED. Another Republican familiar with the dynamic also used the term “PM” to describe Miller, short for prime minister. The implication is that Miller is carrying out the daily work of governance while Trump serves as head of state, focusing on the fun parts of being president.
But DOGE is going beyond the scope of Project 2025, and in ways that directly harm the United States.
Take the Project 2025 recommendations on USAID, the first target of DOGE. DOGE adopted the general theme of the Project 2025 chapter — that USAID had been used to implement a lot of radical plans. But the virtual elimination of USAID implemented last week goes well beyond Project 2025’s recommended reversal to 2019’s budget of $39.3 billion.
Project 2025 hailed Trump’s use of USAID to push for religious protection for Christians which — as I showed — got shut down early along with everything else.
It promoted international religious freedom as a pillar of the agency’s work and built up an unprecedented genocide-response infrastructure.
It specifically called for greater reliance on local NGOs — and pointed to PEPFAR as a model.
Streamlining Procurement and Localizing the Partner Base. USAID is a grantmaking and contracting agency that disburses billions of dollars of federal funding in developing countries through implementing partners, such as U.N. agencies, international NGOs, for-profit companies, and local nongovernmental entities. In rare instances, such as in Jordan and Ukraine, the agency provides direct budget support to finance the operations of host-country governments. USAID far more often counts on expensive and ine!ective large contracts and grants to carry out its programs. It justifies these practices based on speed and a lower administrative burden on its institutional capacity.
[snip]
The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has shown that localization at scale is possible within a short time span. Over the four years of the Trump Administration, the multibillion-dollar program increased the amount of funding disbursed to local entities from about 25 percent to nearly 70 percent with positive overall results. This model should be replicated across all of USAID.
But as declarations in various lawsuits repeat over and over, these local partners are not getting paid, and it’s destroying the credibility of the US (and rule of law).
11. Currently my mission has more than $30 million in unpaid invoices for 2 months of implementing partners’ work, with half of those past Prompt Payment Act due date (30 days) and incurring interest every day. If one were to extrapolate the numbers across all of the missions and USAID/Washington, given that annual USAID appropriation is $40 billion, the total dollar amount of unpaid invoices would certainly surpass $1billion at the most conservative estimate.
[snip]
13. Arbitrary withholding of due payments to U.S. and non-U.S. based partners does grave damage to the reputation and reliability of the U.S. government both domestically and internationally. USAID is a USG Agency which signed the contracts and grants in line with the Code of Federal Regulations and other statutes; USG refusal to pay for the past performed work and non-compliance with the TRO can shatter Americans’ certainty in the rule of law.
Rather than empowering local partners and capabilities, the quick decimation has devastated them — and left Americans still located overseas exposed to backlash.
USAID is just the most substantiated example of the sheer waste DOGE is creating. We’re seeing similarly stupid decisions in the firings of critical personnel (some of whom get hired back), but also the elimination of long-term maintenance or safety programs that will cost far more when those protections are gone.
Project 2025 envisioned stripping civil service protections and politicizing the bureaucracy. But with DOGE cuts, it’s not clear the bureaucracy can be rebuilt, even assuming the Heritage hires knew what they were doing. Meanwhile, the method of those cuts is more likely to elicit a backlash from judges, potentially even from the Supreme Court justices whom right wingers were counting on to bless all this.
And all that’s before you contemplate the possibility that Elon’s DOGE boys are doing something else with the data they’re accessing, or — intentionally or not — setting up backdoors via which adversaries can do so themselves.
Assume you were a true believer in Project 2025 (and not far greater authoritarianism). DOGE puts all that at risk, because by breaking so much so early, it is eliciting backlash and collapse of the economy.
The installation of useful idiots
It’s not just Elon who is making a mess. So are the other unqualified useful idiots Trump has installed — people like Pete Hegseth (who has fired three senior women officers after assuring Joni Ernst he wouldn’t target women) and Tulsi Gabbard (who parroted the same Russian propaganda she partly disavowed to get confirmed yesterday) and RFK Jr (who reneged on his promise not to cut off vaccine programs) and Kash Patel (who reneged on his promise to appoint a career FBI Agent as his Deputy).
These people are doing precisely the affirmative damage to the US that Democrats warned they would do — most obviously in RFK’s initial dismissal of the measles outbreak spreading from Texas to other states. And they’re doing it after years of parroting Russian propaganda.
The personalization of DOJ
We expected DOJ to be politicized in a second Trump term. I was even cynical enough to imagine that he would pardon all the January 6ers. The denialism about both Russia and January 6 were baked right into Project 2025.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation, knowing that claims of collusion with Russia were false,5 collaborated with Democratic operatives to inject the story into the 2016 election through strategic media leaks, falsified Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant applications, and lied to Congress.6
Personnel within the FBI engaged in a campaign to convince social media companies and the media generally that the story about the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop was the result of a Russian misinformation campaign—while the FBI had possession of the laptop the entire time and could have clarified the authenticity of the source.
[snip]
The FBI engaged in a domestic influence operation to pressure social media companies to report more “foreign influence” than the FBI was actually seeing and stop the dissemination of and censor true information directly related to the 2020 presidential election.11
It effectively makes foreign bribery — as well as the kind of kickbacks we saw in advance of Trump’s inauguration — legal.
As I noted here, the SEC, for example, has paused its suit against Justin Sun. As Judd Legum describes, this follows the Chinese-linked businessman’s multi-million “investment” in Trump’s crypto currency.
In March 2023, the SEC charged Sun and three of his companies, accusing him of marketing unregistered securities and “fraudulently manipulating the secondary market” for a crypto token. The SEC accused Sun of wash trading, which involves buying and selling a token quickly to fraudulently manufacture artificial interest.
[snip]
Sun’s purchase put millions in Trump’s pocket. WLF was entitled to “$30 million of initial net protocol revenue” in a reserve “to cover operating expenses, indemnities, and obligations.” After the reserve was met, a company owned by Trump would receive “75% of the net protocol revenues.” Sun’s purchase covered the entire reserve. As of December 1, this amounted to $18 million for Trump — 75% of the revenues of all other tokens sold at the time. Sun also joined WLF as an advisor. While the purchase benefited Trump, WLF tokens are essentially worthless for Sun, as they are non-transferable and locked indefinitely.
Nevertheless, Sun has since invested another $45 million in WLF, bringing his total investment to $75 million. This means Sun’s purchases have sent more than $50 million to Trump, Bloomberg reported. Sun has also continued to shower Trump with praise. On January 22, Sun posted on X, “if I have made any money in cryptocurrency, all credit goes to President Trump.”
Once you’ve installed lawyers who publicly represent they are Trump’s lawyers, once you’ve ensured that no one friendly to Trump will be prosecuted for bribery, then Ukraine was bound to lose any negotiation with Russia. Russia has been dangling bribes in front of Trump for years and now they’ll be free to deliver in plain sight.
And Trump has never placed his own self interest behind the interests of the United States.
The capitulation to Russia
Keep all that in mind as you consider Trump’s abject capitulation yesterday.
Keep in mind that even before yesterday’s ambush of Zelenskyy, Pete Hegseth ordered Cyber Command to stand down any targeting of Russia.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last week ordered U.S. Cyber Command to stand down from all planning against Russia, including offensive digital actions, according to three people familiar with the matter.
Hegseth gave the instruction to Cyber Command chief Gen. Timothy Haugh, who then informed the organization’s outgoing director of operations, Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Ryan Heritage, of the new guidance, according to these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.
The order does not apply to the National Security Agency, which Haugh also leads, or its signals intelligence work targeting Russia, the sources said.
Liesyl Franz, deputy assistant secretary for international cybersecurity at the state department, said in a speech last week before a United Nations working group on cybersecurity that the US was concerned by threats perpetrated by some states but only named China and Iran, with no mention of Russia in her remarks. Franz also did not mention the Russia-based LockBit ransomware group, which the US has previously said is the most prolific ransomware group in the world and has been called out in UN forums in the past. The treasury last year said LockBit operates on a ransomeware-as-service model, in which the group licenses its ransomware software to criminals in exchange for a portion of the paid ransoms.
In contrast to Franz’s statement, representatives for US allies in the European Union and the UK focused their remarks on the threat posed by Moscow, with the UK pointing out that Russia was using offensive and malicious cyber-attacks against Ukraine alongside its illegal invasion.
“It’s incomprehensible to give a speech about threats in cyberspace and not mention Russia and it’s delusional to think this will turn Russia and the FSB [the Russian security agency] into our friends,” said James Lewis, a veteran cyber expert formerly of the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank in Washington. “They hate the US and are still mad about losing the cold war. Pretending otherwise won’t change this.”
The US policy change has also been established behind closed doors.
A recent memo at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) set out new priorities for the agency, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security and monitors cyber threats against US critical infrastructure. The new directive set out priorities that included China and protecting local systems. It did not mention Russia.
A person familiar with the matter who spoke to the Guardian on the condition of anonymity said analysts at the agency were verbally informed that they were not to follow or report on Russian threats, even though this had previously been a main focus for the agency.
The person said work that was being done on something “Russia-related” was in effect “nixed”.
And, again, this happened before the ambush yesterday.
Eight years ago, as Mueller’s prosecutors started to focus on Roger Stone’s possible implication in a hacking conspiracy with Russia, Trump declared that he was going to partner with Putin; Russia and the US would jointly guard things like elections.
Now, Trump has chosen to unilaterally disarm.
Yesterday, Roger Sollenberger unpacked the Gitub of one of Elon’s boys, Jordan Wick.
In addition to his AI start-up, AccelerateX (which Wired wrote about), Wick has been fiddling with:
Tracking government employees by union status
Downloading Xitter DMs
Identifying open source data on submarine cables, ports, and mineral deposits
Sure, the utility of some of that — tracking union status — maps right onto the Project 2025 plans DOGE is purportedly implementing, even if that, plus the DM download, raise grave concerns about privacy.
But the submarine cables too?
Even as Donald Trump has made his fealty to Putin clear, even as his Director of National Intelligence parrots Russian disinformation (protected now by the FBI), Elon Musk has been vacuuming up all the data of all the government. And every claim that he’s been modernizing networks or searching for fraud have fallen apart.
At this point, we simply cannot rule out deliberate wholesale sabotage.
Update: Thought I’d repost what I wrote in December in response to Kimberly Strassel complaining about Trump’s useful idiot picks.
But I don’t doubt that the rat-fucker wing of Trump’s advisory team believes that Bobby and Tulsi do accomplish something. The question is whether some really smart politicos believe it’ll be a good thing to kill children and give dictators America’s secrets and let the richest men in the world destroy America’s banking system and the dollar exchange — whether they believe this will win lasting approval from America’s great disaffected masses. It might well! It certainly will expand the pool of disaffected Americans, and with it, increase the market for a strong man to respond to it all.
Or whether there’s some reason Trump is tempting Republican Senators to defy his plans to do great damage to the United States. Perhaps he intends to dare them to start defying him in bulk.
Or perhaps the rat-fucker wing of Trump’s entourage simply has an unknown reason they want to destroy America. Maybe Trump has other election debts — debts he’d get in more trouble for ignoring — that make him amenable to dropping policy bomb after policy bomb on America’s children.
But that’s sort of the point. You’ve got Kimberly Strassel up in arms because Trump is going to the mat for a conspiracist with a Democratic name who’ll get children killed. But it’s more likely to do with the policy bombs that RFK will help Trump drop than the specific conversations that led Bobby Jr to drop out of the race.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Screenshot-2025-03-01-at-10.57.17.png3341180emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-03-01 11:13:352025-03-01 12:54:41Five Ways Trump Is Sabotaging the United States
Trump announces the end of the transatlantic alliance
First it was Emmanuel Macron, putting his hand on Trump’s knee as he publicly corrected Trump in the Oval Office, in the presence of cameras, on the fact that Europe’s contributions to support Ukraine were (a) grants, not loans, and (b) larger than the contributions made by the US. Trump, in turn, tried to toss out his well-worn talking points, but the damage was done. Trump was called out by a foreign leader as a liar, in his very own office and seat of power.
Then it was Keir Starmer, waving a fancy invitation from King Charles to a state dinner, who did exactly the same thing. He publicly corrected Trump in the Oval Office, in the presence of cameras, on Europe’s support for Ukraine. Again, Trump hemmed and hawwed, and embraced the (Starmer: “unprecedented!”) invitation to a second state visit, but the damage was done. Trump was called out by a second foreign leader as a liar, in his very own office and seat of power.
You had to know this would not sit well.
As network after network played the clip of Macron’s hand on Trump’s knee, after all the networks showed Trump fawning over the Bright Shiny Thing that Starmer dangled in front of him, as Starmer very politely called Trump a liar, everyone knew that this would not end well.
And today, it was Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s turn . . . and as anyone with half a brain could anticipate, it *did* not end well.
Personally, I was amused by J.D. Vance’s holier-than-thou whining about Zelenskyy making a benign appearance in Pennsylvania saying “thank you” to the US for their support and calling it Election Interference. I don’t remember Vance taking up umbrage when the head of DOGE Elon Musk appeared and spoke at the national political rally of the neo-Nazi Alternative for Germany (AfD) party just days ahead of the recent German election, and who repeatedly praised the AfD via Xitter. After the AfD came in second, with a sizable caucus in the new Bundestag, Musk called the head of the AfD to offer congratulations and called her party the future of Germany, and Vance’s reaction was *crickets*.
Well, to be scrupulously fair, that’s not true. He *did* say something, but rather than condemning such interference, Vance joined it. At the Munich Security Conference, Vance praised the AfD (not by name but by lauding their political positions on immigration and other policies) and attacked mainstream German political parties for refusing to work with the AfD.
Americans might not have been listening to all of this, but the Europeans were – especially the Germans – and they knew exactly who Vance was praising. After the German elections, the victorious chancellor-elect made a stunning statement. From Deutsche Welle:
After his party’s victory in the election was confirmed Sunday night, [CDU party leader Friedrich] Merz said that he wanted to work on creating unity in Europe as quickly as possible, “so that, step by step, we can achieve independence from the US.”
Until recently, this would have been a highly unusual thing for any leader of the CDU to say. After all, it has always had a strong affinity for the US.
“Merz aligns himself with the legacy of historical CDU leaders such as [former chancellors] Konrad Adenauer and Helmut Kohl, both of whom played pivotal roles in strengthening transatlantic relations,” said Evelyn Gaiser, a policy advisor on transatlantic relationships and NATO with the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, a German think tank that is associated with but independent of the Christian Democrats.
[snip]
Merz spoke out after JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference (MSC) in February, in which the US vice president said that the biggest threat to Europe did not come from Russia or China, but “from within.”
“This is really now the change of an era,” Merz said on stage at the MSC. “If we don’t hear the wake-up call now, it might be too late for the entire European Union.”
Add this into the context of withdrawing from the World Health Organization and eliminating all the work done by USAID, and the message is crystal clear. While yes, this meeting today in the Oval Office was about Ukraine, it was really a sign of something much much larger.
In April 2021, when Joe Biden addressed a joint session of Congress in a non-State of the Union address, he said this:
I’ve often said that our greatest strength is the power of our example – not just the example of our power. And in my conversations with world leaders – many I’ve known for a long time – the comment I hear most often is: we see that America is back – but for how long?
We now know the answer: four years and five weeks.
RIP the Transatlantic Alliance (1945-2025).
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Trump-Vance-and-Zelenskyy.webp7201280Peterrhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngPeterr2025-02-28 17:54:442025-02-28 17:54:44Four Years and Five Weeks
This story, about a Biden-to-Trump voter in rural Michigan who got fired in the probationary worker purge, caused a bit of controversy on Bluesky. After personalizing Ryleigh Cooper, describing her educational successes and her struggles to conceive a child, the story described how Trump’s empty promise to make IVF free was one of the things (the other being high costs) that led Cooper, after a 15-minute struggle in the voting booth, to vote for Trump instead of Kamala Harrs.
Cooper did not want to think about what happened three months prior but her mind went there anyway. To the voting booth in Baldwin’s town hall, where she filled out every part of the ballot before turning to the box that said “Presidential.” She recalled staring at it for 15 minutes.
She did not want to vote for Trump. Cooper hated what he said about women and hated how he treated them. Her family always said the women who accused the president of sexual assault had either made it up or deserved it. Cooper heard them and kept her own experience a secret, thinking that they might feel the same way about her.
She voted for Joe Biden in 2020, her first time casting a ballot in a presidential election. But life felt more complicated these days. Her mortgage was too expensive, groceries were nearly $400 a month, and one single cycle of IVF could cost more than 10 percent of her annual household income.
Trump, at a campaign stop an hour and a half south of her, had promised to make IVF free. She knew that from a video clip she saw on TikTok. And she had believed him.
A number of lefties argue that Cooper got what she voted for and is due no sympathy.
Even ignoring basic humanity, they’re missing how people decide to vote, and so also how people might choose to fight fascism.
They vote based on what their close families and friends do and say. As the piece notes, people in Baldwin, MI — one of the poorest towns in MI — are predominantly Trump people.
Most people in Baldwin like Trump; more than 62 percent in Lake County, which includes the town, voted for him in November and in 2020. But people don’t talk about it. Politics here, at least until recently, felt removed from everyday worries.
That’s not surprising. Baldwin is at the edge of a large swath of National Forest. I’ve driven through, at least twice; the area is pretty, but I drove through on the way to places on Lake Michigan that are beautiful, and so attract wealthy outsiders like Pete Buttigieg and tourism dollars (Baldwin is about an hour closer to Traverse City than to Grand Rapids). The area is focused on forestry and outdoor activities like hunting and fishing (a lovely bike trail ends in Baldwin). Cycling close to there once, I remember the discomfort of hearing people shooting on property sporting a Confederate flag flying right next to the bike trail.
There are news outlets close, in Big Rapids and Cadillac. But there’s not much substantive news, which may be why the piece describes that people don’t talk about politics. The article describes Cooper accessing two kinds of information: the “news” about Trump’s promise to make IVF free, which she found on TikTok, and Facebook posts from her grandmother and a former teacher parroting right wing lines.
She thought about the Facebook posts she had seen a few days earlier.
“It’s February 3,” her grandmother posted, “and we’re going in the right direction.”
“Any government employee who is afraid of transparency,” wrote the man who taught her AP government class in high school, “is a criminal!”
Cooper knew the people in her life meant well, but she wanted her future to be different from theirs. She had grown up watching her family struggle as her mother lost one job, then another, then another. She was just a few months shy of her graduate degree and close to a promotion that could nearly double her salary. Even $50,000 or $60,000 a year, she thought, could help get her a house a few counties over, with better schools.
Aside from her gender, Cooper is the kind of person who voted for Trump because they consume little real news but instead rely on algorithmic garbage, the kind of person who based her vote on a single TikTok post.
Even still, as a number of people on Bluesky noted, the two topics on which Cooper was misinformed, the veracity of Trump’s promise for free IVF and his claim to have nothing to do with Project 2025, were left unchallenged by a great many purportedly factual news outlets. And unless she got her undergraduate degree at Ferris State in Big Rapids, there’s a decent chance she was away at college when she voted for Biden in 2020 (Michigan State, along with some schools further north and in the UP, offer Forestry programs).
The reason why the United States is so polarized — the reason why Cooper is mostly surrounded by people who support Trump and therefore is statistically likely to rely on Trump voters’ opinion to decide how to vote — is because there’s little circulation between increasingly polarized urban and rural areas. She lives in Baldwin because her family does; she worked in forestry because that’s what the local industry is. Cooper’s isolation is the problem we need to fix, not the person we need to abandon.
And this story, the stories of thousands of people like her, are the quickest way to do that.
After all, I’m betting that her grandmother and AP government teacher didn’t think she’d be targeted by Trump’s cuts. She’s not an arrogant academic, she’s someone who made good by going to college and starting a graduate degree. I’m betting neither thinks she’s a criminal, either.
There’s a quote from Russ Vought that has been cited frequently, especially in the wake of Elon Musk’s five bullet email demand last week. Vought described how he wanted to traumatize people he labeled as “bureaucrats.”
“We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” he said. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can’t do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so.
“We want to put them in trauma.”
But Vought not only wanted to traumatize people he called bureaucrats, he wanted to turn them into villains.
With regards to the trauma, Vought has undoubtedly succeeded, possibly beyond his wildest dreams. Cooper’s story has already been matched by hundreds and thousands of others reported all over the country. The people who are left in government are waiting for the next blow, struggling to make sense of guidance that changes from minute to minute, paranoid that Musk’s boys are spying on their work emails.
But Vought’s effort to turn government workers into villains has largely backfired.
To be sure, several efforts to villainize workers have succeeded. Complaints about Musk’s disinformation targeting USAID appear throughout court declarations and interviews, such as this one submitted by “Diane Doe” in the AFSA lawsuit.
7. The following days maintained high levels of uncertainty, we tried to focus our team on continuing to analyze our portfolio to align with the America First agenda. It started to slowly become evident that the Administration was targeting USAID. For example, many tweets on X from Elon Musk attack USAID which made it clear that these actions had nothing to do with actually reviewing programs.
8. On Friday, January 31st through media posts many of us learned that the goal was in fact to abolish USAID. The level of chaos and uncertainty has been menacing since then. We thought the entire weekend our Mission Director was going to be recalled without cause. Our website where people could go to learn facts about our work disappeared. The social media attacks against USAID escalated to alleging us to be criminals, comparing us to worms, bragging about putting us through a wood chipper, and publishing false headlines about USAID’s work (the worst of which may be accusing USAID of manufacturing bio weapons including COVID-19). The online campaign against USAID has been unfounded and slanderous
10. Since then, as of February 6th 2025 we have received no official orders or travel authorizations, but have been told to continue to plan our immediate departure. Elon Musk and elected officials continue to misrepresent USAID on social media by sharing false information. I would also like to note that despite media talking points, life saving aid has still not been given a waiver. Our PEPFAR programs are still stalled.
11. I have not slept in days. I am not eating. This insanely rapid upheaval of USAID and its personnel has been appalling and sickening. Our country that we have served honorably has been turned against us. I sit by my phone fearing every email. The entire experience is traumatic and continues to be so. We are being treated unfairly and unjustly despite dedicating our lives to public service.
[snip]
15. The head of Congress in the country I am serving responded to Musk’s tweets by saying that they would be investigating USAID and their staff. This has put our safety and security at risk. Additionally, due to the online attack campaign against USAID and the threatening comments to posts the U.S. does not feel safe to return to.
And the far right has built on years of success villainizing the lead scapegoats for this fascist effort, trans people. Don Moynihan wrote up how the NYT, even after disavowing its past propaganda against trans people, adopted the frame set by Libs of TikTok and Christopher Rufo when they misrepresented NSA chat logs to claim the workers were engaged in wild deviance during work hours.
The bigger issue is that a political activist has a direct pipeline into everything government employees are saying, even platforms that are supposed to include sensitive security messages. Who leaked the information?
The bigger issue is that the DNI fired these employees without even a hint of due process.
The bigger issue is that these employees were targeted and fired because they were trans.
It is simply impossible to believe that a group of White male analysts would have been peremptorily fired for engaging in what their Commander in Chief has deemed “locker room talk.” The political activist being mocked, LibsofTikTok, were known for their anti-trans activism. That is why she was being mocked in the first place.
The political activist who broke the story, Chris Rufo, also mischaracterizes much of the discussion: he presents shared advice about transition surgeries and related medical issues as sexually deviant fetishes, leading to headlines like this in right-wing media:
Pink News analyzed the leaked chats and characterized the discussions as “honest and open accounts of various LGBTQ+ topics and experiences, many of them apparently written by trans employees and offered up as useful advice for colleagues.” People outside the trans community may have different levels of comfort with these discussions, but the context is that Rufo and others have consistently fed a stereotype of trans people as dangerous deviants. You don’t have to condone what the employees did to realize that the accusations of deviance are being used here in a way that would never be the case for other employees.
None of this is about security. Not really. It is about purging certain people and identities from public life. Whatever you think about trans people, you should be disturbed by this. If you are familiar with the Lavender Scare — when gay people were purged from government positions in the 1940s to 1960s — you probably know it as a cautionary tale from an intolerant past. A tale of moral panic and persecutions not to be repeated. But it is being repeated.
[snip]
Time and again Rufo’s harassment campaigns have worked because institutions and the media go along with one story he is telling — that he is battling institutional corruption — while deliberately ignoring another story he is telling about a campaign to purge certain ideas and people from public life.
I in no way want to diminish the effect of years of demonization of trans people, though even there, I hope the contributions trans men and women have made to the military, as Pete Hegseth tries to claim they’re disqualified to work in his DOD, undercuts this campaign. We’re about to hear 4,000 stories about the contributions trans people have made to keeping America safe. Let’s be ready to elevate those stories.
Plus, several things are happening that have dulled the effect of Elon Musk’s normally fine-tuned machine for fascism.
First, Elon and his mob have too many targets, with a focus shifting between lawyers and NGOs organizing the resistance, a wildly mismanaged Jeffrey Epstein disinformation effort yesterday as alleged sex traffickers Andrew and Tristan Tate arrived in the US, judges, not to mention Trump’s old villains from his investigations. You need some modicum of focus — and usually more concerted attention from Trump than he has given so far — to fully demonize a person.
And these campaigns are misfiring. Elon Musk’s targeting of a woman who shares the last name of Norm Eisen, who has launched some of the more aggressive lawsuits against Trump’s abuses, misidentified the person in question.
Elon Musk falsely accused prominent lawyer and CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen of leading a “crime family” after he discovered a woman with the same last name who worked for an organization that accepted funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
The only problem? The woman, Tamar Eisen, is no relation to Norm Eisen.
On X, Musk amplified a post which falsely stated that Tamar, an employee of the nonprofit National Democratic Institute, was the CNN personality’s daughter.
The post took aim at the elder Eisen for being “the mastermind behind a slew of lawsuits” that seek to stifle the so-called Department of Government Efficiency’s gutting of USAID.
Tamar Eisen, the post alleged, “was strutting her stuff as a Program Officer for the NDI’s Gender, Women and Democracy team for almost three years.”
Musk wrote in response Thursday afternoon: “The Eisen crime family.”
Yet the two have no familial connection, a source familiar told the Daily Beast.
The guy in a Project Veritas video that Lee Zeldin has used in a corrupt campaign to criminalize green programs has, according to Mark Zaid, no tie to the disbursements Zeldin has targeted.
Meanwhile, the former EPA official in the Project Veritas video, Brent Efron, was contacted last week by the EPA’s inspector general’s office and on Monday by an FBI agent from Washington at the request of Miami federal prosecutor Joshua Paster, deputy chief of an asset forfeiture unit with the southern district of Florida, according to a person familiar with the matter. The Miami office is at least the third U.S. attorney’s office asked to take part in the investigation. It was not clear if Paster would remain on the case, the person said.
Spokespeople for the U.S. attorney’s offices in D.C. and Miami declined to comment.
Efron’s lawyer, Mark Zaid, said in an interview that his client “doesn’t know what this is about, and that he was never involved in the obligation or disbursement of funds from any EPA assistance program, including NCIF and CCIA [held at Citibank]. And he was not involved in any conversations about EPA and Citibank.”
Some of these misfires will just fizzle out as they’re replaced by new chosen villains. But some of them could blow up in spectacular (and useful) fashion, especially if Ed Martin — currently the Acting US Attorney but aspiring to win confirmation for the job by the Senate — judge-shopped until he got a warrant using the video to try to claw back $20 billion in funds.
Meanwhile, as Elon strikes out at everyone who crosses his path (including judges whose actions he seems to barely understand), both the national press like this WaPo story but also the local press continues to tell the stories of the people DOGE has fired. One I’m partial to (in part because I understand how a passion for the Great Lakes unifies the two parties) is this story about how the firings of some Fish and Wildlife personnel stationed a half hour away from Cooper may halt the effort to rid the Great Lakes of nasty lamprey eels (if you don’t know what a lamprey eel looks like, click through for the picture).
Over the weekend, 14 US Fish & Wildlife Service employees who implement the program — most if not all of them based in Ludington and Marquette — were fired in a nationwide purge that some have dubbed “The Valentine’s Day Massacre.”
On top of that, the agency has been forbidden from hiring dozens of seasonal workers needed to dose Great Lakes rivers with lamprey-killing chemicals, prompting officials who oversee the program to question whether it can function at all.
[snip]
The program costs US taxpayers more than $20 million annually, and in return it protects a multibillion-dollar fishery from an eel-like invader that entered the Great Lakes on manmade shipping canals more than a century ago.
A single lamprey can consume 40 pounds of fish annually by attaching to the animals’ skin with razor-sharp teeth, slowly draining their fluids. The Great Lakes ecosystem was in collapse by 1957, when scientists discovered a chemical compound called TMF that kills lamprey while sparing other species.
Today, the fishery commission contracts with the Fish & Wildlife Service to dose hundreds of rivers with TMF each year. As a result, lamprey populations are down about 90% from historical averages. But recent history offers a window into the risk of a lapse in treatments.
The story also focuses on other Forest personnel fired along with Cooper.
“These aren’t … quote-unquote bureaucrats,” Vanderheuel said. “They’re people who get their hands dirty and make sure the trails are cleared so you can ride your ATV. They clean your campgrounds. All the paint on the trees that people see? These are the guys and gals who paint the trees so we can sell timber.”
There are stories like this in every locality. People are saying, “these aren’t … quote-unquote bureaucrats,” in every locality.
The first and second batch of firings has already created a surge in stories portraying people Vought calls bureaucrats as, instead, people’s neighbors, neighbors who perform valuable functions that taxpayers have paid for. These people aren’t villains — they’re the ones protecting us from lamprey eels, cancer, and hurricanes. And by firing them, Elon has made it visible to a lot of people who didn’t know that that is what the federal government is about.
Even the USAID cuts — thought to be among the hardest thing to defend — are eliciting rich profiles of people affected, at least overseas, like this FT profile of both a patient at one of the South African HIV clinics shut down, and the network of people who contributed to its work. In short order, the stories will be a lot more dire, depicting the large number of children that Marco Rubio let die, possibly even examples of potentially violent backlash against America for not paying money owed to local partners.
The US government has, for decades, allowed its work to remain invisible to taxpayers, even as those taxpayers relied on programs to support their lifestyle and even to feed their kids. That invisibility made it easy for goons like Vought, Stephen Miller, and Elon Musk to villainize anonymous government workers.
But even as the richest man in the world finds new ways to terrorize people while demanding big tax cuts and $2.4 billion contracts — a villain every bit as ugly as a lamprey eel — he is creating a flood of stories about the people, your neighbors, who provide the services you may not have realized came from the government.
It is, to my mind, an insane waste of time for self-imagined lefties to complain that newspapers are telling the story of Ryleigh Cooper. Not only is the firing spree we’re seeing an unprecedented attack on the American way of life, one that can and almost certainly will disrupt prior patterns of political formation, meaning whatever influence you think her firing will have on her future politicization is without past precedent. But whatever you think about the past choices Ryleigh Cooper made, she is the daughter of a local community that had a wildly distorted understanding of government — even from her AP government teacher! — before Elon’s firings made government visible in a new way. It may be too little or too late, but changing that understanding is a necessary precondition to trying to reverse the damage.
And making Ryleigh Cooper’s story a localized way to portray what government did, before Elon interrupted it, is an irreplaceable way to do that.
More importantly, no lefty should spend their time trying to make Ryleigh Cooper a villain: That’s precisely what the fascists have, explicitly, set out to do.
Update: Fixed my reference to Biden instead of Harris in first paragraph.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-28-at-1.04.28 PM.png450658emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-28 10:11:532025-02-28 12:49:51Russ Vought Got His Trauma — But Not the Villains He Imagined
Trump had a ritual humiliation session yesterday he billed as a Cabinet Meeting. One purpose of it was to perform complaisance with DOGE [sic]. Trump had Elon lie about his accomplishments and goal, and then invited Cabinet Members to speak up publicly about problems with him, which of course all declined to do.
And obviously, that can only be done with the support of everyone in this room. And I’d like to thank everyone for — for your support. Thank you very much this. This — this can only be done with — with your support.
So, this is — it’s really — DOGE is a support function for the president and for the — the agencies and departments to help achieve those savings and to effect- — effectively find 15 percent in reduction in fraud and — and waste.
And — and we bring the receipts. So, people say, like, “Well, is this real?” Just go to DOGE.gov. We l- — we — line item by line item, we specify each item. So — and w- — and I — I should say, we — also, we will make mistakes. We won’t be perfect. But when we make mistake, we’ll fix it very quickly.
So, for example, with USAID, one of the things we accidentally canceled, very briefly, was Ebola — Ebola prevention. I think we all wanted Ebola prevention. So, we restored the Ebola prevention immediately, and there was no interruption.
But we do need to move quickly if we’re — if we’re to achieve a trillion-dollar deficit reduction in tw- — in — in financial year 2026. It requires saving $4 billion per day, every day from now through the end of September. But we can do it, and we will do it.
Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, do you have any questions of Elon while we’re on the subject of DOGE? Because we’ll finish off with that. And if you would have any questions, please ask — you could ask me or Elon.
Go ahead, please.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Musk. I just wanted to ask you, the — President Trump put out a Truth Social today saying that everybody in the Cabinet was — was happy with you. I just wondered if that — if you had heard otherwise, and if you had heard anything about members of the Cabinet who weren’t happy with the way things were going. And if so, what are you doing to address those — any dissatisfaction?
MR. MUSK: To the best of —
THE PRESIDENT: Hey, Elon, let the Cabinet speak just for a second. (Laughter.)
Is anybody unhappy with Elon? If you are, we’ll throw them out of here. (Laughter.) Is anybody unhappy? (Applause.)
They are — they have a lot of respect for Elon and that he’s doing this. And some disagree a little bit, but I will tell you, for the most part, I think everyone is not only happy, they’re thrilled.
The Ebola line — one Marco Rubio did not contest — got a ton of press.
But WaPo’s story — describing that Elon’s claimed restoration was a lie — got far less.
Yet current and former USAID officials said that Musk was wrong: USAID’s Ebola prevention efforts have been largely halted since Musk and his DOGE allies moved last month to gut the global-assistance agency and freeze its outgoing payments, they said. The teams and contractors that would be deployed to fight an Ebola outbreak have been dismantled, they added. While the Trump administration issued a waiver to allow USAID to respond to an Ebola outbreak in Uganda last month, partner organizations were not promptly paid for their work, and USAID’s own efforts were sharply curtailed compared to past efforts to fight Ebola outbreaks.
“There have been no efforts to ‘turn on’ anything in prevention” of Ebola and other diseases, said Nidhi Bouri, who served as a senior USAID official during the Biden administration and oversaw the agency’s response to health-care outbreaks.
Last month’s Ebola outbreak has now receded, but some former U.S. officials say that’s in part because of past investments in prevention efforts that helped position Uganda to respond — and that other countries remain far more vulnerable.
Bouri said her former USAID team of 60 people working on disease-response had been cut to about six staffers as of earlier this week. She called the recent USAID response to Uganda’s Ebola outbreak a “one-off,” far diminished from “the full suite” of activities that the agency historically would mount, such as ramping up efforts to monitor whether the disease had spread to neighboring countries.
“The full spectrum — the investments in disease surveillance, the investments in what we mobilize … moving commodities, supporting lab workers — that capacity is now a tenth of what it was,” Bouri said.
[snip]
“We have the programs and the people who were working on Ebola and other deadly-disease prevention capacity in other countries not able to do their jobs because their work is frozen, and many of the people have been put on administrative leave,” said Cameron, who worked on biosecurity efforts in the Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden administrations. “And we have a response that is, at best, less efficient, because the implementers are not able to get reliably paid.” [my emphasis]
This is consistent with what people have been claiming in court declarations (in this case from a Controller stationed overseas) for weeks: even where State/USAID claims to have sustained a program, it was nevertheless gutted through non-payment and staffing cuts.
8. Every single payment that I tried unsuccessfully to process after January 27 was for an expense incurred before January 20. Most of the payments I have been trying to process were for expenses incurred in November or December of 2024. These included large payments to partners who bill us every month for the work performed in the previous month, as well as smaller administrative items like cell phone and other utility payments, travel reimbursements, and rental payments.
9. On February 3, the situation changed yet again. As of that date, every time I tried to hit the “certify” button to begin a disbursement, I received an error message stating that I did not have authority to proceed. I contacted Phoenix Security to inquire if there was a technical problem in the system and was told “on Friday January 31, we were instructed to remove the ability to certify payments.” They did not indicate who instructed them, only stating “Unfortunately I am unable to reverse this decision.”
10. On February 5, all USAID controllers received another diplomatic cableindicating that USAID personnel could no longer process payments themselves but must request approval from a Senior Bureau Officer before forwarding the payment packages for processing. However, as of February 11, nobody can agree on who is the appropriate SBO for USAID payments and the State Department hasn’t processed a single payment based on the new procedure.
11. As of February 9, when I try to log into Phoenix, I receive a new error message stating that my sign-in attempt has failed. I have even less access to Phoenix after the February 7 court order than I did before that date.
[snip]
13. I have not been able to process payments under any of the waivers included in the January 24 cable, including legitimate expenses incurred prior to January 24 under existing awards or those for employee operating expenses. Though the waivers exist on paper, in reality all USAID funds have remained frozen because of technological barriers added to the system, I don’t know by whom. Phoenix will not let us disburse anything.
The people who pay the bills have all been forced out of payment systems. And it’s not clear whether DOGE [sic] broke the system or simply disabled it (a Matt Bai report I find suspect, but which plaintiffs have now cited in court filings, says it’s the latter).
The first of these USAID cases — on Judge Amir Ali’s order to halt freezes of such funding — landed before SCOTUS last night; the government’s request to vacate Ali’s order presents a wildly misleading description of the posture of the case.
It also wails mightily about plaintiffs’ request to conduct discovery, including by deposing Marco Rubio.
Worse, this order exposes the government to the risk of contempt proceedings and other sanctions. Agency leadership has determined that the ordered payments “cannot be accomplished in the time allotted by the” district court. App., infra, 97a. That risk is especially concerning because the district court appears poised to require mini-trials, discovery, and depositions of senior officials as to whether a host of foreign-aid decisions genuinely rested on the government’s conceded discretionary authority to terminate contracts and grants, or were instead supposed pretexts for a blanket foreign-aid cut that the district court considers unlawful. See id. at 141a (respondents’ proposed discovery plan) (requesting deposition of Secretary of State) Respondents are pressing even further, demanding discovery into personnel actions, payment-processing protocols, and other agency actions that have nothing to do with their original APA claims challenging a categorical funding pause. The threat of invasive discovery into senior officials’ subjective motivations only exacerbates the Article II harms inflicted by the court’s order.
Or perhaps it wails mightily about being called on a claim made below: That Marco Rubio has been personally involved in all this.
After Judge Ali first issued a TRO, State offered a new claimed basis for the freeze: that State was in the process of canceling the contracts via clauses within the contracts, applied individually. It claimed that the reduced staff of State reviewed every contract and decided whether to keep or eliminate it.
5. USAID led a rigorous multi-level review process that began with spreadsheets including each contract, grant, or funding instrument where each line of the spreadsheeting reflected one such agreement and included information about the recipient, the amount of the award, the subject matter, and a description of the project that often included the location of the project. Policy staff first performed a first line review to determine whether the individual agreement was in line with foreign policy priorities (and therefore could potentially be continued) or not (and presumptively could be terminated as inconsistent with Agency priorities and the national interest). Those recommendations were reviewed by a senior policy official to confirm that, for awards recommended for termination, that ending the program was consistent with the foreign policy of the United States and the operations and priorities of the Agency. The results of that review were routed to me for further review, including of institutional and diplomatic equities. As one example, a presumptively terminated agreement might be continued for a variety of foreign policy reasons, such as the location of the project or the general subject matter, or the judgment and foreign policy perspectives of the second line reviewer. Termination recommendations approved by me ultimately received the Secretary of State’s review. The Secretary of State’s personal involvement confirmed that termination decisions were taken with full visibility into the unique diplomatic, national security, and foreign policy interests at stake vis-à-vis foreign assistance programs. [my emphasis]
Just in time to rush this to the Supreme Court, Marocco claimed that Rubio had finished his decision-making.
Since last night when I executed a declaration, the process for individually reviewing each outstanding State Department grant and federal assistance award obligation has concluded. Secretary Rubio has now made a final decision with respect to each such award, affirmatively electing to either retain the award or terminate as inconsistent with the national interests and foreign policy of the United States. State is processing termination letters with the goal to reach substantial completion within the next 24-48 hours. Notification letters will be distributed for retained awards withing 2 weeks to take account of the overseas lag. In total, approximately 4,100 awards were terminated, and approximately 2,700 awards were retained. Of approximately 711 contracts originally paused, approximately 297 still need to be reviewed; the remainder have either been terminated or resumed. Defendants are committed to fully moving forward with the remaining awards and programs that Secretary Rubio has determined to retain.
A Contracting Officer submitted a declaration yesterday explaining how “implausible” the claim of personal involvement from Rubio is.
36. As a CO who manages a portfolio of less than 50 awards, the claims of “individual reviews” by Secretary Rubio are completely implausible. Contracts and awards are lengthy, technical, and complicated documents. They often include technical specifications that are dozens of pages long, as well as lengthy technical appendices. It would take a single person weeks and weeks of work to substantively review hundreds of contracts and awards, especially if that person was not already familiar with the programs at issue. For example, when the Agency asked COs to review the Scopes of Work and Program Descriptions contained in our awards to determine whether provisions regarding Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion were incorporated, it took me and my team a week to review fewer than 50 awards. Not only did we have a team of people doing this work, but these were awards which I manage and have significant foundational knowledge about.
37. Beyond that, without consulting the COs and CORs/OARs who manage a specific contract or award, it would be impossible in most cases to understand whether a specific award could be terminated, effective immediately, without incurring even greater termination costs or causing even greater harms to the national interest or Agency priorities. For example, the COs and CORs/OARs have specific information about the status of ongoing work, whether immediate termination would incur sunk costs (for example, by allowing already-purchased food and medicine to expire), whether immediate termination would risk the health or safety of Agency personnel or implementing partners, among many other award-specific factors.
He had nothing but briefings on his schedule on February 20. But then he had two high level meetings on February 21. More high level meetings, including with President Macron, on Monday. A meeting with the Saudi Defense Minister Tuesday. And the aforementioned Cabinet Meeting yesterday, where Rubio didn’t speak up to correct Elon’s false claim about Ebola. Rubio did, however, blow off EU foreign policy minister Kaja Kallas yesterday, avoiding a discussion about Ukraine. Today, Keir Starmer visits.
Even with the canceled Kallas meeting, though, Rubio simply had no time — especially not blocks of time that fell into the periods when Pete Marocco claims these decisions were made — to review the contracts in depth.
State needs to claim Rubio had personal involvement in rescinding these contracts. But it is virtually impossible that he did, much less that he had meaningful input on it.
What is far more likely is that Elon’s AI reviewed these contracts, and State is claiming that the work of that AI is instead the considered conclusion of the Senate-confirmed Secretary of State.
No wonder DOJ panicked when plaintiffs said they wanted to depose the people who made the decisions (a request Judge Ali has not endorsed).
Someone just shut down the bulk of foreign aid, purportedly with the personal involvement of the Secretary of the State. But that very same Secretary of State sat silent when Elon Musk falsely claimed that State was still funding Ebola prevention.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Screen-Shot-2022-08-12-at-11.14.02-AM.png8941688emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-27 06:44:152025-02-27 06:58:28Elon Musk’s AI-bola and Marco Rubio’s Very Busy Month
Chris Geidner did a post over the weekend explaining the importance of being litigious. He described how just forcing the Administration to defend itself, on the record and in public, can lead to wins down the road.
The reality of litigation challenging the Trump administration is that it isn’t all going to win.
That’s OK.
Forcing the administration to defend its actions, on the record and in public, is important.
The mere fact of litigating can change implementation of policy to improve its application to those affected. Even a loss can advance awareness about oppressive steps being taken by the administration. And, multiple strategies might be taken to challenge certain actions, some of which will be more successful than others.
From a litigation perspective, in other words, not suing is sometimes “obeying in advance.” Actions need to be challenged. If a key aspect of what President Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and others are doing right now is seeing what they can get away with — and what they can convince people that they can do — then a key part of pushing back against that needs to be challenging everything that can be challenged.
In short: Force them to work for it.
OPM’s cave-in-process on Elon Musk’s respond-or-resign email is a very good example.
Multiple agencies are now instructing employees that, contrary to what Elon said (and Trump appeared to reiterate in presser), responding is optional.
The reason why they’re doing so is virtually certainly due to this lawsuit, filed by Kel McClanahan (here’s his website, if you want to support his work). Its theory was a bit different than a lot of other lawsuits: he argued that OPM was violating its own standards under the E-Government Act mandating the existence and substance of a Privacy Impact Assessment before collecting new information.
46. OPM is an agency subject to the E-Government Act because it is an “establishment in the executive branch of the Government.” 47. A PIA for a “new collection of information” must be “commensurate with the size of the information system being assessed, the sensitivity of information that is in an identifiable form in that system, and the risk of harm from unauthorized release of that information.” The PIA must specifically address “(I) what information is to be collected; (II) why the information is being collected; (III) the intended use of the agency of the information; (IV) with whom the information will be shared; (V) what notice or opportunities for consent would be provided to individuals regarding what information is collected and how that information is shared; [and] (VI) how the information will be secured.”
48. The Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) is charged with “oversee[ing] the implementation of the privacy impact assessment processing throughout the Government” and “develop[ing] policies and guidelines or agencies on the conduct of privacy impact assessments.”
49. Accordingly, OMB has clarified the minimum requirements for a PIA and the role of PIAs in an agency’s decision to collect (or to refrain from collecting) personal data.
50. According to OMB, “Agencies shall conduct and draft a PIA with sufficient clarity and specificity to demonstrate that the agency fully considered privacy and incorporated appropriate privacy protections from the earliest stages of the agency activity and throughout the information life cycle.”
Although the E-Government Act expressly exempts the email system at issue here, which includes only federal government employees, OPM nevertheless has now prepared a PIA. See Attachment A (executed February 5, 2025). That is the sole relief sought through this litigation, and the sole source of Plaintiffs’ asserted irreparable harm. Because the agency has in fact published a PIA (despite it not being required to do so), this case is moot, and Plaintiffs cannot establish irreparable harm.
That PIA gets around providing advance notice about the email because — it claims — responding to any email is voluntary (Josh Marshall may have been the first to notice this, but I don’t think he realizes this PIA exists solely because of the lawsuit).
4.1, How does the project provide individuals notice prior to the collection of information? If notice is not provided, explain why not.
The names and government email addresses of federal government employees are already housed in OPM systems or provided by employing agencies and, in any event, do not contain substantive information about employees. As a result, there is no reason to provide advance notice for the collection of Employee Contact Data. All individuals are provided advance notice of the Employee Response Data, as it is voluntarily provided by the individuals themselves in response to an email.
4.2, What opportunities are available for individuals to consent to uses, decline to provide information, or opt out of the project?
The Employee Response Data is explicitly voluntary, The individual federal government employees can opt out simply by not responding to the email.
Based on those representations — that OPM has a PIA — as well as questions about standing, Judge Randolph Moss denied a Temporary Restraining Order in the lawsuit.
Mind you, the fact that agencies are only now, ten hours before the purported reply deadline, instructing employees not to respond, as well as the fact that DOJ initially instructed DOJ employees to respond (until it reversed course for confidentiality reasons), may help McClanahan prove standing. Imagine employees who did respond before agencies reversed course? Imagine employees who responded to Trump’s public backing for the email? There’s no reversing their injury, or the good faith belief many federal employees would have had that Trump’s comments could be trusted?
Furthermore, OPM claims that actual government employees have fewer privacy protections than others. The lawsuit already includes five plaintiffs who are not government employees. But the Office of US Courts employees also received this email, a violation of separation of powers.
In the course of one month, then, this lawsuit created a way to undercut Musk’s latest assault on government.
Update: In a new filing, McClanahan reveals he’s seeking sanctions.
On 23 February, Plaintiffs’ undersigned counsel served counsel for Defendant Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) with a motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (“Rule 11”). In the spirit of that rule, Plaintiffs will not elaborate on the content of that motion at this time, other than to say that the allegations are new and relate primarily to OPM’s presentation to the Court of the Privacy Impact Assessment (“PIA”) for the GovernmentWide Email System (“GWES”), which, in light of rapidly unfolding events over the weekend, materially misrepresented the allegedly “voluntary” nature of responses to emails sent using that system,1 coupled with the newly discovered evidence that, as Plaintiffs’ undersigned counsel warned the Court in the 14 February hearing, OPM did not purge the GWES of information about non-Executive Branch employees, but only installed “filters” to keep the emails about the deferred resignation program from being sent to them.
Simply put, OPM sent an email using [email protected] demanding that all employees reply to the email with a list of things they did last week by 11:59 PM on 24 February, and today President Trump stated that if someone does not reply “[they’re] sort of semi-fired or [they’re] fired.” Elon Musk (@elonmusk), X.com (Feb. 24, 2025 1:25 PM), at https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1894091228054261781 (last accessed Feb. 24, 2025).
Update: At about 5:00 (so too late for anything but CYA), HHS sent out guidance on how to respond to the OPM email. It ends with this warning.
Assume that what you write will be read by malign foreign actors and tailor your response accordingly.
Update: OPM told everyone, just hours before end of work today, that responding is voluntary.
In an email to its workforce on Monday, the Justice Department said that during a meeting with the interagency Chief Human Capital Officers Council, OPM informed agencies that employee responses to the email are voluntary. OPM also clarified that despite what Musk had posted, a non-response to the email does not equate to a resignation, the email said.
Update: Before he likely oversaw that email warning about malign foreign actors, HHS’ Acting General Counsel raised a bunch of other reasons this email was problematic.
One message on Sunday morning from the Department of Health and Human Services, led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., instructed its roughly 80,000 employees to comply. That was shortly after the acting general counsel, Sean Keveney, had instructed some not to. And by Sunday evening, agency leadership issued new instructions that employees should “pause activities” related to the request until noon on Monday.
“I’ll be candid with you. Having put in over 70 hours of work last week advancing Administration’s priorities, I was personally insulted to receive the below email,” Keveney said in an email viewed by the AP that acknowledged a broad sense of “uncertainty and stress” within the agency.
Keveney laid out security concerns and pointed out some of the work done by the agency’s employees may be protected by attorney-client privilege.
Update: Just hours before the deadline, OPM issued new guidance. Using the word “should,” it says people should respond to their managers and CC OPM.
It also excuses Executive Office of the President — purportedly because of the Presidential Records Act.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-24-at-16.54.40.png4921192emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-24 14:54:412025-02-25 08:36:47How a (Thus Far Unsuccessful) Lawsuit Caused Elon Musk’s OPM Email to Faceplant
is simply a reflection of the ignorance of the DOGE boys Musk has infiltrated into government, the shoddiness of the AI tools they’re using, or simply a disinterest in giving a fuck, because once Elon claims this website says something, the right wing will follow along like sheep.
There’s still a lot of reporting to be done, but thus far outlets have shown that DOGE:
Took items that added up to $16B and claimed it represented $55B of savings
Claimed an $8M savings over a multi-year contract represented $8B total savings
Claimed credit for things that happened under Joe Biden, such as lease cancelations and Jimmy Carter’s death
Included contracts that haven’t been canceled and ignored costs that such cancelations will necessitate
As I said, thus far, this NPR piece captures how badly the DOGE boys are misunderstanding basic things about federal contracting — and also seeking immediate cuts rather than the kind of gradual reorganization that results in savings over time.
That might support a conclusion that these people are just epically incompetent. Except as DOGE gets caught in its errors, something else is happening: it is attempting to cover up its work.
The DOGE website initially included a screenshot from the federal contracting database showing that the contract’s value was $8 million, even as the DOGE site listed $8 billion in savings. On Tuesday night, around the time this article was published, DOGE removed the screenshot that showed the mismatch, but continued to claim $8 billion in savings. It added a link to the original, incorrect version of the listing showing an $8 billion value.
By Wednesday morning, DOGE had updated its list to show $8 million in savings, though it did not acknowledge the error or explain how it might affect its calculation of total money saved, which remained unchanged. A loss of $8 billion in savings would represent nearly 15 percent of the total savings claimed by DOGE.
A screenshot of the DOGE website on Tuesday. The image showing the $8 million value of the contract was later removed.Credit…The New York Times
Even the $8 million is an upper bound on the amount saved by canceling the contract. Since $2.5 million had already been spent on the contract, according to data on USAspending.gov, that suggests that canceling it saved $5.5 million at most.
This thread, from a pseudonymous person on Xitter whose findings have been corroborated and picked up by others, notes several other attempts to cover up errors:
DOGE stopped triple-counting one line item
DOGE was claiming credit for the 80% of an IT contract that had already been spent
But having identified systematic problems (which NPR also did), DOGE not only didn’t make those fixes systematically, but it continues to claim it has identified $55B of savings.
This is a government website.
At some point, the continued claim of savings based on systematic errors, the continued claim of $55B in savings, amounts to fraud. Deliberate deception in service of justifying DOGE.
DOGE has found fraud. The fraud it is engaged in in plain sight on its success page.
The DOGE fraud is coming from inside the house.
That, plus some of the court filings submitted in lawsuits, has led me to suspect something else is going on. It’s not, as the very good NPR piece suggests, that Elon’s DOGE boys don’t know what the fuck they’re looking at, though I have no doubt they don’t (I’m also not sure anyone has a basis to assess their coding; Edward “Big Balls” Coristine’s former colleagues mocked his skills when the learned he had joined DOGE).
“There’s no doubt that these young people [Musk] has working for him are very intelligent coders, genius coders, but they’re limited,” retired senior contracting officer Christopher Byrne said, referring to DOGE team members who have apparently been identifying cuts across government agencies. “They don’t understand the processes, they don’t understand how things work, they don’t understand contracts, they don’t understand grants,” Byrne said.
Rather, I think it stems from the fact that Trump (and Project 2025, in the guise of DOGE) are using an existing entity — the United States Digital Service, an entity set up by Barack Obama — to do something entirely different.
Trump first repurposed USDS on his first day in office, with an Executive Order. That order generally called for DOGE to do the kinds of things it had been doing — technological modernization, of the sort smart engineers might be qualified to do.
Sec. 4. Modernizing Federal Technology and Software to Maximize Efficiency and Productivity. (a) The USDS Administrator shall commence a Software Modernization Initiative to improve the quality and efficiency of government-wide software, network infrastructure, and information technology (IT) systems. Among other things, the USDS Administrator shall work with Agency Heads to promote inter-operability between agency networks and systems, ensure data integrity, and facilitate responsible data collection and synchronization.
But then on February 11, Trump issued an Executive Order vaguely ordering DOGE to do far more, including firing a shit-ton of people.
To restore accountability to the American public, this order commences a critical transformation of the Federal bureaucracy. By eliminating waste, bloat, and insularity, my Administration will empower American families, workers, taxpayers, and our system of Government itself.
[snip]
Reductions in Force. Agency Heads shall promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force (RIFs), consistent with applicable law, and to separate from Federal service temporary employees and reemployed annuitants working in areas that will likely be subject to the RIFs. All offices that perform functions not mandated by statute or other law shall be prioritized in the RIFs, including all agency diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives; all agency initiatives, components, or operations that my Administration suspends or closes; and all components and employees performing functions not mandated by statute or other law who are not typically designated as essential during a lapse in appropriations as provided in the Agency Contingency Plans on the Office of Management and Budget website. This subsection shall not apply to functions related to public safety, immigration enforcement, or law enforcement.
Even the declarations submitted in lawsuits reflect this disjunct. Take the February 13 declaration DOGE member Adam Ramada submitted in a lawsuit the University of California Student’s Association filed against the Department of Education. In ¶3 of his declaration, Ramada describes that Trump’s EO authorizes DOGE to “modernize government technology.”
3. On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14,158, redesignating the United States Digital Service as the United States DOGE Service. The E.O. directs the USDS to modernize government technology and software to increase efficiency and productivity and to follow rigorous data protection standards and comply with all relevant laws when accessing unclassified agency records, software systems, and IT systems. It likewise directs agencies to ensure USDS has full access to all unclassified agency records and software and IT systems.
But the very next paragraph describes that he has been tasked to do something else.
4. I have been detailed to the Department of Education since 28 January 2025 to, among other things, assist the Department of Education with auditing contract, grant, and related programs for waste, fraud, and abuse, including an audit of the Department of Education’s federal student loan portfolio to ensure it is free from, among other things, fraud, duplication, and ineligible loan recipients. In addition, I help senior Department leadership obtain access to accurate data and data analytics to inform their policy decisions at the Department. One other USDS employee is also currently detailed to the Department of Education to assist me.
Later, the same declaration describes the access that six DOGE personnel have to student data as stemming entirely from a hunt for waste, fraud, and abuse.
9. The relevant employees require access to Department of Education information technology and data systems related to student loan programs in order to audit those programs for waste, fraud, and abuse.
An updated Ramada declaration filed February 16 disputed plaintiffs’ claim that 37 people had access to student information by claiming only six people were implementing Trump’s DOGE order(s). But by that point, technological modernization went completely unmentioned. And Ramada added a hunt for contracts that were “inconsistent with leadership’s policy priorities,” something not in his original declaration.
7. I am aware of the list of thirty-seven individuals whom Plaintiff’s counsel “believe have been given access to one or more ED records systems,” according to Plaintiff’s message to Defendants’ counsel on February 15, 2025. As stated above, there are only six of us at the Department whose primary role is implementing the President’s executive order. I am not aware of any DOGE-affiliated individuals other than the six listed above who have been granted access to Department information technology and data systems or who have otherwise received any Department information protected by the Privacy Act or section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code.
8. Thus far, the six of us have primarily worked to identify contracts and grants that are wasteful, abusive, or inconsistent with leadership’s policy priorities.
9. It came to my attention today that one of the six employees referenced above has not yet completed ethics or information security trainings. He has been directed to complete both this week and has indicated that he will do so. [my emphasis]
In other words, Trump used the pre-existing entity focused on technological modernization as a front to — first — hunt things that Elon Musk called fraud but were really just things he could spin out of context to inflame the mob, and then use that paranoia to start firing masses of people and getting rid of DEI.
This has nothing to do with the technical mandate of USDS. Which may be why the former Director of Data Science at USDS resigned Wednesday.
But given DOGE’s failure to show any fraud yet, it likely also has little to do with finding waste, fraud or abuse.
DOGE’s “receipts” page appears to be cover, something to show to credulous Republicans to convince them this effort is in pursuit of something good, a hunt for waste, fraud, and abuse. But hidden within a claim to be pursuing technological modernization which got broadened to incorporate an apparently false claim to be hunting fraud is an effort to cut programs appropriated by Congress at scale.
That’s why DOGE’s receipts page is so shoddy. It’s not that the DOGE boys are not accountants, though they are not. It’s that their function is something other than the EO authorizing their work says it is, and the DOGE receipts page exists solely to sustain the fraud that they’re still pursuing waste, fraud, and abuse.
Update: After posting this and calling on Ron Wyden and Patty Murrray to ask GAO to investigate whether DOGE is committing fraud, I learned that GAO confirmed it opened an investigation (at that point limited to DOGE access to Treasury) requested by Wyden and Elizabeth Warren on February 12.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-20-at-4.24.07 PM-1.png6662278emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-20 12:13:362025-02-21 06:01:17The DOGE Fraud Is Coming from Inside the House
The other day, Fox News’ Jesse Watters explained the difference between left and right wing messaging.
We are waging a 21st century information warfare campaign against the left and they are using tactics from the 1990s. They are holding tiny press conferences. Tiny little rallies. They’re screaming into the ether on MSNBC. This is what you call top-down command and control. Your talking points, from a newspaper, and you put it on the broadcast network and it disappears.
What you’re seeing on the right is asymmetrical. It’s like grassroots guerrilla warfare. Someone says something on social media, Musk retweets it, Rogan podcasts it, Fox broadcasts it.. and by the time it reaches everybody, millions of people have seen it. It’s free money. And we’re actually talking about expressing information, they are suppressing information.
Only, Watters left several things out (unless it’s what he meant by “expressing” information, whatever that is). The things Musk retweets are, almost without exception, false. Which means this massive asymmetrical guerrilla warfare feeds just propaganda. And Watters didn’t admit (though he seemed to, on a Fox and Friends broadcast the other day when he confessed to making up the Hamas tie to the Gaza condom hoax) that after these false claims go viral, they get parroted by Trump’s propagandist, Karoline Leavitt, and then Trump himself.
Still (as multipledisinformation experts noted), Watters offered a perfectly timed explanation of the information warfare the right is conducting.
And amid conflicting claims about what Elon’s role in all this is, I would suggest that until someone confesses differently, his primary role is simply a propaganda one: taking excerpted data he totally misunderstands out of context and pushing false claims about it, one that will feed a baseless narrative of corruption.
Mike Masnick described this would happen weeks ago.
Later on, Musk (operating without any clear legal authority or Senate confirmation) made a whole bunch of wildly false claims about USAID, including that it is “a criminal organization,” arguing that it funds all sorts of things it does not (including the idea that it funds “woke prosecutors”), that it’s a “terror organization”, and more. He even claimed it helped fund the creation of COVID-19.
The pattern is familiar: ExTwitter users spin elaborate red-yarn-on-corkboard conspiracy theories, and Musk treats each one as revealed truth. The result is a government increasingly run on paranoid hallucinated fever dreams rather than expertise – imagine NASA’s Apollo Program being handed over to flat-earth conspiracy theorists while the actual engineers are sidelined, and you’ll get the idea.
The danger isn’t just bad policy — it’s the replacement of accountable governance with conspiracy-driven chaos that threatens everything from disaster response to diplomatic relations.
And Renee DiResta described the familiar pattern today.
This is absolutely the Twitter Files for the government.
It’s the same methodology boosted by the same people.
Crawl through a bunch of stuff, find something that seems outrageous, make an online mob lose their minds. Destroy work, upend lives. Get it totally wrong, move to the next thing.
That’s what we’ve seen.
First there was the lie Elon told about condoms in Gaza (as I noted, Watters seemed to confess the other day that he made up the bit about Hamas getting them).
Elon Musk acknowledged Tuesday that there might not have been a federal plan to spend $50 million on condoms for Gaza — two weeks after the White House press secretary told the false story at an official briefing and more than a week after the president baselessly doubled the phony figure to $100 million and said the condoms were going to Hamas.
“Some of the things that I say will be incorrect, and should be corrected,” Musk, the billionaire businessman who is leading a Trump administration initiative they call the Department of Government Efficiency, said when a reporter told him the Gaza story was wrong. “So, nobody’s going to bat a thousand. I mean, any – you know, we will make mistakes, but we’ll act quickly to correct any mistakes.”
This correction was not particularly quick. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s claim that President Donald Trump had thwarted $50 million in condom funding for Gaza made headlines around the world in late January. Trump kept repeating the story, and inflating the figure, even after media outlets reported it was highly unlikely to be true.
The saga of the imaginary condom aid began when Leavitt announced during her debut White House press briefing on January 28 that Musk’s team and the president’s budget office had “found that there was about to be 50 million taxpayer dollars that went out the door to fund condoms in Gaza” before Trump imposed a freeze on foreign aid. Musk promoted Leavitt’s words on the X social media platform he owns.
Then there was the lie about dead people receiving Social Security checks, an anomaly in Social Security data identified ten years ago and revisited in an Inspector General report released two years ago.
In 2015,3 we reported that SSA had not established controls to annotate death information on the Numident records of numberholders who exceeded maximum reasonable life expectancies of age 112 or older and were likely deceased. At the time, only 35 known living individuals worldwide were age 112 or older, however, SSA’s Numident included 6.5 million numberholders4 age 112 or older whose record did not contain death information. Therefore, the numberholders’ information did not appear in the full DMF. We recommended SSA add death information to approximately 1.5 million Numident records where the numberholders’ death information appeared in SSA payment records. We also recommended SSA determine whether it could efficiently correct the approximately 5 million remaining records. SSA agreed to explore the legal and technical feasibility, as well as the cost, to establish an automated process to update the millions of Numident records for individuals who appeared to be alive and age 112 or older, but ultimately decided not to update these records.
Social Security decided not to address it because of cost.
In response to our 2015 report, SSA considered multiple options, including adding presumed death information to these Numident records. SSA ultimately decided not to proceed because the “. . . options would be costly to implement, would be of little benefit to the agency, would largely duplicate information already available to data exchange consumers and would create cost for the states and other data exchange partners.”16 SSA also believed a regulation would be required to allow it to add death information to these records, and adding presumed death information to the Numident would increase the risk of inadvertent release of living individuals’ personal information in the DMF.
Now there are the outrageous errors in the DOGE “receipts” page. Thus far, the reporting on this has been inadequate (though Washington Times published a slavering review, which I guess indicates DOGE knows its audience). For example, the NYT dedicated four reporters to call out just the most embarrassing error — that the richest man in the world had mistaken an $8 million payment over a multi-year contract and boasted instead that it represented $8 billion in savings for the two years remaining on the contract.
Daily Beast did a better job, noting not just the order of magnitude error that NYT and others identified, but also that Elon, like Trump, is taking credit for savings made under Joe Biden.
The group boasted that its “estimated savings” for American taxpayers is $55 billion so far, but the total it gave Monday adds up to just a third of that figure—and appears to claim credit for the closure of two government offices that were shuttered under Joe Biden.
Those closures are the National Archives centers in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, and in Fairfield, Ohio. DOGE’s site claims the latter location was a “True Termination – Agency Closed Office.” No other details are offered.
The only details offered on a contract termination for the National Archives center in Fairfield, Ohio.DOGE
Those centers’ approximate closing dates were announced way back on Aug. 1, however, when Biden was still president.
“The records and artifacts of the Barack Obama Presidential Library, which have been held temporarily at Hoffman Estates, will be permanently moved to College Park, MD, in late FY 2025,” a news release from National Archives announced at the time.
Others have noted that many of the big savings are in reality subscriptions to media outlets, including (as Brad Heath noted, the SEC’s subscription to Westlaw). Once all these necessary services get turned back on again, the imagined savings will be wiped away.
Still, DOGE’s shoddy work, slapped up there after days of unfulfilled promises of transparency, needs to be more systematically mined, if for no other reason than to determine whether this is simply a reflection of the ignorance of the DOGE boys Musk has infiltrated into government, the shoddiness of the AI tools they’re using, or simply a disinterest in giving a fuck, because once Elon claims this website says something, the right wing will follow along like sheep.
They don’t need and maybe won’t bother trying to find real proof of savings, because between Elon and Trump and Fox News, they will insist it is the truth, not matter how often it gets debunked.
Until this effort is exposed as the propaganda campaign it is, the lies Musk tells give even Republicans discomforted by all the job losses in their districts something to cling to: A claim that this is about auditing, rather than destruction, a claim that this is about fraud, rather than policies that even Republicans have protected for years, and for good reason.
The richest man in the world is conducting a con on Republicans in government, claiming he is fixing government when instead he is dismantling even the parts that the Republicans themselves cherish.
As Masnick said, “it’s the replacement of accountable governance with conspiracy-driven chaos.”
It remains the case that one of the foundational claims to which Trump’s people continue to return is the one I identified a week ago: A GAO report from last year that spoke of $2.7 trillion in improper payments over the last two decades, but also a spike in recent years that almost entirely arises from fraud and management problems with the various COVID programs Trump rolled out his first term.
The factual claims of fraud — as opposed to the disinformation spun by Elon Musk — largely measure fraud that Trump created through his catastrophic response to COVID. And he fired several of the Inspectors General — most notably HHS IG Christi Grimm (whose work resulted in 193 charges last June), Department of Labor IG Larry Turner (who had already identified $191 billion in improper COVID payments, many fraudulent, and was chasing$135 billion more), and SBA IG Mike Ware (who had IDed around $200 billion in COVID fraud, returning $40 billion to the US Treasury and was still chasing more) — who were busy hunting it all down.
DOGE continues to rely on fraud Trump enabled to excuse their assault on government. And what they’ve found so far is that they lack any of the competencies they would need to audit or identify fraud, and Trump already fired the people who do have those competencies.
Update: Lawfare catches DOGE taking credit for savings due to Jimmy Carter’s death.
Yet a brief glimpse of the data raises questions about its accuracy. One row describes a lease terminated for an “agency” called “Allowance to Former Presidents.” Additional information shows that the property is 7,682 square feet, costs $128,233 per year, and is in Atlanta, Georgia. The GSA maintains a database of property leased by the federal government. Cross-referencing the information on DOGE’s website with GSA’s database reveals that the federal government was leasing this property from “The Carter Center, Inc.” The Carter Center is a nonprofit organization founded by former President Carter, who died on Dec. 29, 2024.
The Former Presidents Act provides former presidents with certain post-presidency benefits. Subsection (c) of that Act says, “The Administrator of General Services shall furnish for each former President suitable office space appropriately furnished and equipped, as determined by the Administrator, at such place within the United States as the former President shall specify.” As one might expect, Carter’s office was located in the Carter Center, and GSA leased office space for Carter from the Carter Center.
DOGE is likely not responsible for the termination of GSA’s lease of the Carter Center. The benefits to Carter under the Former Presidents Act expired upon his death.
Update: NPR’s review of this gets closer to the kind of real test of these claims. For example, it finds that some of the purport cuts have not yet been made.
Just over half of the contracts touted by DOGE, accounting for $6.5 billion in alleged savings, haven’t actually been terminated or closed out as of Wednesday, according to an NPR analysis of a federal government procurement database, even though the site’s “wall of receipts” listed these items.
More than a third of the listed contracts posted online would not actually save any money if canceled, according to DOGE.
And it interviews contracting officers.
A smarter way to reform contracting would actually cost money in the short term,” Riedl said. “Because it requires audits, it requires analysis, building new systems, building new controls rather than just going through with a chainsaw and trying to cut contracts almost randomly.”
Byrne, whose contracting career spanned more than 20 years and included work with the General Services Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Navy, says DOGE’s website is also missing basic information needed to track and understand federal spending, like the ID number, what type of agreement or contract method was used and whether the cancellation was for some or all of the spending. Several publicly available data sources already track and confirm changes to federal contracts, including the Federal Procurement Data System, USASpending.gov and the System for Award Management (SAM). Unlike DOGE, those sources list other relevant data like the current value of the contract, historical changes to the amount budgeted and spent for the contract and when the contracts begin and end.
Who also note that the government is going to have to pay for a lot of the programs cut.
Even government contracts that have been terminated before reaching their full value could end up costing taxpayers more to settle up. Jessica Tillipman, associate dean for government procurement law studies at The George Washington University Law School, previously told NPR that the termination for convenience clause used for many of these cancellations is expensive.
“When the government terminates a contract for convenience, it’s still obligated to pay for the work completed,” she said. “This doesn’t eliminate the government’s responsibility for paying these sorts of costs.”
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-19-at-3.26.34 PM.png1428876emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-19 12:02:482025-02-20 00:19:55DOGE Is Xitter Files for Government
That’s not surprising. Baldwin is at the edge of a large swath of National Forest. I’ve driven through, at least twice; the area is pretty, but I drove through on the way to places on Lake Michigan that are beautiful, and so attract wealthy outsiders like Pete Buttigieg and tourism dollars (Baldwin is about an hour closer to Traverse City than to Grand Rapids). The area is focused on forestry and outdoor activities like hunting and fishing (a lovely bike trail ends in Baldwin). Cycling close to there once, I remember the discomfort of hearing people shooting on property sporting a Confederate flag flying right next to the bike trail.
