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
Yesterday, Judge Tanya Chutkan had a Presidents Day hearing on a lawsuit challenging DOGE’s actions. While she reportedly seemed inclined not to grant an emergency restraining order, she did order the government to provide her with two pieces of information: how many people had and were going to be fired, and what Elon Musk’s status is.
In a response and declaration, the government blew off the first question, but on the second, denied that Musk has the power of DOGE. He’s just a senior Trump advisor, one solidly within the White House Office, and so firewalled from the work of DOGE, yet still protected from any kind of nasty disclosure requirements.
But as the attached declaration of Joshua Fisher explains, Elon Musk “has no actual or formal authority to make government decisions himself”—including personnel decisions at individual agencies. Decl. ¶ 5. He is an employee of the White House Office (not USDS or the U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization); and he only has the ability to advise the President, or communicate the President’s directives, like other senior White House officials. Id. ¶¶ 3, 5. Moreover, Defendants are not aware of any source of legal authority granting USDS or the U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization the power to order personnel actions at any of the agencies listed above. Neither of the President’s Executive Orders regarding “DOGE” contemplate—much less furnish—such authority. See “Establishing and Implementing the President’s Department of Government Efficiency,” Exec. Order No. 14,158 (Jan. 20, 205); “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Workforce Optimization Initiative,” Exec. Order 14,210 (Feb. 11, 2025).
The statement is quite obviously an attempt to retcon the structure of DOGE [sic], one that Ryan Goodman has already found several pieces of evidence to debunk.
But it is a testament that the suit in question — by a bunch of Democratic Attorneys General, led by New Mexico [docket] — might meet significant success without the retconning of Elon’s role.
Partly for more general benefit, let me talk about the various kinds of lawsuits filed so far against Trump’s attacks.
Kinds of plaintiffs:
Imminent, individual personal injury: The cases that have had the most success, so far, are examples of individuals who describe a specific imminent injury. The most obvious such example is a number of Trans women prisoners who’ve argued, successfully so far, that they face a very high likelihood of assault and/or rape if they are moved to male prisons.
Unions or other representatives of federal workers: These lawsuits address the imminent injury of privacy violations or firing and other mistreatment. The most successful (and eye-popping) so far has been the American Foreign Service Association lawsuit challenging the USAID shutdown [docket], in which a Doe employee yesterday provided another horrifying declaration describing another instance of a pregnant woman being deprived of promised medevac, and another from a woman in South Africa running up debt taxpayers will have to pay and about to lose access to electricity on the compound. But there are limits to the recourse that unions can seek on both these theories. For example, while Trump appointed judge Carl Nichols imposed a temporary restraining order on actions targeted at employees oversees, he has not done so for the USAID personnel stuck without the ability to fix anything in DC, because being put on paid leave is not the same kind of injury as being stuck overseas with no access to security warnings.
States (all with Democratic Attorneys General): The states are arguing a variety of things, both contractual breaches and injuries to their citizens. Contractual challenges may have little ability to halt ongoing destruction.
Private entities, like corporations or associations: These entities are often arguing contractual breaches, or privacy damages. The latter are likely to have more success than the former because of the way the Privacy Act works.
Kinds of challenges:
Many of these challenges claim a violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, basically arguing that the government changed the rules without going through the process they are required to use to change the rules.
Many lawsuits also claim violations of the Privacy Act, which requires that the government follow certain rules if they’re accessing your data in new ways. Thus far, the government has argued that employees have more limited protections than private citizens.
Underlying many of these suits are claims about the Impoundment Act and Separation of Powers because the government is not spending money the way Congress said it had to, but argued through an APA challenge. These challenges are particularly important because a key project of Project 2025 is to effectively strip Congress of the power of the purse.
Some lawsuits have tried to get at cybersecurity violations or even hacking (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) claims, but thus far with little success. In any case, those would pivot on how DOGE [sic] got access to various computer systems, and in most cases, a senior Agency official ultimately relented to give them access.
This lawsuit, and another similar one brought by 26 anonymous USAID employees, argue that Elon Musk’s role in all this violates the Appointments Clause. This basically argues that Elon is acting as a superior officer, which requires Senate confirmation.
The injury suffered by each set of plaintiffs and legal theory largely limits the ability of judges to weigh in. So, for example, if a suit is arguing only Privacy Act violations, a judge can do no more than limit the dissemination outside of authorized channels of the data of the plaintiffs, something that has been ineffective once agencies started giving DOGE formal authorization to access computer servers. If a suit worries about firings, but the government instead puts tons of people on paid leave (as happened with USAID), then the plaintiffs are not yet suffering an irrevocable injury.
Here’s how the Appointments Clause theory, arguing that Elon is exercising powers that need to be created by Congress and confirmed by them, looks in the complaint.
64. Although he occupies a role President Trump—not Congress—created and even though the Senate has never voted to confirm him, Mr. Mr. Musk has and continues to assert the powers of an “Officer[] of the United States” under the Appointments Clause. Indeed, in many cases, he has exceeded the lawful authority of even a principal officer, or of the President himself.
65. As explained below, Mr. Musk: (1) has unprecedented and seemingly limitless access across the federal government and reports solely to President Trump, (2) has asserted significant and sweeping authority across a broad swath of federal agencies, and (3) has engaged in a constellation of powers and activities that have been historically associated with an officer of the United States, including powers over spending and disbursements, contracts, government property, regulations, and agency viability.
66. In sum, Mr. Musk purports to exercise and in fact asserts the significant authority of a principal officer on behalf of the United States. Yet, he does not occupy an office created by Congress and has not been nominated by the President or confirmed by the Senate. As a result, all of Mr. Musk’s actions are ultra vires and contrary to law.
You can see why the White House has decided that Elon is boxed away inside the White House with no direct control over the dismantling of government bureaucracy. The retconning of his role is all the more obvious when you understand that the right wing judges on SCOTUS feel very strongly about the Appointments Clause. And Trump is on the record relying on it, most spectacularly in convincing Aileen Cannon that Jack Smith had to be confirmed by the Senate before he could indict Trump.
In practice, Trump is saying Elon can dismantle entire agencies without Senate confirmation, but Jack Smith couldn’t prosecute him as a private citizen without it.
Or he was. Now he’s arguing that all this is happening without Elon’s personal direction.
There is plenty in the complaint already that debunks this, not least the narrative of how Elon started disappearing USAID even before, by his own description, Trump approved.
93. With a budget of over $40 billion, USAID accounts for more than half of all U.S. foreign assistance. USAID has missions in over 100 countries. As of January 2025, USAID had a workforce of over 10,000, with approximately two-thirds serving overseas.
94. On Saturday, February 1, 2025, a group of about eight DOGE personnel entered the USAID building and demanded access to every door and floor, despite only a few of them having the requisite security clearance.34 The areas to which they sought access included a sensitive compartmented information facility—commonly known as a SCIF—an ultra-secure room where officials and government contractors take extraordinary precautions to review highly classified information. DOGE personnel, aided by phone calls from Mr. Musk, had pressured USAID officials for days to access the secure facility and its contents.35
95. When USAID personnel attempted to block access to some areas, DOGE personnel, including Mr. Musk, threatened to call federal marshals. Under threat, the agency personnel acquiesced, and DOGE personnel were eventually given access to the secure spaces.
96. Later that day, top officials from USAID and the bulk of the staff in USAID’s Bureau for Legislative and Public Affairs were put on leave. Some of them were not notified but had their access to agency terminals suspended. USAID’s security official was also put on leave.36 97. Within hours, USAID’s website vanished. It remains inoperative.37
98. On Sunday, February 2, 2025, Mr. Musk tweeted, “USAID is a criminal organization. Time for it to die.”
38 Later, he tweeted, “We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the woodchipper.”39
99. Mr. Musk provided no support for his claim that USAID is a criminal organization. 100. On Monday, February 3, 2025, Mr. Musk stated that he was in the process of closing the agency, with President Trump’s blessing. Mr. Musk stated: “I went over it with him [President Trump] in detail, and he agreed that we should shut it down. And I actually checked with him a few times [and] said ‘are you sure?’ The answer was yes. And so we’re shutting it down.”40
Now, before DOJ gave this answer and blew off Judge Chutkan’s order to provide details of the ongoing firing spree, she seemed inclined not to grant a restraining order to stop all this.
It’s unclear whether this defiance will change that. Or, at the very least, whether it will lead to more questions about whether White House wrote any of this down.
What is clear is that the White House recognizes a real risk if Elon is held accountable for all the things Elon has done.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-18-at-09.09.31.png6781192emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-18 06:28:432025-02-18 08:10:04Why Elon Musk Can’t Run DOGE [sic] Anymore
At a weird appearance in the Oval Office rife with awkward projections that Elon Musk believes he is more powerful than Trump (here’s the full CSPAN video), a journalist asked Elon how — given the egregious error he made about condoms and Gaza — we should believe anything he said.
The exchange is bad enough: Elon basically confessed, in front of Trump, that a hoax Elon started that traveled first to Trump propagandist Karoline Leavitt and from there, through Jesse Watters’ exaggerations on Fox News, into several repetitions of the false claim by Trump was wrong.
The entire point of this presser was to substantiate Trump’s false (and undocumented) claim that DOGE [sic] had found billions of dollars of waste, fraud, and abuse and use that to, first, pressure judges who are putting brakes on DOGE and, then, justify giving DOGE [sic] authority to fire a bunch of people via Executive Order.
When Trump asked Elon to substantiate such claims, Elon instead vaguely pointed to people who were wealthy even though they had meager salaries — not something that should be under his review. He listed other things that are known — and were known, during Trump’s first term — which are archaic but not fraud.
And in that appearance, a journalist called Elon out for inventing something about Gaza that led Trump to lie publicly.
That should have led to stories about how, in Trump’s presence, Elon admitted he makes shit up and Trump repeats them.
For the most part, it didn’t happen:
NYT noted that Elon offered no proof of fraud, but did not mention the proof that Elon got caught in a lie.
WaPo focused on the EO, but later explained that neither Trump nor Musk offered proof — but didn’t mention he got caught in a lie.
Politico focused on the EO, but later noted that Elon said he would police his own conflicts.
In an analytical piece, CNN claimed that Elon offered examples of fraud (which is false), but didn’t mention Gaza.
After airing Elon about scrutiny he claimed he was getting, WSJ did mention the Gaza question.
Asked about the Trump administration’s false assertion that the federal government sent $50 million worth of condoms to Gaza, the billionaire acknowledged that he might at times promote erroneous information. “Some of the things that I say will be incorrect and should be corrected,” Musk said. “Nobody is going to bat 1,000.”
But WSJ didn’t pursue the implication of it: that Elon got caught in a false claim.
Indeed, the only specific example that Trump mentioned was funding FEMA spent in NYC to house migrants — something approved by Congress — for which the staffers have been fired (as I’ll return to, Trump’s DOJ is already misrepresenting this in courts), was also based on an Elon lie.
The Trump administration said on Tuesday that it had fired four employees from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, including the agency’s chief financial officer, over their roles in disbursing federal funds to house migrants in New York City hotels.
The firings capped a startling chain of events that began on Monday with an early-morning social media post by Elon Musk who claimed, misleadingly, that FEMA had recently sent $59 million meant for disaster relief to New York City to pay for “high end hotels” for migrants, and who called the expenditure unlawful.
New York City officials raced to clarify that the federal money had been properly allocated by FEMA under President Joseph R. Biden Jr. last year, adding that it was not a disaster relief grant and had not been spent on luxury hotels.
Nonetheless, just two hours after Mr. Musk’s post, FEMA’s acting director, Cameron Hamilton, announced that the payments in question “have all been suspended” — even though most of the money had already been disbursed — and that “personnel will be held accountable.”
By Tuesday morning, roughly 24 hours after Mr. Musk’s post, the Trump administration had followed through on one part of its pledge.
Elon also made a false claim that they had turned on AIDS prevention — in one of the state lawsuits, Washington State presented a case where funds for AIDS prevention programs was being withheld.
This press conference consisted of Elon (and Trump) making false claim after false claim.
It also consisted of Trump lying over and over, without proof, about how one only needed to look for fraud to find it. No one asked why he hadn’t looked in his first term. Indeed, several times he blamed Biden for problems that have existed for decades.
And yet, at best, journalists instead claimed only that Elon and Trump simply presented no proof.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-12-at-11.14.24.png5141236emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-12 06:17:482025-02-12 10:18:30“The Fraudsters Complain the Loudest and the Fastest:” Legacy Media Ignores Import of Gaza Condom Fact Check
The big news overnight in the legal fight to rein in DOGE is that SDNY Judge Paul Engelmayer has ordered Treasury to stop letting Elon Musk’s DOGE [sic] boys to snoop in Treasury’s payment system and destroy any copies of records already made from it. [docket]
the defendants are (i) restrained from granting access to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees, other than to civil servants with a need for access to perform their job duties within the Bureau of Fiscal Services who have passed all background checks and security clearances and taken all information security training called for in federal statutes and Treasury Department regulations; (ii) restrained from granting access to all political appointees, special government employees, and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department, to any Treasury Department payment record, payment systems, or any other data systems maintained by the Treasury Department containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees; and (iii) ordered to direct any person prohibited above from having access to such information, records and systems but who has had access to such information, records, and systems since January 20, 2025, to immediately destroy any and all copies of material downloaded from the Treasury Department’s records and systems, if any;
This order comes on top of Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly’s order limiting access to Treasury’s payment system to normal employees and two DOGE [sic] employees, but the latter for read-only access [docket]:
Mr. Tom Krause, a Special Government Employee in the Department of the Treasury, as needed for the performance of his duties, provided that such access to payment records will be “read only”;
Mr. Marko Elez, a Special Government Employee in the Department of the Treasury, as needed for the performance of his duties, provided that such access to payment records will be “read only”;
Anna Bower parsed how DOJ substantiated (or not) that this was really “read only” access. Which was part of what a bunch of Democratic Attorneys General, led by Tish James, pointed to to claim they still needed a TRO, over and above the one issued by Kollar-Kotelly.
The temporary restraining order entered yesterday by the D.C. District Court in Alliance for Retired Americans v. Bessent, No. 1:25-cv-313 (D.D.C.) (“ARA”), does not change this conclusion. That order continues to permit two SGEs affiliated with DOGE to have access to the BFS payment records and payment systems, restricts their access to “read only” just for payment records and not payment systems, and does not direct that any copies of data from the systems made since the Agency Action took effect be destroyed. ARA, Dkt No. 13.
Now, I’m somewhat skeptical that Engelmeyer’s order, as issued, is sustainable. He issued the order in advance of the assigned judge on the case, Jeannette Vargas, and before the government had a chance to respond to the lawsuit.
But the lawsuits to enjoin DOGE [sic] are playing catch-up to the known facts.
And the known facts get us much closer to the being able to prove that Elon and his DOGE [sic] boys are altering code, if not hacking it, rather than simply reviewing its data.
The suit and TRO before Judge Kollar-Kotelly, filed by several unions, is entirely privacy focused.
The state AGs’ suit and TRO, which establish standing by pointing to the billions of dollars of payments they get from the Feds, argues that Elon is attempting to intercept payments to entities Trump doesn’t like. It asserts a claim repeatedly backed in public reporting, but affirmatively denied before Kollar-Kotelly: that the DOGE boys — here, self-proclaimed eugenicist Mark Elez, have altered code.
5. As of February 2, 2025, the President and Treasury Secretary, directed Treasury to grant expanded access to BFS payment systems to political appointees and “special government employees” for reasons that have yet to be provided, although one apparent purpose, upon information and belief. Upon information and belief, one purpose is to allow DOGE to advance a stated goal to block federal funds from reaching beneficiaries who do not align with the President’s political agenda. For example, DOGE was tasked with freezing payments issued by the U.S. Agency for International Development (“USAID”) and sought access to BFS payment systems to accomplish that goal.5 Virtually unfettered access to BFS payment systems was granted to at least one 25-year-old DOGE associate, Mark Elez, who, on information and belief, had the authority to view or modify numerous critical files.6 Indeed, reports indicate that Elez had administrative privileges over the BFS payment system’s code, giving him the ability to alter user permissions and “read and write” code—even if the associate had “read-only” access to the system’s data.7 Elez has since resigned from DOGE after being linked to racist social media posts.8
6. Around the same time that DOGE associates were unlawfully granted access to BFS systems, Mr. Musk began publicly stating his intention to recklessly freeze streams of federal funding without warning. On February 2, 2024, Mr. Musk posted on X (formerly Twitter), an online social media platform, that DOGE is “rapidly shutting down” various “illegal payments” made by the government to grant recipients, including payments to Lutheran Family Services to provide services to migrant children.9 That same day, Mr. Musk posted that his team “spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper.” Since then, Mr. Musk has unambiguously called for the cancellation of various streams of federal funding. For instance, on February 6, 2025, he alleged: “Billions of taxpayer dollars to known FRAUDULENT entities are STILL being APPROVED by Treasury. This needs to STOP NOW!”10 Mr. Musk has also made wild, unsubstantiated claims about the BFS payment system and suggested putting it on the blockchain.11
6 A 25-Year-Old With Elon Musk Ties Has Direct Access to the Federal Payment System | WIRED
9 Elon Musk on X: “The @DOGE team is rapidly shutting down these illegal payments” / X
10 Elon Musk on X: “Billions of taxpayer dollars to known FRAUDULENT entities are STILL being APPROVED by Treasury. This needs to STOP NOW!” / X
11 Fatima Hussein, “Elon Musk’s task force has gained access to sensitive Treasury payment systems, sources say,” PBS News, Feb. 2, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/elon-musks-task-force-hasgained-access-to-sensitive-treasury-payment-systems-sources-say; Billy Bambrough, “‘This Needs To Stop Now’—Elon Musk Confirms Radical Doge U.S. Treasury Plan,” Forbes, Feb. 2, 2025, https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2025/02/02/this-needs-to-stop-now-elon-musk-confirmsradical-doge-us-treasury-plan/.
It cites Elon’s insane rants on Xitter as well.
In addition to the privacy concerns addressed in the union lawsuit, the AGs’ lawsuit raises concerns about appropriations (and separation of powers), but also cybersecurity, something not included in the union lawsuit.
139. The conduct of DOGE members presents a unique security risk to States and State residents whose data is held by BFS, given that DOGE employees have already reportedly set up an unauthorized commercial server at another federal agency without a privacy impact assessment as required by the 2002 E-Government Act. Access by DOGE employees to BFS is likely to present even greater risks to the security and privacy of States’ and their residents’ data.
140. Unsecure data is susceptible to cyber attacks and identity theft. Identity theft has a significant impact on States, beyond the financial well-being of its residents. It strains law enforcement resources, damages state economies through lost productivity and consumer confidence, and raises costs for the state to redress fraudulent claims made from stolen identities for unemployment and healthcare benefits. [my emphasis]
The AGs’ suit actually doesn’t cite a source for the claim that DOGE set up a commercial server at another agency. But I think the claim comes from a lawsuit Kel McClanahan filed against Office of Personnel Management, aiming to require it to stop the all-government email DOGE [sic] set up to offer its “Fork in the Road” severance offer. McClanahan first sued, with two plaintiffs who worked at government agencies, on January 27, for a violation of the E-Government Act. [docket]
In response, the government claimed that the main theory of injury, that the government had set up the all-government email without first doing a privacy assessment didn’t apply for employees, and was moot because it had since done one, which it included here. The privacy assessment claimed this was just a Office365 account.
1.3. Has a system security plan been completed for the information system(s) supporting the project? The Office 365 mailbox has been granted an Authorization to Operate (ATO) that includes a system security plan. The government computer storing the data is subject to standard security requirements, including limited PIV access.
And it claimed that the account included only employee data.
2.1. Identify the information the project collects, uses, disseminates, or maintains. GWES collects, maintains, and uses the names and government email addresses of federal government employees. GWES also collects and redistributes responses to emails sent to those addresses, which are limited to short, voluntary, non-identifying information. Specifically, GWES contains the following:
Employee Contact Data: GWES collects, maintains, and uses the names and government email addresses of federal government employees. Other identifying information is not used.
Employee Response Data: After an email is sent using Employee Contact Data, GWES collects, maintains, and redistributes short, voluntary responses.
It largely ignored McClenahan’s claim (based largely on Reddit posts) that DOGE had installed a separate server.
But other than speculation on social media, Plaintiffs provide no evidence that OPM took any of the actions that would trigger the PIA requirement under sections 208(b)(1)(A)(i)-(ii) of the E-Government Act. Moreover, Plaintiffs disregard entirely the fact that the E-Government Act does not require a PIA when an agency is seeking to collect information about “agencies, instrumentalities, or employees of the Federal Government.”
Since then, McClanahan filed an amended complaint, which added five more plaintiffs, none of whom are Executive Branch employees (for example, one works for the Library of Congress; another is a contractor), substantiating that some of the DOGE emails went to people outside the Executive Branch, and provided additional substantiation of the Reddit claims (including raising questions about whether this could even be Microsoft365).
30. Furthermore, prior to 20 January 2025, OPM lacked the technical capacity to send direct communications to all Executive Branch employees: But just days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration, OPM did not have the capability to send a mass email of that scale, according to a person familiar with the matter. To send mass emails, the agency had used govDelivery, a cloud communications service provided by public sector IT company Granicus, a different person familiar said. The govDelivery contract had restrictions on the volume of emails available to send without incurring added costs, and the agency would not have been able to reach 2.3 million people, the approximate number of all civilian federal employees, the second person added. David DiMolfetta, OPM’s new email system sparks questions about cyber compliance Nextgov/FCW (Jan. 28, 2025), available at https://www.nextgov.com/digitalgovernment/2025/01/opms-new-email-system-sparks-questions-about-cybercompliance/402555/ (last accessed Feb. 3, 2025).
31. Additionally, OPM has used Microsoft Office 365 since at least 2021, including Outlook 365 for email. OPM, Privacy Impact Assessment for OPM – Microsoft Office 365 (May 13, 2021), available at https://www.opm.gov/information-management/privacy-policy/privacypolicy/office-365-pia.pdf (last accessed Feb. 3, 2025). Outlook 365 cannot send more than ten thousand emails per day. See Microsoft, Exchange Online limits (Dec. 11, 2024), at https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/servicedescriptions/exchange-online-servicedescription/exchange-online-limits#sending-limits-1 (last accessed Feb. 3, 2025).
32. According to the FedNews Message, “Instead [of using the normal channels], an on-prem (on-site) email server was setup [sic]. Someone literally walked into our building and plugged in an email server to our network to make it appear that emails were coming from OPM. It’s been the one sending those various ‘test’ message[s] [discussed below].” FedNews Message.
33. This statement is supported by recent reporting:
A new server being used to control these [OPM] databases has been placed in a conference room that Musk’s team is using as their command center, according to an OPM staffer. The staffer described the server as a piece of commercial hardware they believed was not obtained through the proper federal procurement process.
Caleb Ecarma & Judd Legum, Musk associates given unfettered access to private data of government employees Musk Watch (Feb. 3, 2025), at https://www.muskwatch.com/p/muskassociates-given-unfettered (last accessed Feb. 3, 2025).
34. Upon information and belief, this server and/or other systems linked to it are retaining information about every individual with a Government email address.
The amended complaint argues that the privacy impact was factually and legally insufficient.
39. Neither Biasini nor Hogan were OPM employees prior to 20 January.
40. Biasini worked at the Boring Company prior to 20 January. It is not currently known if he still works there.
41. Hogan worked at Comma.ai prior to 20 January. It is not currently known if he still works there.
42. The GWES PIA was both factually inaccurate and legally inadequate.
[snip]
54. Upon information and belief, OPM has not ensured review of a PIA for any of these systems by any legally sufficient Chief Information Officer or equivalent official.
55. OPM has not published a legally sufficient PIA or made such an assessment available for public inspection for any of these systems.
In other words, as these twin lawsuits against Treasury get closer to arguing that Elon is not looking for savings but instead altering the payment system, McClanahan continues to chase proof that Elon’s DOGE [sic] boys have added their own server which, by dint of sending emails to everyone (including people not employed by the Executive branch) with a .gov address, is collecting information on everyone with a .gov address.
Meanwhile, several other developments get closer to showing that Elon is hacking the government, not assessing it.
First, late this week, OPM removed access by some DOGE [sic] boys to more sensitive OPM systems.
Directives from the agency’s interim leadership issued late this week indicated that DOGE representatives should be withdrawn from two principal systems containing personally identifiable information for millions of federal employees, according to communications reviewed by The Post and people familiar with the developments who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.
Those systems are called Enterprise Human Resources Integration and Electronic Official Personnel Folder. They hold sensitive information about employees of most federal agencies, including addresses, demographic profiles, salary details and disciplinary histories.
The Post reported Thursday morning that DOGE agents had gained access to those systems along with “administrative” access to OPM computer systems. That allowed them sweeping authority to install and modify software on government-supplied equipment and, according to two OPM officials, to alter internal documentation of their own activities.
Meanwhile, both Wired and WaPo have stories describing how a Booz Allen analyst described the DOGE [sic] access as an ““unprecedented insider threat risk;” the analyst was promptly fired.
The review, delivered Monday to Treasury officials by a contractor that runs a threat intelligence center for Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service, said that DOGE’s access to the payment network should be “immediately” suspended. It also urged Treasury to scour the payments system for any changes approved by affiliates of DOGE, which is overseen by billionaire Elon Musk, the correspondence shows. DOGE stands for Department of Government Efficiency.
A Treasury employee told The Post that the threat center is run by Booz Allen Hamilton, a large federal contractor. The company confirmed it runs the threat center, which it said is embedded within Treasury.
Late Friday, after this article appeared, Booz Allen said it had “removed” a subcontractor who wrote the warning and would seek to retract or amend it. “The draft report was prepared by a subcontractor to Booz Allen and contained unauthorized personal opinions that are not factual or consistent with our standards,” company spokesperson Jessica Klenk said. Booz Allen won more than $1 billion in multiyear U.S. government contracts last year.
In a separate communication a week ago, a high-ranking career official at Treasury also raised the issue of risks from DOGE access in a memo to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, including the potential breach of information that could lead to exposure of U.S. spies abroad, according to five people with knowledge of the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to reflect government deliberations. The memo included recommendations to mitigate risks, which Bessent approved, said another person familiar with the matter, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity.
And while the focus at Treasury has been on eugenicist Marko Elez, whom Elon has pushed to be reinstated, closer scrutiny into Edward “Big Balls” Coristine — who is at OPM and possibly HHS — has described he has ties to hackers. Brian Krebs, who was targeted by some people in that crowd, described screen shots that suggest Coristine may have been fired for leaking internal documents to a competitor.
Wired noted that Coristine only worked at Path for a few months in 2022, but the story didn’t mention why his tenure was so short. A screenshot shared on the website pathtruths.com includes a snippet of conversations in June 2022 between Path employees discussing Coristine’s firing.
According to that record, Path founder Marshal Webb dismissed Coristine for leaking internal documents to a competitor. Not long after Coristine’s termination, someone leaked an abundance of internal Path documents and conversations. Among other things, those chats revealed that one of Path’s technicians was a Canadian man named Curtis Gervais who was convicted in 2017 of perpetrating dozens of swatting attacks and fake bomb threats — including at least two attempts against our home in 2014.
And Krebs provides chatlogs showing some of Coristine’s former associates are taking notice.
The Com is the English-language cybercriminal hacking equivalent of a violent street gang. KrebsOnSecurity has published numerous stories detailing how feuds within the community periodically spill over into real-world violence.
When Coristine’s name surfaced in Wired‘s report this week, members of The Com immediately took notice. In the following segment from a February 5, 2025 chat in a Com-affiliated hosting provider, members criticized Rivage’s skills, and discussed harassing his family and notifying authorities about incriminating accusations that may or may not be true.
Bloomberg matched Krebs’ reporting on the reason for Coristine’s firing from Path.
“Edward has been terminated for leaking internal information to the competitors,” said a June 2022 message from an executive of the firm, Path Network, which was seen by Bloomberg News. “This is unacceptable and there is zero tolerance for this.”
A spokesperson for the Arizona-based hosting and data-security firm said Thursday: “I can confirm that Edward Coristine’s brief contract was terminated after the conclusion of an internal investigation into the leaking of proprietary company information that coincided with his tenure.”
Afterward, Coristine wrote that he’d retained access to the cybersecurity company’s computers, though he said he hadn’t taken advantage of it.
“I had access to every single machine,” he wrote on Discord in late 2022, weeks after he was dismissed from Path Network, according to messages seen by Bloomberg. Posting under the name “Rivage,” which six people who know him said was his alias, Coristine said he could have wiped Path’s customer-supporting servers if he’d wished. He added, “I never exploited it because it’s just not me.”
Bloomberg tied Coristine’s past even more closely to organized abuse campaigns.
JoeyCrafter was a member of Telegram groups called “Kiwi Farms Christmas Chat” and “Kiwi Farms 100% Real No Fake No Virus,” both referencing an online forum known for harassment campaigns. Typically, the site has been used to share the personal information of a target, encouraging others to harass them online, in-person, over the phone or by falsely alerting police to a violent crime or active shooter incident at their home.
This is the kind of DOGE boy Elon has thrown at government networks — and thus far, Republicans don’t seem to give a damn that Trump has given these DOGE [sic] boys access to data on virtually all Americans, employee or no.
One thing is clear, however: There’s not a shred of evidence these boys are doing what Elon claims they’re doing.
Most of these new facts — the seeming proof that OPM isn’t doing what it claimed, the insider threat warning, the ties to hackers — are not in the AGs’ suit. And by the time the suits catch up to the facts, the complaints may look quite different.
Update: Corrected that none of the OPM plaintiffs are employees of US Courts (though they did get an email).
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-08-at-14.21.47.png992896emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-08 14:09:402025-02-08 16:46:59It’s Still Not Clear Whether Elon’s DOGE Boys Are Reviewing, Taking, or Altering Government Networks
There was a big development (and a few smaller ones) in DOGE’s [sic] attempts to start shutting down big parts — Treasury and Office of Personnel Management — of the government.
Before I look at those, I want to look at the order Trump appointee Carl Nichols (a former Clarence Thomas clerk) issued in a lawsuit two unions filed to enjoin the USAID shutdown.
Administrative Procedure Act because it was in excess of statutory authority
Administrative Procedure Act because it was arbitrary and capricious
They described the death and destruction the shutdown has caused and will cause.
The agency’s collapse has had disastrous humanitarian consequences. Among countless other consequences of defendants’ reckless dissolution of the agency, halting USAID work has shut down efforts to prevent children from dying of malaria, stopped pharmaceutical clinical trials, and threatened a global resurgence in HIV.40 Deaths are inevitable. Already, 300 babies that would not have had HIV, now do.41 Thousands of girls and women will die from pregnancy and childbirth.42 Without judicial intervention, it will only get worse. The actions defendants plan to take on Friday will “doom billions of dollars in projects in some 120 countries, including security assistance for Ukraine and other countries, as well as development work for clean water, job training and education, including for schoolgirls under Taliban rule in Afghanistan.”43
Plaintiffs frame their TRO request as pertaining to one overarching event: the allegedly “illegal and unconstitutional dismantling of USAID.” Mot. at 9. But at the TRO hearing, it became clear that plaintiffs’ allegations of irreparable injury flow principally from three government actions: (1) the placement of USAID employees on administrative leave; (2) the expedited evacuation of USAID employees from their host countries; and (3) Secretary Rubio’s January 24, 2025 order “paus[ing] all new obligations of funding . . . for foreign assistance programs funded by or through . . . USAID.” Dep’t of State, Memo. 25 STATE 6828. The Court finds that a TRO is warranted as to the first two actions but not the third.
The request for a Temporary Restraining Order included declarations describing the injuries the shutdown has and will cause, including this one describing the harm a sudden move will cause to an employee’s two special needs kids.
This directive will have profound impacts on the wellbeing of my kids’ personal, educational and psychological development. I have two children at Post: a seven-year-old in first grade and a two-year-old in preschool. Both have received “Class 2” medical clearances from State MED and thus they receive a Special Needs Education Allowance (SNEA) for occupational therapy (OT). My older child has documented gross and fine motor skill delays due to prenatal intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). My younger child also has documented gross and fine motor skill delays due to torticollis. Both children receive OT services in conjunction with their schooling in a purposefully integrated manner, a best practice promoted by specialists at the State Department ‘s Office of Child and Family Program (CFP) who oversee their care. Additionally, my older child who is in first grade was recently diagnosed by a licensed medical professional with ADHD and anxiety. They are now receiving Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) at Post from a licensed therapist and the Embassy Medical Unit is tracking their care.
Uprooting my children from their school, OT service providers, and child therapist in the middle of the school year will undoubtedly set back their development with possible lifelong implications. In the United States, we currently have no home or ties to a specific school district. My kids have lived overseas nearly their entire life in service of our country. There will be an inevitable gap – possibly a long one – before they are back in a stable routine of integrated schooling, OT services, and psychological services, a routine that medical professionals have determined they need to overcome developmental delays, and in the case of my seven-year-old, ADHD.
Or this one, describing the danger of losing access to security protections in high risk locations.
Personal Safety Risks: The shutdown could have life-threatening consequences for PSC colleagues serving in high-risk locations. The abrupt shutdown of government devices and access was highly reckless to colleagues in active conflict zones, such as Ukraine and Somalia. Friends and colleagues lost access to the Embassy safety communication channels, and many could no longer use a safety app called “Scry Panic 2.0,” which is installed on government-furnished equipment. In addition, many PSCs serving USAID abroad were unsure if they remained under U.S. chief-of-mission authority, which guarantees access to U.S. Government resources to ensure staff safety and accountability, including for emergency evacuations. U.S. Department of State officials, who were tasked with developing a plan to get USAID officials home, had no instructions or information on the next steps.
Many USAID PSCs work in high-risk environments where access to security resources is critical. I have heard from overseas colleagues who have now lost access to Diplomatic Security systems, meaning they can no longer coordinate security protocols, evacuations, or emergency procedures. Without official communication from USAID leadership, these PSCs remain in dangerous locations without clarity on whether they still have institutional protection. Others fear that in the event of a medical emergency or security threat, they will be forced to rely on personal funds or external assistance, as USAID has not provided guidance on whether existing security protocols still apply to them.
A risk exacerbated, the declaration explains, by the false claims launched against USAID staffers.
PSCs are also at increased risk of physical harm due to the threats, harassment, and misinformation that have accompanied the shutdown. The reckless rhetoric spread on social media and in political discourse has put USAID personnel at risk. I have heard from colleagues who have been labeled as criminals, supporters of terrorists, or Marxists—simply for doing their jobs.
High-profile figures, including Elon Musk and his supporters, have fueled this misinformation, creating a hostile environment where USAID staff fear for their personal safety. With individuals involved in the January 6th insurrection now released, there is a heightened sense of danger that USAID employees could be targeted next. I have colleagues who no longer feel safe in their own homes, with some refusing to leave family members alone out of fear that someone radicalized by online misinformation may try to harm them.
Judge Nichols cited both of those injuries in enjoining the government. He cited the latter risk when disputing the government claim that putting 2,700 USAID employees (500 of whom were already put on leave, the others would have been as of yesterday) was just a “garden-variety personnel action.”
Taking the TRO factors somewhat out of order and beginning with irreparable injury, the Court finds that plaintiffs have adequately demonstrated that their members are facing irreparable injury from their placement on administrative leave, and that more members would face such injury if they were placed on administrative leave tonight. Many USAID personnel work in “highrisk environments where access to security resources is critical.” ECF No. 9-10 ¶ 14. No future lawsuit could undo the physical harm that might result if USAID employees are not informed of imminent security threats occurring in the countries to which they have relocated in the course of their service to the United States. The government argued at the TRO hearing that placing employees on paid administrative leave is a garden-variety personnel action unworthy of court intervention. But administrative leave in Syria is not the same as administrative leave in Bethesda: simply being paid cannot change that fact.
And he cited the former injury when ruling that immediately recalling the officers overseas would create real injury, one not counterbalanced by any pressing government need.
Specifically, whereas USAID’s “usual process” provides foreign service officers with six to nine months’ notice before an international move, plaintiffs allege that USAID has now issued a “mandatory recall notice” that would require more than 1400 foreign service officers to repatriate within 30 days. Mot. at 18.
Plaintiffs have demonstrated that this action, too, risks inflicting irreparable harm on their members. Recalling employees on such short notice disrupts long-settled expectations and makes it nearly impossible for evacuated employees to adequately plan for their return to the United States. For instance, one of plaintiffs’ members attests that, if he is recalled from his foreign post, he will be forced to “[u]proot” his two special-needs-children from school in the middle of the year, “set[ting] back their development with possible lifelong implications.” ECF No. 9-5 ¶ 6. He also attests that, because his family has no home in the United States and his children have “lived overseas nearly their entire life,” there will be “an inevitable gap—possibly a long one—before they are back in a stable routine . . . that medical professionals have determined they need to overcome developmental delays.” Id. Other of plaintiffs’ members tell similar stories, explaining that the abrupt recall would separate their families, interrupt their medical care, and possibly force them to “be back in the United States homeless.” See ECF ECF No. 9-4 ¶ 7; ECF No. 9-5 ¶ 8; ECF No. 9-9 ¶ 6. Even if a future lawsuit could recoup any financial harms stemming from the expedited evacuations—like the cost of breaking a lease or of abandoning property that could not be sold prior to the move—it surely could not recoup damage done to educational progress, physical safety, and family relations.
But perhaps the most important language in Judge Nichols’ short opinion was his disdain for the government’s flimsy claims that the USAID employees have to be put on leave because of vague claims of fraud.
When the Court asked the government at the TRO hearing what harm would befall the government if it could not immediately place on administrative leave the more than 2000 employees in question, it had no response— beyond asserting without any record support that USAID writ large was possibly engaging in “corruption and fraud.”
That is, when pushed to justify this purge to a sympathetic Trump appointee, DOJ simply couldn’t substantiate claims of fraud.
To be sure, Nichols only enjoined the government until February 14. And he didn’t reverse the freeze on funding — notwithstanding that the government likely lied in saying that the freeze only applied to prospective funding obligations.
As a threshold matter, the Court notes that there are significant factual questions about what the practical effect of that order is. The government argued at the hearing that the order only prevents USAID from entering “new obligations of funding”—leaving it free to pay out contracts that it entered into prior to January 24, 2025—and indeed, the text of the order does seem to permit that result. Dep’t of State, Memo. 25 STATE 6828. Yet, plaintiffs maintained at the TRO hearing that payments on existing USAID grants have been frozen, preventing certain “contracting officers” employed by USAID from using agency funds to fulfill monetary commitments that the agency had already made.
But Trump’s administration had a chance to substantiate the wild claims of fraud and abuse that Elon Musk has leveled at USAID.
And Carl Nichols was unimpressed.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/NicholsPic.jpeg13851165emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-08 10:11:052025-02-08 10:11:05Trump Appointee Carl Nichols Enjoins Trump from Stranding USAID Workers
Yesterday, Stephen Miller RTed a propagandist’s attack on Jamie Raskin, in which he reframed Raskin’s legal points — that Congress has the power of the purse, that Elon Musk cannot eliminate agencies created by Congress — by suggesting they were an attack on DOGE’s [sic] efforts to “eliminat[e] waste and fraud.”
Miller suggested Democrats — defending the Constitution — hate democracy, because (Miller said) “voters have the right to elect a president to drain the permanent unelected DC swamp.”
With his RT, the Deputy Chief of Staff of Donald Trump’s White House suggested Elon had been elected.
Elon. Not Trump.
According to Politico, propagandists were posting this argument on Xitter, with Elon RTing them to assert his own legitimacy.
On X, Musk repostedaccounts arguing Americans voted for Musk to play a major role in the Trump administration.
But there’s a big difference between Draino and Eric Daugherty suggesting that Elon, not Trump, was elected, and Stephen Miller doing so.
Meanwhile, this NYT article suggests that the White House isn’t in control of what Elon is doing.
Senior White House staff members have at times also found themselves in the dark, according to two officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions. One Trump official, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said Mr. Musk was widely seen as operating with a level of autonomy that almost no one can control.
[snip]
This time, however, he carries the authority of the president, who has bristled at some of Mr. Musk’s ready-fire-aim impulses but has praised him publicly.
“He’s a big cost-cutter,” Mr. Trump told reporters on Sunday. “Sometimes we won’t agree with it and we’ll not go where he wants to go. But I think he’s doing a great job. He’s a smart guy.”
[snip]
Several former and current senior government officials — even those who like what he is doing — expressed a sense of helplessness about how to handle Mr. Musk’s level of unaccountability. At one point after another, Trump officials have generally relented rather than try to slow him down. Some hoped Congress would choose to reassert itself.
Mr. Trump himself sounded a notably cautionary note on Monday, telling reporters: “Elon can’t do and won’t do anything without our approval. And we’ll give him the approval where appropriate, where not appropriate, we won’t.”
“If there’s a conflict,” he added, “then we won’t let him get near it.”
It depicts a fight that — last week — was pitched as proof that Chief of Staff Susie Wiles had managed to limit Elon’s access to Trump by denying him an office in the West Wing as instead, at least as Elon tells it, a concession about office size.
At one point, Mr. Musk sought to sleep over in the White House residence. He sought and was granted an office in the West Wing but told people that it was too small. Since then, he has told friends he is reveling in the trappings of the opulent Secretary of War Suite in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, where he has worked some days.
And amid all that, it notes Elon’s ties to Miller, linking a story that focuses on immigration, not destroying government.
Now, for all its star power, this is not the article you should read to find out what’s going on in the agencies. Wired has, generally, been leading the pack on that front, having IDed the boys Elon has installed, confirmed one of those boys has control over Treasury’s payment systems, recorded the Musk boys’ platitudes about AI, and found that even after PEPFAR was exempted from USAID cuts, it remains unfunded. And if you want to understand where access by these boys to the government’s HR records will lead, read Mike Masnick.
But I want to compare the impotence portrayed by NYT — the refashioning of the office space fight, the anonymous confirmation that few if anyone in the White House know what Elon’s doing, the on the record quotes from a clueless Trump, a lying Karoline Leavitt, and … from Stephen Miller’s spouse, Katie, who has been installed in Elon’s group, that nothing will go wrong here — with the relative success of the two billionaires’ days yesterday.
Trump got his ass handed to him.
After promising big tariffs on our closest trading partners yesterday, he twice announced one month delays on the tariffs, tied to concessions that “Sleepy Joe Biden” actually negotiated, in one case four years ago. Worse still, both Claudia Sheinbaum and Justin Trudeau beat Trump to the microphone, and in Canada’s case, their Ambassador showed up on Fox News to make it clear Canada already agreed to the things Trump was hailing as a big concession, while Biden was still President. Better yet, some journalists have learned the lesson of the Colombia “negotiation,” in which the same thing happened. Leavitt’s lies about concessions may get less and less effective, moving forward, each time she tries to claim that Trump is some great dealmaker.
I suspect that between the time Trump announced tariffs and the time he capitulated, Senators and possibly even Rupert Murdoch told him how insane the tariffs were. I further suspect that these discussions involved a quid pro quo, perhaps tying a Susan Collins vote for Tulsi Gabbard, for example, in exchange for a reversal on tariffs that might affect Maine.
However Trump was talked off that cliff, he got his ass handed to him.
He didn’t even entirely succeed at claiming this was a fight over immigration and fentanyl trafficking, when that excuse was obvious bullshit as it pertains to Canada.
The one bright spot of his day was making a big announcement about a Sovereign Wealth Fund, yet another piece of paper Stephen Miller handed him to sign, probably, but a promise that, like the plan to annex Canada and purchase Greenland, remains unfunded and undiscussed in heated talks in the House and Senate about how to do reconciliation.
As I suggested Friday, so long as Stephen Miller keeps handing Trump papers to sign, he seems content to imagine he’s the President.
Meanwhile, Elon did succeed in getting the Trump-whisperers at NYT to accept that his attack on bureaucracy, which started with an agency with a $40 billion budget, 1% of government expenditures, and has never glanced at the agency with an $800 billion budget that has never passed an audit.
Mr. Musk has told Trump administration officials that to fulfill their mission of radically reducing the size of the federal government, they need to gain access to the computers — the systems that house the data and the details of government personnel, and the pipes that distribute money on behalf of the federal government.
Mr. Musk has been thinking radically about ways to sharply reduce federal spending for the entire presidential transition. After canvassing budget experts, he eventually became fixated on a critical part of the country’s infrastructure: the Treasury Department payment system that disburses trillions of dollars a year on behalf of the federal government.
Mr. Musk has told administration officials that he thinks they could balance the budget if they eliminate the fraudulent payments leaving the system, according to an official who discussed the matter with him. It is unclear what he is basing that statement on. The federal deficit for 2024 was $1.8 trillion. The Government Accountability Office estimated in a report that the government made $236 billion in improper payments — three-quarters of which were overpayments — across 71 federal programs during the 2023 fiscal year.
[snip]
In private conversations, Mr. Musk has told friends that he considers the ultimate metric for his success to be the number of dollars saved per day, and he is sorting ideas based on that ranking.
“The more I have gotten to know President Trump, the more I like him. Frankly, I love the guy,” Mr. Musk said in a live audio conversation on X early Monday morning. “This is our shot. This is the best hand of cards we’re ever going to have.”
This is ridiculous garbage, as are Elon’s daily claims of money he has saved (which NYT accedes elsewhere). You’re not going to eliminate the deficit by shutting down USAID. You will, however, cut off a lot of funding to Ukraine, with Russia laughing gleefully as it watches. As Elon moves onto reviewing individual employees, you’ll cut off employees who’ll have to be replaced by more expensive contractors.
You won’t cut spending appreciably.
Nothing Elon is doing will balance the budget. Nothing Elon is doing will make government more efficient. Hell, his AI boys can’t even tell the difference between a condom and a hospital, and as a direct result, Trump keeps making transparently bogus claims about Gaza funding.
But as we try to get a sense of where the attacks on democracy are coming from, it’s worth noting that the first thing that happened — before the Senate installed one after another of Trumps’ wildly unqualified nominees, and before Congressional Republicans have decided how to defund government themselves — Elon has gone in and started changing code at government agencies, and done so with feeble claims of approval from the White House.
Meanwhile, people who seem to answer to Miller — people like Acting DC US Attorney Ed Martin, one of three January 6 insurrectionists salted through government so far — appear to be working for Elon, not Trump.
Update, February 5: Both NBC and Atlantic are reporting that Susie Wiles claims to be in charge of what Elon is doing.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Screenshot-2025-02-04-at-09.53.40.png992902emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-02-04 07:48:202025-02-05 08:16:31Stephen Miller Claimed Elon Musk Was the One Elected in November
On January 27th, an AP story appeared on the news website Military.com with the headline “Intelligence Sharing by the US and Its Allies Has Saved Lives. Trump Could Test Those Ties.” On the surface, it reads like one of those analysis pieces that come out when the White House changes from one party to the next, with the added twist of knowing what the first Trump administration was like.
The Associated Press spoke with 18 current and former senior European and U.S. officials who worked in NATO, defense, diplomacy or intelligence. Many raised questions and concerns about Trump’s past relationship with America’s spies and their ability to share information at a time of heightened terror threats and signs of greater cooperation between U.S. adversaries.
The importance of trust
The U.S. and its allies routinely share top-secret information, be it about potential terror threats, Chinese cyberattacks or Russian troop movements. America’s closest intelligence partners are New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Britain, and it often shares with other nations or sometimes even adversaries when lives are at stake.
[snip]
Cooperation particularly between the U.S. and the U.K. is “strong and robust enough to withstand some turbulence at the political level,” said Lord Peter Ricketts, former U.K. national security adviser and current chair of the European Affairs Committee of the upper chamber of the British Parliament.
However, any strong intelligence relationship is underpinned by trust, and what if “trust isn’t there?” Ricketts said.
Ricketts’ question is no longer a hypothetical. This is the reality faced by intelligence services who in the past have been friendly with the US intelligence community. The AP put out their story on January 27th, and that seems like years ago. Today this reads like a warning.
The takeover of USAID that has played out this past week is *not* just a battle over who runs offices in DC. The bulk of USAID’s staff work overseas, alongside their local partners. When phone calls from these overseas missions back to DC go unanswered, and when US staffers abroad are told to stand down, all those local partners are going to get very, very nervous, and not just because their paychecks stop. They’re going to talk to others in their government, trying to find out what it going on. At the same time, they will be providing input (either directly or indirectly) to their own country’s intelligence service, as their spooks add it to whatever they are learning from elsewhere. In the US, folks worry about those who are losing their jobs; overseas, these fights will result in people dying, like those who don’t get the clean water, medical care, or disease prevention measures like malaria nets. Those other countries are watching with horror the stories of Musk’s minions breaking into sensitive databases, over the objections of trusted career people, and wonder what of their own information is now in the hands of a privateer, and if the same this is (or will be) going on at the CIA, DIA, and other US intelligence agencies.
I guarantee you that all these other countries are watching the battle over USAID much more carefully than folks in the US.
Now imagine you are a member of a foreign intelligence service — perhaps the head, or perhaps a mid-level staffer whose specialty is the US. You see the USAID invasion. You see the public decapitation of the FBI. You see the targeting of career DOJ officials. You see Hegseth paint a target on the back of Milley (and others, like John Bolton and John Brennan). You see all this, much of it in the bright light of public reporting. You hear more from your contacts, who paint more detailed pictures of these purges and fights. You see all this, and you ask yourself two questions, over and over again.
1) Are the things we shared with the US intelligence community in the past safe from being revealed in public, and thus causing us harm?
2) Can we trust the US intelligence community with information we might share with them in the future?
Given what we’ve seen over the last week, the answers to these questions are becoming more and more clear: 1) no and 2) no.
I haven’t talked to those “18 current and former senior European and U.S. officials who worked in NATO, defense, diplomacy or intelligence” to whom the AP spoke. The AP headline was hypothetical – “Trump could test those ties” – but now on February 3rd, it’s real. Trump has been f’ing around with those intelligence service ties, and he’s about to find out what happens.
The short answer is becoming clear, as Trump’s vision of America First becomes America Alone.
I think one effect of Trump’s attempt to wow journalists with the appearance of action is to hide how many major fuck-ups and failed promises Trump has had in his first two weeks (like the serial confession that Trump and Stephen Miller lied to voters about how many criminal aliens there are and Trump’s equivocations about multiple of the tariffs he will set).
But one locus of many of the worst failures comes from this unelected immigrant.
Among the things that African immigrant Elon Musk has done in the last few weeks was:
Forced FAA’s head, Michael Whitaker, out days before a fatal crash. As the Verge explained, Elon took Whitaker out because he deigned to regulate Musk’s companies.
But Musk’s efforts to get Whitaker were well known even before Trump’s victory in November. He has complained many times about the FAA, lashing out in September after the agency levied a $633,000 fine for launching missions with unapproved changes. (Musk is worth over $400 billion, making him the richest man in the world.)
The FAA has also fined Starlink, after the SpaceX subsidiary failed to submit safety data before launching satellites in 2022. In a House hearing, Whitaker explained that the FAA’s civil penalties were “the only tool we have to get compliance on safety matters.”
On X, Musk complained that the FAA was “harassing SpaceX about nonsense that doesn’t affect safety while giving a free pass to Boeing even after NASA concluded that their spacecraft was not safe enough to bring back the astronauts.” He also claimed that humans would never land on Mars without “radical reform at the FAA.” In September, he wrote “he needs to resign” about Whitaker.
Elon also pushed out the guy who manages America’s checkbook, David Lebryk, in whom a lot of the confidence of investors and businessmen is invested.
The highest-ranking career official at the Treasury Department is departing after a clash with allies of billionaire Elon Musk over access to sensitive payment systems, according to three people with knowledge of the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private talks.
David A. Lebryk, who served in nonpolitical roles at Treasury for several decades, announced his retirement Friday in an email to colleagues obtained by The Washington Post. President Donald Trump named Lebryk as acting secretary upon taking office last week. Lebryk had a dispute with Musk’s surrogates over access to the payment system the U.S. government uses to disburse trillions of dollars every year, the people said. The exact nature of the disagreement was not immediately clear, they said.
Officials affiliated with Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” have been asking since after the election for access to the system, the people said — requests that were reiterated more recently, including after Trump’s inauguration.
[snip]
Typically only a small number of career officials control Treasury’s payment systems. Run by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, the sensitive systems control the flow of more than $6 trillion annually to households, businesses and more nationwide. Tens, if not hundreds, of millions of people across the country rely on the systems, which are responsible for distributing Social Security and Medicare benefits, salaries for federal personnel, payments to government contractors and grant recipients and tax refunds, among tens of thousands of other functions.
Musk’s flunkies, including one 18-year old with only a high school diploma, have also been installed in the Office of Personnel Management [corrected] — the government’s HR department.
Sources within the federal government tell WIRED that the highest ranks of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)—essentially the human resources function for the entire federal government—are now controlled by people with connections to Musk and to the tech industry. Among them is a person who, according to an online résumé, was set to start college last fall.
Scott Kupor, a managing partner at the powerful investment firm Andreessen Horowitz, stands as Trump’s nominee to run the OPM. But already in place, according to sources, are a variety of people who seem ready to carry out Musk’s mission of cutting staff and disrupting the government.
Amanda Scales is, as has been reported, the new chief of staff at the OPM. She formerly worked in talent for xAI, Musk’s artificial intelligence company, according to her LinkedIn. Before that, she was part of the talent and operations team at Human Capital, a venture firm with investments in the defense tech startup Anduril and the political betting platform Kalshi; before that, she worked for years at Uber. Her placement in this key role, experts believe, seems part of a broader pattern of the traditionally apolitical OPM being converted to use as a political tool.
Sources say that Riccardo Biasini, formerly an engineer at Tesla and most recently director of operations for the Las Vegas Loop at the Boring Company, Musk’s tunnel-building operation, is also at the OPM as a senior adviser to the director. (Steve Davis, the CEO of the Boring Company, is rumored to be advising Musk on cuts to be made via DOGE and was integral in Musk’s gutting of Twitter, now X, after his takeover of the company in 2022.)
According to the same sources, other people at the top of the new OPM food chain include two people with apparent software engineering backgrounds, whom WIRED is not naming because of their ages.
One thing they’ve done is set up a government-wide email function.
Last week, many federal workers received test emails from the email address [email protected]. In a lawsuit filed last night, plaintiffs allege that a new email list started by the Trump administration may be compromising the data of federal employees.
In their attempts to set up agency- and government-wide emails, Elon’s unelected bureaucrats seem to have taken security filters off at least NOAA’s email system, resulting in noxious spam being sent.
After setting up the government-wide email, someone sent out an email similar to the one Elon sent out when he gutted Xitter, attempting to fool government workers into accepting something misleadingly labeled a buy-out, one not authorized by statute or appropriation.
In a separate email sent on Tuesday entitled “Fork in the Road,” most federal workers were effectively offered an eight-month severance package to leave their jobs, simply by sending [email protected] a message with the word “Resign” in the subject line between now and February 6. Military personnel, postal workers, and national-security and immigration officials are not eligible.
The executive branch has no authority from Congress to offer a mass buyout to federal workers. In fact, the OPM website clearly states that the limit for incentive packages for voluntary resignations is $25,000, far less than eight months’ pay for the average federal worker. Some employees can’t even be offered that.
The way OPM purports to get around this is by defining this as “deferred resignation.” The resignation of the federal worker would be set at September 30, and they will retain full pay and benefits until then and be exempt from return-to-office requirements that are part of one of the Trump executive orders. (This is also a way to not unlawfully reduce salary outlays in federal appropriations for the current fiscal year.) “I understand my employing agency will likely make adjustments in response to my resignation including moving, eliminating, consolidating, reassigning my position and tasks, reducing my official duties, and/or placing me on paid administrative leave until my resignation date,” reads the sample resignation letter. In this sense it is just a future setting of an end date of employment, though the strong implication is that those employees will have nothing to do for the next eight months.
[snip]
This was an Elon Musk operation, through and through. In fact, the “Fork in the Road” email had the same title as one that Elon Musk sent to Twitter when he took over there, informing workers to be “extremely hardcore” or take the resignation offer. The Twitter emails even included the same ask of workers to reply with their decision.
All this access — and almost certainly, some shitty AI — is where the big lie Karoline Leavitt told in her first presser came from.
MS. LEAVITT: There was notice. It was the executive order that the president signed.
There’s also a freeze on hiring, as you know; a regulatory freeze; and there’s also a freeze on foreign aid. And this is a — again, incredibly important to ensure that this administration is taking into consideration how hard the American people are working. And their tax dollars actually matter to this administration.
You know, just during this pause, DOGE and OMB have actually found that there was $37 million that was about to go out the door to the World Health Organization, which is an organization, as you all know, that President Trump, with the swipe of his pen in that executive order, is — no longer wants the United States to be a part of. So, that wouldn’t be in line with the president’s agenda.
DOGE and OMB also found that there was about to be 50 million taxpayer dollars that went out the door to fund condoms in Gaza. That is a preposterous waste of taxpayer money.
Jesse Watters picked up Leavitt’s lie, which in turn led Trump to parrott Watters’ expanded version of it.
It’s possible flunkies installed by African immigrant Elon Musk mistook Africa for the Middle East (of which only Jordan gets contraceptives), because Africa receives condoms from the US (as part of the important PEPFAR anti-AIDS program that even Republican Senators were demanding be resumed when it got shut down).
And this is just what we already know! While it hasn’t been confirmed, I’d bet a good deal of money that Elon’s flunkies were behind shutting down the Medicaid portals early in the week, something that affected health care for people throughout the country.
It has been spectacular failure after failure.
And many of them were directly caused by the immigrant demanding that we get rid of unelected bureaucrats taking democracy away.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screenshot-2025-01-31-at-3.12.43 PM.png4901192emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2025-01-31 12:37:022025-02-01 03:23:30Some of the Ways Trump’s Immigrant Invader Damaged America in Just Two Weeks
You might be forgiven for forgetting that, just over a week ago, Trump’s spox, Karoline Leavitt, issued a statement affirming that Trump — and not Elon Musk — leads the Republican party.
As soon as President Trump released his official stance on the CR, Republicans on Capitol Hill echoed his point of view. President Trump is the leader of the Republican Party. Full stop.
She was trying to sustain the illusion that Trump really did only learn about the contents of the Continuing Resolution that Elon Musk tanked after Elon did, rather than that Elon vetoed a bill Trump had already acquiesced to.
Read Robert Kuttner on the ways that Elon outplayed Trump in the CR negotiations (though I think Elon had several goals, not just to continue doing business in China unimpeded, but also defeating a measure that would have limited his ability to post Deep Fakes of AOC on Xitter).
You might be forgiven for forgetting Leavitt’s thin denial because Trump’s own comments, at Turning Point USA’s latest shindig, were even more striking.
Elon is going to have his DOGE [sic], Trump recommitted. But he’s not going to be President, Trump continued, because he is Constitutionally prohibited.
But I will order federal workers to get back to the office in person or be terminated from the job immediately. And we will create the new Department of Government Efficiency, headed by Elon Musk.
And no, he’s not taking the presidency. I like having smart people. You know, the — they’re on a new kick — Russia, Russia, Russia, Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine, all the different hoaxes. And the new one is, President Trump has ceded the presidency to Elon Musk. No, no, that’s not happening. But Elon’s done an amazing job. Isn’t it nice to have smart people that we can rely on, okay? Don’t we want that?
[snip]
But no, he’s not going to be president, that I can tell you. And I’m safe. You know why? He can’t be. He wasn’t born in this country. But the fake news knows that. No, he’s a great guy, and we want to have him, everybody.
Pretty rich [cough] for a guy like Trump to seek refuge in the Constitution.
The next day, Trump put Stephen Miller’s spouse, Katie on DOGE [sic], right alongside naming another billionaire, Stephen Feinberg, to serve as Deputy Secretary of Defense.
We learned during the campaign that the relationship between Stephen Miller and Musk is chummier than we knew, though we still can’t say whether Miller was the one who counseled Musk on bringing “the boss himself, if you’re up for that!” back onto Xitter.
But by picking even the spokesperson for DOGE [sic] — presumably a spox who would like to get paid — Trump provides NGOs like CREW a lever to demand transparency into DOGE [sic] that it is otherwise designed to evade.
It also puts a trusted insider inside.
All that was before the hilarious fight between Laura Loomer and Elon Musk (and Vivek Ramaswamy, who suggested American children don’t have the same work ethic that children of South Asian immigrants do) over H1Bs yesterday. After Loomer called Musk out for pushing immigration, Elon started shutting down her Xitter privileges.
Which led to Elon “censoring” Loomer’s account, after which she herself adopted the “President Musk” moniker.
Then someone with a manic South African accent using the name Adrian Dittman went into an Owen Shroyer chatroom and further antagonized Loomer.
Perhaps this is all some light-hearted amusement — something to do between the Beyoncé hafltime show and the New Years Eve ball drop.
But I do think it’s a testament to the complexity of the relationship between Trump and Elon. And that’s true for more reasons than the fundamental incompatibility of Trump’s populist nativism and Elon’s supranational aspirations. As it happened, the CR disappointed almost three dozen Republicans, who took Trump’s promise of backing Elon’s plans to cut government seriously. But it also disappointed Trump, who didn’t get Republicans to eliminate the debt ceiling. And those two incompatible stances — cutting government spending versus eliminating all limits to it — are simply two unpopular ways of giving the richest man in the world more tax cuts.
Many people predict, with good reason, that the two Malignant Narcissist problem will soon lead to a break between the men — that Trump will tire of questions about his own authority and lash out, cut off Elon, maybe even retaliate. The more people call Elon the President, the more likely that will happen.
But I’m not convinced that fully accounts for the complexity of this relationship. I don’t know whether that’s because Trump is awed by Elon’s shiny rockets and endless money. Or if there’s further complexity to the way Trump won the election.
It should be the case that Trump, through no more than inaction, a failure to order subordinates to shut down the various investigations and regulatory reviews that threaten Musk, could eliminate the problem Elon poses to his authority.
But Trump has already allowed Elon to chip away at the viability of his coalition.
Share this entry
https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Screenshot-2024-12-27-at-11.11.18.png772906emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2024-12-27 07:46:472024-12-27 07:46:47The Complications of Elon Musk
