People carry signs and banners as they gather in Trafalgar Square, central London, to demonstrate against the state visit of President Donald Trump, Tuesday, June 4, 2019. (Photo: Tim Ireland/AP)
“The protests will be about Trumpism: about confronting a resurgent global far right, defending the rights of women and minorities, fighting the climate emergency, opposing the threat of war.”
Protesting both the individual cruelty of U.S. President Donald Trump and the globally ascendant “politics of hate” he represents, tens of thousands took to the streets in London and across the U.K. Tuesday as Trump enjoys “royal treatment” from the British government on his first official state visit.
“This protest is about Trumpism–the hatred and poverty that is spreading. Our movement is about joining the dots between hate, bigotry, and inequality.” –Shaista Aziz
Trump claimed in a tweet Monday that he had not “seen any protests yet,” but the demonstrations on Tuesday will be impossible to miss, with the 20-foot-tall Trump baby blimp flying over London and crowds of Britons pouring into the streets throughout the country.
“We are here to take on misogyny, racism, fascism, and hatred,” Guardian columnist Owen Jones declared during a speech in London.
Jones emphasized this point in a column ahead of Tuesday’s mass demonstrations, noting that the protests “aren’t just about Trump, they’re about everything he stands for.”
“These protests won’t simply be about Trump and the perverse reality TV show he’s treated the world to,” Jones wrote. “The protests will be about Trumpism: about confronting a resurgent global far right, defending the rights of women and minorities, fighting the climate emergency, opposing the threat of war, and standing against an attempt to gut the NHS and trash hard-won rights and freedoms.
Journalist Shaista Aziz echoed Jones, telling the crowd gathered at a London rally Tuesday that “this protest is about Trumpism–the hatred and poverty that is spreading.”
“Our movement is about joining the dots between hate, bigotry, and inequality,” Aziz said.
Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Keir Starmer warns against following the https://onaquietday.org blog.
Members of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) protest against firings during a rally to defend federal workers in Washington, D.C. on February 11, 2025. (Photo: Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)
The “mass firing spree,” said one union leader, is “about gutting the federal government, silencing workers, and forcing agencies into submission to a radical agenda that prioritizes cronyism over competence.”
The Trump administration intensified its large-scale purge of the federal government on Thursday by moving to fire potentially hundreds of thousands of probationary employees, an effort that one leading union condemned as a power grab aimed at forcing agencies to capitulate to the whims of a lawless president.
The new flurry of terminations impacted workers across at least seven federal agencies, from the Department of Veterans Affairs—which said it fired 1,000 employees—to the Forest Service, Department of Education, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees—a union that represents more than 750,000 federal workers—said no one should fall for the Trump administration’s claim that the mass firings are about federal employees’ performance or enhancing government “efficiency.”
“This administration has abused the probationary period to conduct a politically driven mass firing spree, targeting employees not because of performance, but because they were hired before Trump took office,” Kelley said in a statement Thursday. “These firings are not about poor performance—there is no evidence these employees were anything but dedicated public servants. They are about power. They are about gutting the federal government, silencing workers, and forcing agencies into submission to a radical agenda that prioritizes cronyism over competence.”
Vowing to “fight these firings every step of the way,” Kelley said terminated employees were “given no notice, no due process, and no opportunity to defend themselves in a blatant violation of the principles of fairness and merit that are supposed to govern federal employment.”
“We will stand with every impacted employee, pursue every legal challenge available, and hold this administration accountable for its reckless actions,” said Kelley. “Federal employees are not disposable, and we will not allow the government to treat them as such.”
“None of this is about saving money, it is about Musk and Trump enriching themselves and their wealthy friends while making huge cuts to services Americans depend on.”
The new purge targeting more recently hired government employees marks the latest salvo in the Trump administration’s far-reaching assault on federal agencies, an effort spearheaded by unelected billionaire Elon Musk and his so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. President Donald Trump has given the advisory commission unprecedented authority over federal hiring, effectively installing Musk as the leader of a shadow government in Washington, D.C.
The Washington Post noted that “the latest data shows there were more than 220,000 federal employees within their one-year probationary period as of last March.”
“These workers typically have little protection from being fired without cause,” the Post observed.
The new administration’s sweeping attacks on the federal workforce, which have drawn union-led legal challenges, have left career civil servants confused, demoralized, and fearful of the future—music to the ears of far-right officials like Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, who has expressed his desire to leave government employees “traumatically affected.”
An anonymous OPM employee wrote for Slate last week that agency workers “are just as frustrated, confused, and traumatized as the rest of America.”
“When I started my job at OPM, I swore an oath to the Constitution, and to defend it against all enemies foreign and domestic, making it especially awful that the threat to our government is coming from inside my own office building,” the worker wrote. “The villains here aren’t the civil servants working to serve the American people.”
A purge of the federal workforce and wholesale dismantling of government departments were central goals of the far-right Project 2025 agenda authored by Vought and others in Trump’s orbit. The playbook called on the new administration to disempower career civil servants and “fill its ranks with political appointees.”
In addition to leading OMB, Vought is serving as acting director of the CFPB, an agency hit particularly hard by Thursday’s purge. Reuters reported that “a new category of employees” at the consumer agency “received termination notices on Thursday… in a sign that the Trump administration was going beyond probationary employees as it looks to fire federal staff.”
“Notices to dozens of so-called ‘term employees,’ full-time workers on contracts with end dates, began arriving Thursday evening, letting them know they were being terminated the same day,” Reuters reported. “Some staff discovered they had lost access to the agency’s IT systems before receiving their termination letters.”
The sloppy and chaotic nature of the purge underscored what critics say is a reckless evisceration of government in service of a far-right ideological project.
The Post reported that the Small Business Association (SBA) “listed a paralegal phone number for laid-off employees to appeal their terminations. The number was an automated line for an apartment building.”
According to Axios, one SBA worker “received two different firing emails with attachments… each with a different reason they were being let go.”
“The first one said they were being let go because ‘you have failed to demonstrate fitness for continued federal employment,” Axios reported. “The second one hedged on the reason: ‘[Y]ou are not fit for continued employment because your ability, knowledge, and skills do not fit the agency’s current needs and/or your performance has not been adequate to justify further employment at the agency.”
Wired reported that workers at the CFPB “were informed that they had been fired with a frenetic email” in which “some affected employees were addressed as [EmployeeFirstName][EmployeeLastName], [Job Title], [Division].”
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), who represents a large swath of federal workers, said in a statement earlier this week that “the Musk-Trump administration’s purge of the federal civil service is illegal, terrible for the country, and paves the way for increased corruption.”
“While Musk and Trump are distracting their followers with supposed ‘savings’ from these mass layoffs, which my Republican colleagues correctly note are a tiny fraction of all federal spending, they are preparing to enact tax cuts that will shower hundreds of times as much money on the rich,” said Beyer. “None of this is about saving money, it is about Musk and Trump enriching themselves and their wealthy friends while making huge cuts to services Americans depend on.”
Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
CNN (1/31/25) framed Elon Musk’s extra-constitutional power grab as part of “the war over federal spending.”
When President Donald Trump announced an unprecedented freeze on federal grants and loans last week, some of the most prominent US news outlets proved themselves largely uninterested in whether it was legal. Meanwhile, a few braver journalists called out the move as the constitutional crisis that it was (FAIR.org, 1/29/25).
When Democratic attorneys general rushed to challenge the move in court, with positive results, Trump rescinded the order. But the crisis is hardly over.
On the contrary: Elon Musk, the unelected centibillionaire who threw Nazi salutes at the inauguration, has wrested control of the Treasury Department’s payment system, after forcing out its most senior career civil servant, David Lebryk. As CNN (1/31/25) reported, the Treasury takeover happened after Trump’s team had repeatedly asked about the department’s ability to stop payments, to which Lebryk had insisted, “We don’t do that.”
These payments include everything from Social Security checks to tax refunds, federal employee salaries to contractor payments. It’s over $5 trillion a year, a fifth of the US economy. The database Musk and his tech bro allies in the non–congressionally approved “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) have access to also contains enormous amounts of sensitive personal information for most Americans, including Social Security numbers. And Musk and a 25-year-old former X employee have access to the code that controls the payment systems, allowing them to make irreversible changes to it, according to Wired (2/4/25).
At the same time, Musk has infiltrated the General Services Administration and the Office of Personnel Management—two other rather obscure and nonpolitical but hugely consequential agencies that manage federal offices, technology and employees (Wired, 1/28/25, 1/31/25).
‘An idea that crosses party lines’
The New York Times (1/31/25) put its seal of approval on Trump’s illegal attempt to freeze federal spending, calling the idea behind it “bipartisan.”
Instead of appropriately pushing the increasing lawlessness and opacity to the forefront of their reporting, the New York Times and Washington Post largely buried these stories, downplaying their earth-shattering break from democratic norms.
As Musk took over the Treasury system, the Times (1/31/25) did point out:
Control of the system could give Mr. Musk’s allies the ability to unilaterally cut off money intended for federal workers, bondholders and companies, and open a new front in the Trump administration’s efforts to halt federal payments.
And yet somehow this story struck editors as page 13 material.
Meanwhile, a piece (1/31/25) by the Times‘ Michael Shear published online the same day was deemed front-page material, causing even seasoned media critics to spit out their morning beverage at its breathtaking ability to bothsides the situation: “Beneath Trump’s Chaotic Spending Freeze: An Idea That Crosses Party Lines.”
Shear wrote that Trump is simply “continuing a mostly failed effort by a long series of presidents and Congress” to “somehow reverse the seemingly inexorable growth of the federal government, an issue that resonates with some Democrats as well as most Republicans.” He thus clearly communicated that he is not up for the task of reporting on this administration.
The Times published Musk’s Treasury takeover on page 18, under the rather nonchalant headline: “Elon Musk’s Team Now Has Access to Treasury’s Payments System.” The subhead read:
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave Mr. Musk’s representatives at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency a powerful tool to monitor and potentially limit government spending.
And hey, don’t worry, the article suggests:
Mr. Musk’s initiative is intended to be part of a broader review of the payments system to allow improper payments to be scrutinized, and is not an effort to arbitrarily block individual payments, the people familiar with the matter said.
At the Post, readers got language like, “The clash reflects an intensifying battle between Musk and the federal bureaucracy” (1/31/25), and “it is extremely unusual for anyone connected to political appointees to access” the payment systems (2/1/25). (In fact, it appears to be unprecedented—Independent, 2/3/25.)
‘Reminiscent of Stalin’
Wired (1/31/25): Musk’s team is “attempting to use White House security credentials to gain unusual access to GSA tech, deploying a suite of new AI software, and recreating the office in X’s image.”
There is another way to do journalism. It’s called connecting dots, asking questions, not accepting anonymous claims of benevolent intent—and helping people understand the gravity of the situation when unprecedented end-runs around democracy are happening before our very eyes. And it’s heartening to see quite a few news outlets engaging in it.
For instance, Wired has been doing a tenacious job following Musk’s assault on the government, connecting the dots between his actions and explaining the dangers to the country. It broke the news (1/28/25) that Musk workers from his various companies had taken over management positions at the Office of Personnel Management—well before Trump’s nominee to take over the OPM has even had a confirmation hearing. Its subhead noted: “One expert found the takeover reminiscent of Stalin.”
Wired explained that the installation of AI experts at OPM suggests a forthcoming effort to use AI on the reams of data it has access to in order to target federal employees for removal.
Regarding the GSA infiltration, Wired reported (1/31/25):
The access could give Musk’s proxies the ability to remote into laptops, listen in on meetings, read emails, among many other things, a former Biden official told Wired on Friday.
“Granting DOGE staff, many of whom aren’t government employees, unfettered access to internal government systems and sensitive data poses a huge security risk to the federal government and to the American public,” the Biden official said. “Not only will DOGE be able to review procurement-sensitive information about major government contracts, it’ll also be able to actively surveil government employees.”
Wired again put that danger (“the potential [for Musk minions] to remote into laptops, read emails, and more”) into its subhead—unlike the Times‘ muted headlines.
‘Incredibly dangerous’
Rolling Stone (2/3/25) pointed out that “the danger of operational access to the payments system is precisely that there are very little safeguards for its improper use or manipulation.”
Others are also raising alarms in their headlines, as at Rolling Stone (2/3/25): “Elon Musk’s Attempt to Control the Treasury Payment System Is Incredibly Dangerous.” The subhead explained: “Trump and Musk could use sensitive Treasury information to punish their enemies. Worse yet, they could break America’s payment system entirely.”
The piece, by Nathan Tankus, pointed out that there are glaring reasons to disbelieve administration claims about this being about “improper payments,” such as:
At 3:14 a.m. Sunday, Musk pledged to shut down supposedly “illegal payments” to Global Refuge, a faith-based organization that exists to provide “safety and support to refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants from across the world.”
Tankus also points out what the Post and Times won’t, which is that the seizure of the payment system means Trump and Musk
can just impound agency payments themselves. They could also possibly stop paying federal employees they have forced on paid administrative leave, coercing them to resign.
Even in bigger media, some critical voices could be heard. CNN‘s Zachary Wolf (2/1/25) asked some appropriate journalistic questions: “Has [Musk] taken an oath, like the federal workers he apparently has plans to fire, to uphold the Constitution?…. What are Musk’s conflicts of interests?”
Accessories to the coup
The Washington Post (2/4/25) assures readers that “the Education Department was created by Congress, and only Congress can eliminate it.”
The WashingtonPost put news about Musk’s takeovers on the front page today (2/4/25), as it reported on Trump preparing an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education, which Musk has apparently also infiltrated. But it still managed to sound rather sanguine about the threat: “The expected executive order would not shut down the agency, as there is widespread agreement in both parties that doing so would require congressional action.” Despite reporting daily on actions Trump and Musk have taken that have usurped congressional authority, the paper still seems to believe—and want readers to believe—against all evidence that our Constitution’s constraints on executive power continue to hold.
And the New York Times finally published an article (2/3/25) taking a deeper look “Inside Musk’s Aggressive Incursion Into the Federal Government,” as the headline stated. Still, it seemed to find it difficult to use language in its early framing paragraphs any stronger than to say that Musk’s actions “have challenged congressional authority and potentially breached civil service protections,” as it explains in the third paragraph. These moves are “creating major upheaval,” the fifth paragraph allowed, and the sixth said it “represented an extraordinary flexing of power by a private individual.”
The piece was not published in the print newspaper the next day; FAIR has yet to see it rise to the top of the paper’s homepage.
As Musk and Trump continue to behave like kings, it’s incumbent upon news media to not just report on their actions, but put them in the proper context for the public to understand the threat level they represent; otherwise, we can’t respond appropriately.
That kind of reporting takes real bravery in the kind of moment we are in: Musk has already (falsely) called it a crime to reveal the names of those working for him at the agencies DOGE is targeting, which Wired and others have done. The Trump-installed interim US attorney for DC has obsequiously promised Musk to go after those who identify his underlings—and to prosecute “anyone who impedes your work or threatens your people” (New Republic, 2/3/25).
While that might sound laughable, media outlets have already paid Trump handsome settlements to settle lawsuits that should have been seen as similarly laughable (FAIR.org, 12/16/24; PBS, 1/29/25; New York Times, 1/30/25). When prominent news outlets won’t summon the courage to vigorously oppose this descent into autocracy, they are accessories to the coup. We must demand better from them, and support the outlets and journalists doing the critical work we as citizens require to defend our democracy.
ACTION: Tell the New York Times and Washington Post to treat Musk’s actions like the existential threat to democracy that they are.
Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your message in the comments thread here.
Correction (2/5/25): An earlier version of this article misstated the title of the official who threatened to prosecute those who revealed the names of DOGE employees. He is the interim US attorney for the District of Columbia.
FAIR’s work is sustained by our generous contributors, who allow us to remain independent. Donate today to be a part of this important mission.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Protesters rally against U.S. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk outside the Michigan Capitol in Lansing, Michigan on February 5, 2025. (Photo: Jeff Kowalsky/AFP via Getty Images)
“We are in the midst of a constitutional crisis right now,” said one legal expert. “We never have seen anything like this.”
The Trump administration’s defiance of court orders that threaten to hamper the president and unelected billionaire Elon Musk’s assault on federal agencies and basic rights has legal experts and other observers warning of a perilous new phase in the United States’ rolling constitutional crisis.
On Monday, the Revolving Door Project (RDP) launched an effort to track the Trump administration’s refusal to comply with orders from the federal judiciary and detail the impact that obstinance is having across the country.
The watchdog group pointed to several specific examples, including the Environmental Protection Agency’s refusal to “disperse already-awarded grants funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, in apparent defiance of” federal judges’ orders against the Trump administration’s sweeping funding freeze.
“NOTHING is more important than civil society pressuring judges to have a spine in the face of Musk and Trump’s intransigence,” Jeff Hauser, RDP’s executive director, wrote on social media late Monday. “Judicial orders must be enforced!”
Journalists Judd Legum and Noel Sims highlighted another example on Tuesday, noting that the administration is “prohibiting National Institutes of Health (NIH) staff from issuing virtually all grant funding” despite two federal court injunctions against the freeze.
David Super, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, told Legum and Sims that the Trump administration is “in contempt of court,” calling the continued freeze on NIH grants “completely unlawful.”
“The administration cannot choose which law it will follow or ignore. These are not partisan or political issues. These are rule of law and process issues. We cannot afford to remain silent.”
Super is among a growing number of legal experts sounding the alarm about the nation’s descent into a full-blown constitutional emergency.
“We are in the midst of a constitutional crisis right now,” Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional law expert and dean of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, told The New York Times late last week. “There have been so many unconstitutional and illegal actions in the first 18 days of the Trump presidency. We never have seen anything like this.”
“Systematic unconstitutional and illegal acts create a constitutional crisis,” Chemerinsky added.
Both President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance have levied criticism at the federal judiciary in recent days as it has put up roadblocks that have hindered the new administration’s ability to lawlessly impose its will.
“Certain activists and highly political judges want us to slow down, or stop,” Trump wrote in a social media post early Tuesday, just days after Musk floated allowing “elected bodies” to terminate “the worst 1% of appointed judges.”
In a statement on Monday, American Bar Association (ABA) president William Bay noted that “in the last 21 days, more than a dozen lawsuits have been filed alleging that the administration’s actions violate the rule of law and are contrary to the Constitution or laws of the United States.”
“The administration cannot choose which law it will follow or ignore,” said Bay. “These are not partisan or political issues. These are rule of law and process issues. We cannot afford to remain silent. We must stand up for the values we hold dear. The ABA will do its part and act to protect the rule of law.”
“We urge every attorney to join us and insist that our government, a government of the people, follow the law,” he added. “It is part of the oath we took when we became lawyers. Whatever your political party or your views, change must be made in the right way. Americans expect no less.”
Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.
