Posts
Trump’s Latest Weaponization Is about Historic Loyalty Oaths as Much as Current Ones
Yesterday, Trump issued three more Executive Orders targeting people for their free speech:
- Miles Taylor
- Chris Krebs
- Lawfirm Susman Godfrey
It seems Trump has an unlimited appetite for stripping people of security clearances they don’t hold. Or perhaps Trump’s handlers have figured out these EOs will provide an endless supply of dopamine hits that make the care and feeding of a malignant narcissist easier.
I want to add something to the flood of commentary about this abuse of power.
Miles Taylor, recall, was the author of an anonymous column published in the NYT.
To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.
But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.
That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.
The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.
Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.
In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,” President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.
He left the White House in June 2019, over five years ago, and identified himself as Anonymous in October 2020.
Chris Krebs was the eminently competent head of CISA whom Trump fired by Tweet in November 2020, 53 months ago, after Krebs affirmed the integrity of the 2020 election.
The fact [sic] sheet targeting Krebs describes this as an attempt to “end government censorship,” but then describes it as a part of “ensuring loyalty” (to the US; I guess Trump has lost track of where “C’est moi” ends and “l’État” begins).
ENDING GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP: President Trump is committed to ending government censorship of Americans and believes that those who engage in such conduct should not have access to our nation’s secrets.
[snip]
ENSURING LOYALTY AND ACCOUNTABILITY: President Trump has made clear that loyalty to the United States must come before personal or partisan agendas, taking decisive action against those who misuse their undeserved influence to deceive the American public.
The fact [sic] sheet against Taylor fashions itself explicitly as an attempt to root out “betrayal.” and then asserts that one “drains the swamp” by “rooting out … disloyalty.”
ERADICATING GOVERNMENT BETRAYAL: President Trump is committed to ending the weaponization of government and believes that those who engage in such conduct should not have access to our nation’s secrets.
[snip]
DRAINING THE SWAMP: President Trump is delivering on his promise to drain the swamp by rooting out inefficiency, corruption, and disloyalty.
Both of these, then, explicitly make an example of past Trump appointees who “betrayed” Trump. They serve as an object lesson to the people leaking now.
But they are more than that. They also serve to order up an investigation into both men’s networks from their tenure under Trump.
Both EOs direct the Department of Homeland Security (for which both worked) to review their government activities to see whether they violated “suitability standards for Federal employees” or entailed dissemination of classified information; in Krebs’ case, Trump’s order explicitly incorporates Pam Bondi into the investigation as well, whereas the Taylor one only incorporates “any other relevant agency heads.”
Both deviate from earlier EOs in delivering the end report to the White House Counsel rather than Stephen Miller.
Here’s how that looks in the Krebs EO.
I further direct the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with any other agency head, to take all appropriate action to review Krebs’ activities as a Government employee, including his leadership of CISA. This review should identify any instances where Krebs’ conduct appears to have been contrary to suitability standards for Federal employees, involved the unauthorized dissemination of classified information, or contrary to the purposes and policies identified in Executive Order 14149 of January 20, 2025 (Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship). As part of that review, I direct a comprehensive evaluation of all of CISA’s activities over the last 6 years, focusing specifically on any instances where CISA’s conduct appears to have been contrary to the purposes and policies identified in Executive Order 14149. Upon completing these reviews, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall prepare a joint report to be submitted to the President, through the Counsel to the President, with recommendations for appropriate remedial or preventative actions to be taken to fulfill the purposes and policies of Executive Order 14149. [my emphasis]
But there’s one more item of interest.
The investigative language builds on the EO Trump signed on inauguration day, which is mentioned prominently in the Krebs EO.
(b) The Attorney General, in consultation with the heads of executive departments and agencies, shall investigate the activities of the Federal Government over the last 4 years that are inconsistent with the purposes and policies of this order and prepare a report to be submitted to the President, through the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, with recommendations for appropriate remedial actions to be taken based on the findings of the report.
But it expands the review by two years.
That is, the investigative language in both these EOs authorizes the investigation of actions — and people — from Trump’s first term. In the guise of leak investigations (18 USC 793 has a ten year statute of limitation, otherwise any investigation into the nearly or already expired statutes of limitation would be pointless).
And the investigation within Homeland Security would roll out without court review. (I expect some of these witch hunts will be stymied by judges who recognize the command influence and obvious fraudulent accusations behind them).
This effort doesn’t just target Krebs and Taylor for what Trump claims is “betrayal.” It also provides the excuse to map out their associates within government, including those who may still be around.