Trump Forces Federal Employees to Write Essays Praising Him to Keep Their Jobs

In a recently issued memo, President Donald Trump is mandating that all new federal employees write essays endorsing his executive orders and policies as a part of the application process, reflecting a concerning shift toward political loyalty in federal hiring. Vince Haley, head of domestic policy at the White House, requires applicants to express how their work ethic and experiences align with advancing these policies.

This new directive is part of Trump’s broader strategy to dismantle nonpartisan civil service protections, a movement that has faced backlash and raises alarms about increasing authoritarian control over government operations. Critics, including political scientists and experts in public service, argue that these changes fundamentally undermine professional integrity and push a pro-Trump agenda that prioritizes loyalty over competency.

The memo outlines a “Merit Hiring Plan” which includes not only the essay requirement but also proposes streamlined hiring processes while eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives framed as “racial discrimination.” This seeks to replace a merit-based system with one that aligns more closely with Trump’s political ideology, threatening to dilute expertise in favor of ideological conformity.

Experts warn that this initiative could lead to a significant loss of skilled individuals in federal positions, as many experienced civil servants may opt to leave rather than conform to a regime that prompts loyalty oaths. Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service, stressed that the government is “emptying the shelves of existing nonpartisan expert civil servants” in favor of Trump loyalists, which is detrimental to effective governance.

As this hiring strategy unfolds, it points towards an administration determined to reshape the federal workforce into a political tool, effectively turning civil service into an arm of the executive branch that fails to uphold democratic norms. With a hiring freeze in place and further cuts anticipated, the implications for public service as a nonpartisan institution appear dire under the ongoing influence of Trump’s policies.

(h/t: https://www.newsweek.com/trump-administration-federal-employees-merit-hiring-plan-2080139?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR6zCc6SnbVP8dHA53lPDb50cy04Tvm1fnWqydyzsBruzRPVIO1_IcSQ_aqfPg_aem_LTxxitp7MfzQY0efb3yFYA#Echobox=1748945203)

ABC News Suspends Anchor Terry Moran at the Direction of Trump White House

ABC News has suspended veteran correspondent Terry Moran following a controversial social media post that criticized President Donald Trump and Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. In a statement, ABC emphasized its commitment to objectivity and impartiality in news coverage, asserting that Moran’s comments did not reflect the network’s views and violated its standards, prompting an evaluation of his actions.

The now-deleted post on Moran’s social media account called Trump a “world-class hater,” suggesting that the former president’s animosity serves only to glorify himself, likening it to “spiritual nourishment.” This bold assertion has sparked reactions from Trump’s allies, who view it as further evidence of bias in mainstream media and are demanding accountability for Moran’s remarks.

Trump, known for his aggressive stance against news outlets he perceives as biased, has been involved in multiple legal actions against the press, including a $20 billion lawsuit against CBS for alleged deceptive editing in a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris. Moreover, he previously reached a settlement with ABC News after pursuing a libel lawsuit against them.

Miller, who has advised Trump since his first term and is a significant proponent of the administration’s strict immigration policies, responded to Moran’s critique by framing it as indicative of a larger issue within the corporate media, which he accused of adopting a radical stance while masquerading as impartial journalists.

Moran has been with ABC News since 1997 and recently conducted an interview with Trump during the early months of his second term. The fallout from his social media activity underscores the ongoing tensions between the Republican administration and the press amidst claims of bias and attacks on journalistic integrity.

(h/t: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/08/abc-correspondent-suspended-post-condemning-trump-00393929)

Trump’s National Guard Troop Threat Against LA Protesters

Donald Trump has intensified his assault on protests in Los Angeles, threatening demonstrators after deploying National Guard troops in response to opposition against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions. This militarized response followed militant raids where officers employed crowd control measures, including CS gas and rubber bullets, against activists who were advocating for immigrant rights. Trump’s administration has shown itself willing to escalate tensions rather than engage in constructive dialogue.

In a bizarre overnight rant on Truth Social, Trump applauded the actions of the National Guard while simultaneously criticizing California’s leadership, including Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass. He labeled them as incompetent in managing the protests and invoked the specter of violence to justify his heavy-handed approach. Instead of addressing the root causes of unrest, Trump resorted to incendiary claims that users of masks among protesters were hiding something, implying malicious intent.

The president’s rhetoric underscores a broader trend of authoritarian tactics employed by the Trump administration, where dissent is increasingly met with militarization rather than negotiation. By discouraging the wearing of masks at protests, Trump is attempting to further intimidate those who dare to oppose him, perpetuating a cycle of fear and repression that aligns with his agenda of silencing opposition. His framing of protests as radical and organized by ‘troublemakers’ further delegitimizes legitimate social movements seeking change.

This deployment of National Guard troops serves as an alarming reminder of how the Trump administration manipulates national security rhetoric to suppress dissent and ensure that the voices of marginalized communities remain unheard. While claiming to act in the name of safety, the reality is the administration is eroding civil liberties and undermining the right to protest, which is a fundamental aspect of American democracy.

The continued militarization of public protests not only reflects Trump’s disdain for democratic principles but also serves the interests of wealthy elites who seek to maintain the status quo. As such, Trump’s recent actions represent a significant threat to the principles of democracy and justice, indicating a clear trajectory toward authoritarianism where dissent is quelled, and power remains consolidated in the hands of a privileged few.

(h/t: https://www.rawstory.com/trump-protesters-2672330516/)

Trump Administration Escalates Tensions with National Guard Deployment in LA Amid ICE Protests

President Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, is deploying the National Guard to Los Angeles in response to protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations that began over the weekend. Following criticism from activists regarding ICE’s actions, Homan proclaimed on Fox News that their intervention aims to enhance safety in the area, suggesting that local officials should be grateful for federal assistance.

The protests erupted after ICE conducted a series of immigration raids, resulting in the detention of at least 44 individuals in the Los Angeles area, igniting public outrage. Senior White House adviser Stephen Miller escalated tensions by labeling the protests an “insurrection,” a term that starkly suggests an assault on the very fabric of American law and governance.

Despite the protests, LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell emphasized that the police would not be participating in mass deportations nor had they been involved in the ICE operations. McDonnell reinforced the city’s commitment to public safety without resorting to discriminatory tactics that threaten immigrant communities.

In the midst of this civil unrest, Homan expressed intentions to pursue legal actions against those voicing their dissent against ICE, indicating a troubling trend of using state power to stifle opposition. Critics highlight this as part of a larger, authoritarian strategy upheld by the Trump administration, echoing fears of a systematic assault on rights and freedoms, particularly for marginalized groups.

The situation further complicates Trump’s already contentious immigration agenda, which is under scrutiny due to recent court rulings mandating the reinstatement of legal protections for certain deported individuals. This juxtaposition of local dissent with federal escalation underscores the increasing volatility surrounding immigration policies and the Trump administration’s approach to dissent.

Trump Accuses China of Violating Trade Agreement Claims

Former President Donald Trump has publicly accused China of “totally violating” the terms of a recently established trade agreement with the United States. In a post on Truth Social, Trump criticized China’s compliance, suggesting that the trade tensions between the two nations could escalate further due to their perceived breaches.

Trump’s comments come after a brief détente in the trade war, where both nations had previously agreed to lower tariffs amid escalating import duties, which had reached as high as 145%. In what Trump described as a “FAST DEAL” to stabilize their economies, he expressed disappointment over China’s actions, stating, “So much for being Mr. NICE GUY!”

While Trump’s rhetoric intensifies, Jamieson Greer, the U.S. trade negotiator, echoed his sentiments, indicating ongoing problems with China’s behavior regarding critical minerals and the overwhelming trade deficit between the nations. Despite these negotiations, Greer admitted there has been no substantial change in China’s trade practices, raising concerns about the effectiveness of Trump’s approach.

Reacting to Trump’s accusations, China urged the U.S. to cease what it termed as “discriminatory restrictions” and to honor the agreements reached during recent talks. The Chinese embassy in Washington called for both parties to collaboratively reinforce their commitments to the trade consensus established in Geneva, demonstrating their counter-narrative to Trump’s claims.

The ongoing tensions fueled by Trump’s volatile trade policies have led to uncertainty within global markets, as analysts now describe a complex and confusing economic landscape for investors. As businesses brace for the impacts of uncertainty generated by Trump’s tactics, the ramifications of his inconsistent tariff strategies persistently undermine both American economic stability and international relations.

(h/t: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/30/trump-accuses-hustler-judges-of-attempting-to-destroy-ameri/)

Trump Has Prepared Stash of Executive Orders to Distract Media

President Donald Trump’s administration consistently relied on a trove of executive orders and proclamations strategically crafted to influence public narrative and deflect from pressing issues. Months before his recent travel ban announcement, Trump’s team had prepped this controversial measure, showing a pattern of planned, reactive governance designed to control headlines and public discourse.

In announcing the travel ban, Trump attempted to link it to a criminal incident involving an Egyptian individual, even asserting that the threat posed by foreign nationals was significant. However, White House officials admitted that the proclamation was not a direct reaction to the event, highlighting the administration’s premeditated intentions rather than genuine response to security concerns.

Throughout his presidency, Trump utilized a plethora of executive actions to impose his priorities, often invoking crises to justify his administration’s decisions. White House personnel indicated that many orders were prepared in advance, waiting to be deployed at the president’s convenience, reflecting a tactical approach to governance that contrasts sharply with conventional legislative processes.

This tactic has led to a significant uptick in executive orders signed by Trump, surpassing the output of past presidents in mere months. In total, Trump has signed more than 150 executive orders in less than five months—a pace unprecedented in modern presidential history and indicative of a governing style focused on unilateral action rather than collaboration with Congress.

Trump’s governance emphasizes bravado over substance, utilizing executive powers swiftly while leaving legislative achievements largely unfulfilled. This pattern persists as he aims to consolidate authority and shape political narratives to favor his administration, revealing an authoritarian tendency that raises profound concerns about the erosion of democratic norms in the United States.

(h/t: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/06/06/trump-executive-orders-strategy/)

Trump Threatens Musk Over Funding Democratic Candidates

In a recent phone interview, President Donald Trump threatened serious repercussions for Elon Musk if Musk chooses to fund Democratic candidates running against Republicans. Trump’s comments indicate a hostile response to Musk’s criticisms of the GOP’s spending bill, where he stated, “If he does, he’ll have to pay the consequences for that,” without elaborating on what those consequences might entail.

Trump’s relationship with Musk appears irreparable, as he stated he has no desire to mend their public feud that escalated recently on social media. When questioned about their relationship, Trump bluntly replied, “No,” indicating a finality to their alliance. He also expressed disappointment in Musk’s criticisms of the Republican spending bill, insisting that Musk, who previously benefited from the president’s administration, knew well the bill’s details.

Musk’s public criticisms included calls for Trump’s impeachment and harsh words about the administration’s tariff policies, which he claims might lead to a recession. Trump retaliated by suggesting the termination of Musk’s government contracts and subsidies, implying that such power lies within his control, though he admitted he hadn’t given much thought to actually following through with that idea.

Despite the escalating tensions, Trump optimistically declared that the Republican Party is more unified than ever, framing Musk’s criticism as ultimately beneficial by drawing attention to the strengths of the spending bill. Trump’s remarks come amid calls from fellow Republicans, like Steve Bannon, to scrutinize Musk’s business dealings, which reflects an increasing alignment among party members against dissenting voices.

Vice President JD Vance weighed in on the feud, labeling Musk’s attacks as “nuclear” and suggesting that reconciliation may be difficult after such a public fallout. He cautioned Musk against criticizing Trump, emphasizing the bureaucratic frustrations often faced by business leaders in Washington.

(h/t: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna211605)

Trump’s Budget Bill Opens Protected Lands to Mining for Billionaire Luksic Despite Environmental Risks

President Donald Trump’s budget reconciliation bill includes a last-minute provision that would benefit Chilean billionaire Andrónico Luksic, a former landlord to Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump. This provision permits Luksic’s company, Antofagasta, to begin mining operations on protected federal lands in Minnesota, an action that poses serious environmental risks to surrounding freshwater bodies, as detailed in a federal environmental review.

Antofagasta, owned by Luksic’s family-run conglomerate, is set to conduct a nearly $2 billion nickel and copper mining operation in an ecologically sensitive area adjacent to Superior National Forest. This project, known as Twin Metals, has been pursued by Luksic since 2012 amid rising concerns from local Native American tribes and conservation groups about the potential toxic runoff negatively impacting water sources and ecosystems.

Despite significant opposition, the Trump administration reversed an earlier decision by the Obama administration that blocked the mining project due to its potential ecological harm. Under Trump’s leadership, the Department of the Interior expedited preliminary permits for Twin Metals, a decision criticized for disregarding environmental standards mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act.

The current budget bill not only lifts a Biden-era ban on mining leases near these protected areas but also reflects extensive lobbying efforts by Antofagasta and other corporate interests. In the last quarter alone, Antofagasta’s lobbying expenditures reached $200,000, with additional investments aimed at influencing federal lease approvals. Right-wing groups like Americans for Prosperity also played a role in pushing for expedited mining operations, showcasing the intertwining of corporate greed and political maneuvering in Trump’s agenda.

This latest move exemplifies Trump’s ongoing alliance with wealthy elites and the disregard for environmental protections, threatening the integrity of crucial ecosystems while enriching his allies. The implications of such actions extend beyond immediate profits, signaling a dangerous trend towards prioritizing corporate interests over public health and environmental stewardship.

(h/t: https://jacobin.com/2025/06/chile-mining-trump-luksic-environment?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR5efzZAtOmrJTaoURjqxHFjbVK5vo85anHceD5Oo9PfRq69EenAWV39Cdd3rg_aem_S46WY66tluDU0ClO9oYwtA)

Trump’s Surgeon General Nominee Dr. Casey Means Faces Serious Conflicts of Interest in Health Industry

President Donald Trump’s nomination of Dr. Casey Means as U.S. surgeon general underscores the unsettling reality of how special interests permeate America’s healthcare system. Despite being a vocal critic of systemic corruption within medical and food industries, Means has engaged in practices that starkly contradict her stated beliefs. The Associated Press has revealed significant financial entanglements, raising serious conflicts of interest that make her suitability for the role questionable.

Dr. Means, who received her medical degree from Stanford University but abandoned her residency, has cultivated a robust presence in the wellness industry. She promotes numerous health products, some tied to businesses in which she holds financial stakes. With a substantial online following and an audience eager for health advice, her promotional strategies often blur the lines between genuine recommendations and profit-driven endorsements.

Her marketing tactics, including the use of affiliate links for various health products on platforms like Amazon, demonstrate a growing concern about transparency in the health influencer space. While Means claims to personally vet the products she promotes, the lack of consistent disclosures about her financial relationships raises ethical concerns about her fitness to serve as surgeon general—an office intended to provide the American public with trustworthy health information.

The Federal Trade Commission mandates clear disclosures from influencers, yet many consumers remain unaware of the profit motives behind these endorsements. Although Means has shared some disclosures, her inconsistent practices, particularly with posts endorsing investment-related companies, highlight a troubling disregard for transparency. Experts emphasize that trust is paramount for public health leaders, and any lack of clarity surrounding her affiliations could undermine public confidence in health guidance.

As Dr. Means awaits Senate confirmation, her approach to managing conflicts of interest brings forth important questions about the evolving role of influencers in government. The historical precedent for surgeons general facing ethical scrutiny regarding their financial ties suggests that careful examination of her practices is necessary for maintaining the integrity of public health recommendations. The implications of her nomination could set a concerning trend in which financial self-interest overtakes the foundational commitment to public welfare.

Chancellor Merz Rebukes Trump’s D-Day Remarks on Nazi Defeat

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz strongly challenged President Donald Trump after the latter remarked that D-Day was “not a great day” for Germany. This statement came during a press conference in the Oval Office, where the leaders discussed cooperation to address the ongoing war in Ukraine and its implications.

In his response, Merz pointed out the significance of June 6, marking the anniversary of D-Day, a pivotal moment when Allied forces defeated Nazi Germany. Merz emphasized that this defeat ultimately led to the liberation of Germany from the Nazi dictatorship, acknowledging the role of the United States in this historical event.

Merz articulated a shared commitment to bringing the current war in Ukraine to an end, stressing the necessity of collaborative efforts between the U.S. and Germany. He urged Trump to recognize the potential for American leadership in mitigating the ongoing conflict, while also underscoring Germany’s support for Ukraine and the need for increased pressure on Russia.

Trump’s dismissive comments about such a significant historical event demonstrate a troubling ignorance regarding the consequences of World War II and the liberation from fascism. His failure to recognize the context and gravitas of D-Day reflects a broader disregard for historical lessons, which is concerning for U.S.-German relations.

This incident showcases the alarming tendencies within Trump’s rhetoric that undermine democratic values and the legacy of international cooperation in favor of a distorted view of history that aligns with nationalist sentiments. It stands as a reminder of the risks posed by leaders who trivialize pivotal moments of liberation and democracy.

(h/t: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/german-chancellor-objects-when-trump-cracks-that-nazi-defeat-was-not-a-great-day-for-germany/)

1 3 4 5 6 7 396