Following a video from Democratic lawmakers urging soldiers to refuse “unlawful” orders, Donald Trump ignited controversy by accusing them of “sedition” and calling for their arrest, sparking outrage among military legal professionals. These experts criticize Trump’s broad and inappropriate use of legal terms while simultaneously expressing concern over the safety of lawmakers. Although many agree that some orders, such as the US’s actions against alleged drug trafficking boats, may be illegal, military attorneys warn of the immense burden placed on service members who refuse orders and stress the need for clarification and guidance. Furthermore, the politicization of the military is highlighted as a dangerous trend, putting junior service members in a precarious position and potentially leading to a breakdown in the core principle that every order is presumed lawful.
Read More
Dozens of former US Department of Justice attorneys have detailed the politicization of federal law enforcement during Donald Trump’s second term. The attorneys reported directives to investigate Trump’s political opponents, drop investigations, and mass pardons, including those who participated in the January 6th Capitol riot. This politicization extended to executive orders targeting law firms and investigations with predetermined outcomes, and the use of pardons for political allies. Additionally, there have been efforts to relax gift-acceptance rules, and misuse of government resources for personal gain.
Read More
Even staunch Republican allies are growing frustrated with the Trump administration’s slow approval of disaster declarations. The president has been publicly linking disaster relief funding to political support, as seen in his social media posts touting aid to states he won in past elections. Simultaneously, the White House has denied major disaster declarations for states that voted against him, such as Maryland and Vermont, prompting accusations of politicizing disaster relief. This pattern reinforces concerns that the administration prioritizes aid based on political affiliation rather than the needs of affected communities.
Read More
In a recent analysis, it is argued that President Trump could potentially use the U.S. military to exert control over Americans. The author points to the deployment of troops in cities against the wishes of local authorities as evidence of acclimating the public to military presence. Concerns are raised due to the firing of top legal military officers, suggesting an intent to circumvent legal constraints. This is further compounded by Trump’s statements about combating drug cartels and the potential for extending this to domestic actions. Ultimately, the author suggests that while the military remains a significant obstacle, the potential for its politicization is concerning.
Read More
Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, FBI Director Kash Patel initially misinformed the public by falsely claiming the shooter was in custody, which was later corrected. This incident has raised concerns about Patel’s leadership, especially as he faces upcoming congressional oversight hearings. Democrats are expected to question him on several issues, including the firing of senior executives and a shift in the agency’s priorities towards illegal immigration and street crime. Patel is also under scrutiny for his handling of investigations and potential politicization of the bureau.
Read More
Following the firing of a top Bureau of Labor Statistics official, Donald Trump’s team scrambled to explain the decision, citing concerns about the reliability of jobs data. The former president accused the official of manipulating figures, though no evidence supported these claims. While some administration officials pointed to data revisions as a justification for the firing, critics, including former government officials, condemned the move as undermining the integrity of the agency. The episode has raised concerns about the politicization of economic data and its potential impact on market confidence.
Read More
US nuclear regulator asks job seekers political questions, and that’s where we begin this discussion. The very idea that a government agency, particularly one responsible for nuclear safety, would inject political considerations into the hiring process immediately raises red flags. It strikes at the heart of meritocracy, a concept that many, ironically, champion when it comes to other areas like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The notion that the best people for the job might be overlooked because of their political leanings, or worse, because of their lack of unwavering loyalty to a particular political figure, is deeply troubling.
The implications are significant.… Continue reading
Attorney General Pam Bondi has fired her personal ethics advisor, Joseph Tirrell, a career attorney with nearly 20 years of service, without stating a reason for his removal. Tirrell, who headed the DOJ’s ethics office, advised senior officials on matters such as financial disclosures and conflicts of interest, and also provided guidance to all DOJ employees. His removal may be related to the roughly 20 employees involved in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigations, where Tirrell had advised on ethics matters. The move comes amidst other departures of key oversight officials, raising concerns about the potential politicization of the Justice Department.
Read More
President Trump ordered the dismissal of all remaining U.S. attorneys appointed by the Biden administration, citing unprecedented politicization of the Justice Department. This action, while unusual in its abruptness, follows Trump’s campaign promise to depoliticize the DOJ and comes after several Biden-appointed attorneys resigned or were terminated last week. The dismissals represent a significant shakeup within the department, with Trump replacing them with his own nominees requiring Senate confirmation. Trump’s critics, however, express concerns about the ongoing politicization of the Justice Department under his administration.
Read More
President-elect Trump has nominated Kash Patel, a staunch loyalist with limited federal law enforcement experience, to lead the FBI. Patel, who faces Senate confirmation, has a history of promoting conspiracy theories and advocating for a purge of perceived Trump enemies within the bureau, causing significant concern among Democrats and some former officials. This nomination is expected to face strong opposition, particularly given previous failed nominations of similarly controversial figures. Critics cite Patel’s lack of qualifications and worry about potential politicization of the FBI under his leadership. The nomination also contravenes the established norm of ten-year terms for FBI Directors, intended to ensure agency apoliticism.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood