What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[dist]

Little recap about the ongoing war on the Federal administration.

February 15, 2025 (Saturday)

After World War II, the vast majority of Americans—Democrats and Republicans alike—agreed that the federal government should regulate business, provide a basic social safety net, promote infrastructure, and protect civil rights. But not everyone was on board. Some big businessmen hated regulations and the taxes necessary for social welfare programs and infrastructure, and racists and religious traditionalists who opposed women's rights wanted to tear that "liberal consensus" apart.

They had no luck convincing voters to abandon the government that was overseeing unprecedented prosperity until the Supreme Court's 1954 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, decision permitted them to turn back to an old American trope. That ruling, which declared segregation in the public schools unconstitutional, enabled opponents of the liberal consensus to resurrect the post–Civil War argument of former Confederates that a government protecting Black rights was simply redistributing wealth from hardworking white taxpayers to undeserving Black Americans.

That argument began to take hold, and in 1980, Republican president Ronald Reagan rode it to the White House with the story of the "welfare queen," identified as a Cadillac-driving, unemployed moocher from Chicago's South Side (to signal that the woman was Black). "She has 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards and is collecting veteran's benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands," Reagan claimed. "And she is collecting Social Security on her cards. She's got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names." The woman was real, but not typical—she was a dangerous criminal rather than a representative welfare recipient—but the story illustrated perfectly the idea that government involvement in the economy bled individual enterprise and handed tax dollars to undeserving Black Americans.

Republicans expanded that trope to denigrate all "liberals" of both parties, who supported an active government, claiming they were all wasting government monies. Deregulation and tax cuts meant that between 1981, when Reagan took office, and 2021, when Democratic president Joe Biden did, about $50 trillion moved from the bottom 90% of Americans to the top 1%. But rather than convincing Republican voters to return to a robust system of business regulation and restoring taxes on the wealthy and corporations, that transfer of wealth seemed to make them hate the government even more, as they apparently were convinced it benefited only nonwhite Americans and women.

That hatred has led to a skewed idea of the actions and the size of the federal government. For example, Americans think the U.S. spends too much on foreign aid because they think it spends about 25% of the federal budget on such aid while they say it should only spend about 10%. In fact, it spends only about 1% on foreign aid. Similarly, while right-wing leaders insist that the government is bloated, in fact, as Elaine Kamarck of the Brookings Institution noted last month, the U.S. population has grown by about 68% in the last 50 years while the size of the federal government's workforce has actually shrunk.

What has happened is that federal spending has expanded by five times as the U.S. has turned both to technology and to federal contractors, who outnumber federal workers by more than two to one. Those contractors are concentrated in the Department of Defense. At the same time, budget deficits have been driven by tax cuts under Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump as well as the unfunded wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; the Treasury actually ran a surplus when Democratic president Bill Clinton was in office in the 1990s.

When asked, Americans say they don't actually want to get rid of government programs. A late January poll from the Associated Press–NORC Center for Public Affairs Research—a gold-standard pollster for public attitudes—found that only about 29% of Americans wanted to see the elimination of a large number of federal jobs, with 40% opposed (29% had no opinion). Instead, 67% of adults believed the U.S. is spending too little on Social Security, 65% thought it was spending too little on education, 62% thought there is too little aid for the poor, 61% thought there is too little spending on Medicare, and 55% thought there is too little spending on Medicaid. Fifty-one percent thought the U.S. should spend more on border security.

Nonetheless, Trump is echoing forty years of Republican rhetoric when he claims to have a "mandate" to slash government and to purge it of the diversity, equity, and inclusion programs that hold the playing field level for Black Americans, women, people of color, and ethnic, religious, and gender minorities.

On February 11, Trump signed an executive order putting billionaire Elon Musk in charge of "large-scale reductions in force," and yesterday, Musk and his allies began purging the federal government of career employees, beginning with employees still in their probationary period, typically those with less than a year in the job. The Department of Veterans Affairs lost 1,000 people, the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau lost more than 100 people, the U.S. Department of Agriculture lost more than 2,400, the U.S. Forest Service lost more than 3,000, the Environmental Protection Agency lost 400, the Small Business Administration lost more than 100, and the Interior Department lost 2,300, including workers at national parks. The Department of Health and Human Services is expected to lose nearly all of its 5,200 workers in their probationary period, including 1,300 at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—10% of its workforce—while the National Institutes of Health (NIH) lost 1,500. "I am heartbroken, more than anything, for the future of science in this country as we gut this institution that has for so long been intentionally shielded as much as possible from politics," an NIH employee told Will Stone, Pien Huang, and Rob Stein of NPR.

Five government employees' unions have sued, saying the mass firings violate the formal procedures for reductions in force. Employees say they were already understaffed and there is no way they will be able to keep up the level of their performance under the cuts. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) points out that rather than saving money, "it is a massive waste of taxpayer dollars to fire employees the department just invested months into recruiting, vetting and training."

On Reddit, federal employees shared their experience. One wrote: "The thing that I can't get over is that the actual richest man in the world directed my f*cking firing. I make $50K a year and work to keep drinking water safe. The richest man in the world decided that was an expense too great for the American taxpayer."

It certainly appears that those in charge of the firings didn't know what they were doing: on Thursday they fired more than 300 workers at the National Nuclear Security Administration, apparently not aware that they were the people who oversee the nation's nuclear weapons. Today, Peter Alexander and Alexandra Marquez of NBC News reported that officials are now trying to rehire them but can't figure out how to reach them because the workers lost access to their work email when they were fired.

The firings of federal employees come after the Trump administration instituted a "freeze" on federal spending. This impoundment of funds is illegal—the Constitution, Congress, and the courts have all established that once Congress has established a program, the president must implement it. But the truth is that Congress implemented these programs for a reason, and members would not kill them because they recognize they are important for all Americans.

Now MAGA voters are now discovering that much of what billionaire Elon Musk is cutting as "waste, fraud, and corruption" is programs that benefit them, often more than they benefit Democratic-dominated states. Dramatically, farmers, who backed Trump by a margin of three to one, are badly hit by the freeze on funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act for conservation of land, soil, and water. "This isn't just hippie-dippy stuff," Wisconsin cattle, pig, and poultry farmer Aaron Pape told Linda Qiu and Julie Creswell of the New York Times. "This is affecting mainstream farmers."

Similarly, the shutdown of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is a blow to the agricultural sector: USAID buys about $2 billion in agricultural products from U.S. farmers every year. It has also supported funding for research at state universities like the University of Tennessee, the University of Missouri, and the University of Louisiana.

Cuts to indirect spending in grants from the National Institutes of Health will also hit hard across the country, and states where Trump won more than 55% of the 2024 vote are no exception. Former college president Michael Nietzel noted in Forbes that Texas stands to lose more than $300 million; Ohio, more than $170 million; and Tennessee, Missouri, and Florida, more than $130 million apiece. These losses will cause thousands of layoffs and, as the Association of American Medical Colleges said, "diminish the nation's research capacity, slow scientific progress and deprive patients, families and communities across the country of new treatments, diagnostics and preventive interventions."

Trump said Wednesday he wanted to shutter the Department of Education immediately, calling it "a big con job." That Department provides grants for schools in low-income communities as well as money for educating students with special needs: eight of the ten states receiving the most federal money for their K–12 schools are dominated by Republicans. 
Trump has called the Federal Emergency Management Agency a "disaster" and said states should handle natural disasters like hurricanes, wildfires, floods, and tornadoes on their own. But states do not have the resilience they need for such short-term emergencies. Once again, while all states receive FEMA money, Republican-dominated states get slightly more of that money than Democratic-dominated states do.

Before the 2024 election, Aaron Zitner, Jon Kamp, and Brian McGill of the Wall Street Journal noted that by 2022, 53% of the counties in the U.S. received at least a quarter of their income from government programs—primarily through Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Those counties heavily support Republicans, including Trump.

On Friday the Republican-dominated House Budget Committee presented its budget proposal to the House. It calls for adding $4.5 trillion to the budget deficit in order to extend Trump's 2017 tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. It also calls for $1.5 trillion in spending cuts, including cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and supplemental nutrition programs. Budget Committee chair Jodey Arrington (R-TX) said: "The era of wasteful, woke, and weaponized government is over."

For forty years, Republican politicians could win elections by insisting that government spending redistributed wealth from hardworking taxpayers to the undeserving because they did not entirely purge the federal programs that their own voters liked. Now Trump, Musk, and the Republicans are purging funds for cancer research, family farms, national parks, food, nuclear security, and medical care—all programs his supporters care about—and threatening to throw the country into an economic tailspin that will badly hurt Republican-dominated states.

A January AP/NORC poll found that only 12% of U.S. adults thought it would be good for billionaires to advise presidents, while 60% thought it would be bad.

Forty years of ideology is under pressure now from reality, and the outcome remains uncertain.

[mongers]

Tomorrow will mark 4 weeks of this BS, so just another 204 weeks 5 days left of this shit-storm*.



* in theory and baring an act of god, who if existing must have a real twisted sense of humour.

[Tamas]

Tomorrow will mark 4 weeks of this BS, so just another 204 weeks 5 days left of this shit-storm*.



* in theory and baring an act of god, who if existing must have a real twisted sense of humour.

This cannot possibly go on like this. I think utter incompetence is a more likely explanation to what's happening. They have to melt down at some point, hopefully without the rest of us.

[Admiral Yi]

Deregulation and tax cuts meant that between 1981, when Reagan took office, and 2021, when Democratic president Joe Biden did, about $50 trillion moved from the bottom 90% of Americans to the top 1%.

Clearly Not Literal

[Syt]

https://apnews.com/article/trump-election-security-fbi-cisa-foreign-interference-98f1e17c8a6d5923db945a27f06458e7

Dismantling of federal efforts to monitor election interference creates opening for foreign meddling

NEW YORK (AP) — When a suspicious video of ballots being ripped up in Pennsylvania gained attention on social media last October, federal agencies responded quickly and called it out as Russian disinformation.

On Election Day in November, bomb threats to polling places in numerous states caused relatively few disruptions to voting. It's one of the many scenarios covered by the nation's cybersecurity agency in its outreach to state and local officials.

The future of that assistance is now uncertain.

The Trump administration's downsizing and disbanding of federal agencies has hit efforts that improve election security and monitor foreign influence. That could create gaps for America's enemies to exploit the next time the country holds a major election.

"Our adversaries are upping their game every day," said former Department of Homeland Security cyber chief Suzanne Spaulding. "I'm worried that we are, at the same time, tearing down our defenses."

Last week, new Attorney General Pam Bondi disbanded an FBI task force focused on investigating foreign influence operations, including those that target U.S. elections. She also limited the scope of enforcement actions on people who do not disclose lobbying on behalf of foreign governments. She wrote that the changes would "free resources to address more pressing priorities, and end risks of further weaponization and abuses of prosecutorial discretion."

The Trump administration also has made sweeping cuts at the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which oversees the nation's critical infrastructure, including election systems. On Saturday, a senior DHS official said mass firings of federal employees in probationary status had resulted in cuts of more than 130 employees at CISA. It was not immediately clear whether those included 17 employees who had worked on election security who were placed on leave last week.

The DHS official on Saturday also said CISA was pausing all election security activities pending a review of their funding, activities and personnel. The agency was ending its involvement in a voluntary program that shared information about cyber defenses with state and local election officials.

The actions send a message that securing U.S. elections against interference from countries such as Russia, China and Iran is no longer a federal government priority, said Larry Norden, an election expert with the Brennan Center for Justice.

"I think we would be naive to think that the bad guys don't get that message, too, that there's going to be less of a cop on the beat to protect our elections," he said.

State and local governments run elections in the U.S., but federal support in recent years has helped them protect against escalating threats, coordinate with other election offices on security and expose foreign influence campaigns designed to undermine voter confidence.

Los Angeles County Registrar Dean Logan recalled two times when the federal government was the first to be aware of a threat toward his office. In 2023, federal officials warned of a suspicious envelope heading to its election facilities early enough that it could be intercepted. In 2024, the federal government notified him of an emailed bomb threat to his office before he was aware of it.

"We can't be the eyes and ears to see everything," Logan said. "We're focused on administering the election."

There are certain elements of that work that only the FBI can do, said Darren Linvill, co-director of the Media Forensics Hub at Clemson University, which investigated malign influence campaigns in 2024. He said the FBI's task force "will be missed in 2026 and beyond."

The top Democrats on the Senate and House committees overseeing election legislation wrote a letter last week to CISA's top leaders to express "grave concern" over the changes and request more information about how those changes will affect election security.

Trump has sought to stop the government's tracking of online misinformation, something he has likened to censorship targeting conservatives. Though Trump signed the bill to create CISA in 2018, he fired its director, Christopher Krebs, following the 2020 election that Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden. Krebs had vouched for the security of the vote as Trump continued to claim it was rigged.

Biden's administration embraced government monitoring of foreign influence and frequently alerted the public to such operations in 2024. An FBI investigation also led to the indictment of three Iranian operatives for hacking into Trump's campaign.

The FBI has worked closely with CISA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in coordinating intelligence on foreign influence operations, efforts led by ODNI's Foreign Malign Influence Center.

Trump's new director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has not shared her plans for the center, which was authorized by Congress and is set to expire at the agency's discretion in 2028. She said in a statement after taking her oath of office Wednesday that she wants to "end the weaponization and politicization" of the intelligence community.

There is no indication the Justice Department plans to stop investigating espionage-related crimes related to election interference. But the gutting of a task force dedicated to that mission has an impact all the same, said David Salvo, managing director of the German Marshall Fund's Alliance for Securing Democracy.

"I'm sure there's still officers at the FBI who are probably watching this activity in some respect," he said. "But I'm not convinced that the political masters care all that much, and it's possible that those officers will be told to stop that work entirely."

Some Republicans have praised the task force's removal. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who leads the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on the social platform X that the unit was "highly politicized" and shutting it down was the "right move."

In an emailed statement, the FBI acknowledged the task force had been disbanded but said it would not comment on "specific personnel actions."

As for CISA, whose broader mission is to protect America's critical infrastructure, the future is unclear. Trump's Republican allies have criticized the agency for its work to combat misinformation about COVID-19 and the 2020 election. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said during her Senate confirmation hearing that it had strayed "far off mission."

DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin confirmed in an email last week that employees were on leave and said the agency was evaluating "how it has executed its election security mission with a particular focus on any work related to mis-, dis-, and malinformation." On Saturday, DHS said that portion of its review was complete and the agency was taking "appropriate actions" regarding those employees.

Amid the uncertainty at the federal level, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs said he was urging the Legislature to fund election security programs. Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes said that while Trump can restructure the federal government as he wants, his state depends on CISA's election services.

"I'm not too concerned with which agency's providing them, but we need to have them," he said.

[viper37]

This cannot possibly go on like this. I think utter incompetence is a more likely explanation to what's happening. They have to melt down at some point, hopefully without the rest of us.

Trump administration wants to un-fire nuclear safety workers but can't figure out how to reach them

They know what they're doing.

[viper37]

Amid the uncertainty at the federal level, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs said he was urging the Legislature to fund election security programs. Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes said that while Trump can restructure the federal government as he wants, his state depends on CISA's election services.

Why fund them?

It would prevent the Republicans from winning again.

[Syt]

How is the media intimidation progressing? FCC is launching investigations into NPR and PBS, NBC and Comcast, there's the CBS interview matter, backlash by the FCC head against a radio station (AFAIK legally?) covering ICE raids, and of course withdrawing access (AP News not going along with the Gulf of Mexico renaming), kicking out media from their Pentagon offices and replacing them with OAN, Newsmax etc, and of course the constant threat of taking any media outlet into long and costly legal battles.

Any pushback at all happening (keeping in mind that social media, where unfortunately a lot of people get their news, had their owners like Musk and Zuckerberg have already fallen in line with Trump)?

[The Minsky Moment]

IDK but the independent media we have left should support AP by all withdrawing from the White House press pool.  It is utterly pointless to cover the White House anyways as there is no news that worthy of the name to be found there.  Just an inexperienced MDEI hire press secretary who lurches back and forth between confused deer-in-headlights babbling and ridiculous gaslighting fibs.

News coverage would be vastly improved by getting reporters out of the fun house mirror WH press pool and out gathering real news.

[Savonarola]

Trump cuts 10% of CDC workforce: https://apnews.com/article/trump-job-cuts-health-cdc-0d002fd6f528a7b91ced79628bf68196

NEW YORK (AP) — Nearly 1,300 probationary employees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — roughly one-tenth of the agency's workforce — are being forced out under the Trump administration's move to get rid of all probationary employees.

The Atlanta-based agency's leadership was notified of the decision Friday morning. The verbal notice came from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in a meeting with CDC leaders, according to a federal official who was at the meeting. The official was not authorized to discuss it and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

The affected employees are supposed to receive four weeks paid administrative leave, the official said, adding that it wasn't clear when individual workers would receive notice.

HHS officials did not answer questions about the specifics of the layoffs. In an emailed statement, Andrew Nixon, the department's director of communications, wrote: "HHS is following the Administration's guidance and taking action to support the President's broader efforts to restructure and streamline the federal government. This is to ensure that HHS better serves the American people at the highest and most efficient standard."

With a $9.2 billion core budget, the CDC is charged with protecting Americans from outbreaks and other public health threats. Before the cuts, the agency had about 13,000 employees, including more than 2,000 staff work in other countries.

Historically CDC has been seen as a global leader on disease control and a reliable source of health information, boasting some of the top experts in the world.


The staff is heavy with scientists — 60% have master's degrees or doctorates. Most of the workforce does not belong to a union.

It's not only new employees who are subject to probation. Probationary periods also are applied to veteran staffers who, for example, were recently promoted to a new job in management.

Dr. Joshua Barocas, an infectious diseases expert at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, said many of the probationary-status CDC employees are filling vital roles.

"It's essentially assuming that they are not in a job that is crucial for the success of keeping everyone safe — just because they've been there for less than a year or less than six moths," said Barocas, speaking Friday morning during an Infectious Diseases Society of America call with reporters.

"That sort of slash-and-burn approach is what will cause continued disruptions in our understanding of diseases" and disease outbreaks, he said.

___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

EPA and USDA have also received similar treatment (and it looks like NOAA is next on the list.) 

My brother works for USDA, he said that he no longer has a partner, so only one person covers all of west and northern Michigan; also their lab no longer has a supervisor.  None of the supervisors were consulted, these are entirely haphazard cuts with no plans how to operate after the cuts have been made.  I'm sure it's no different at EPA or CDC.  In USDA's case they are combatting an epidemic right now, avian flu, so it is a particularly bad time to do this.

One reason, I suspect, that the science agencies are first up on DOGE's list is that research scientists have a longer probationary period than most federal employees (three years, as compared to one year for a regular employee or two years for a promotion/transfer.)

[Savonarola]

And on the subject of poorly thought out terminations:

US government tries to rehire nuclear staff it fired days ago

"Go fast and break things," might not be the best policy for dealing with the nuclear stockpile.

[mongers]

EPA and USDA have also received similar treatment (and it looks like NOAA is next on the list.) 

My brother works for USDA, he said that he no longer has a partner, so only one person covers all of west and northern Michigan; also their lab no longer has a supervisor.  None of the supervisors were consulted, these are entirely haphazard cuts with no plans how to operate after the cuts have been made.  I'm sure it's no different at EPA or CDC.  In USDA's case they are combatting an epidemic right now, avian flu, so it is a particularly bad time to do this.

One reason, I suspect, that the science agencies are first up on DOGE's list is that research scientists have a longer probationary period than most federal employees (three years, as compared to one year for a regular employee or two years for a promotion/transfer.)

So not Dept of Government Efficiency, but Dept of Oligarch Mishaps - DOOM

[Richard Hakluyt]

From the Guardian :

"The sheer insularity of the Trump administration's approach was illustrated on Friday when Bessent – supposedly one of the more sensible figures in the administration – said: "The US has a strong dollar policy, but because we have a strong dollar policy it doesn't mean that other countries get to have a weak currency policy." "

 

[celedhring]

From the Guardian :

"The sheer insularity of the Trump administration's approach was illustrated on Friday when Bessent – supposedly one of the more sensible figures in the administration – said: "The US has a strong dollar policy, but because we have a strong dollar policy it doesn't mean that other countries get to have a weak currency policy." "

 

I kinda gave up when I read reports that Gabbard had come across as the most "normal" of the US representatives to the Munich conference 

[dist]

The grift will be real, and Elon thinks he is running Wayne Enterprises.