Trump II, Day 9: This is NOT What "America" Looks Like
January 28, 2025
Dear friends,
Time for Day 9. I’ve worked in government. I’ve walked into federal buildings where the people around me weren’t there for money or power or prestige. They were there because they believed—naively or not—that public service mattered. That it meant something to help make things work. So when I opened my inbox and saw that surreal OPM email, offering a check to quit and a warning if I didn’t, it hit different. It felt like a dare. Like they wanted to see how many of us would take the bait, just to make the rest feel disposable. And Day 9 didn’t stop there. Whether it was firing qualified labor board members, gutting climate regulations, or yanking the security clearance of a military official with actual enemies abroad, the message was loud: serve this country, and you’re expendable—unless you serve him.
Trump (and Musk) vs. Civil Servants
Day 9 started with — for me, personally — an incredibly weird email. At the time, I actually was a government employee (technically, though I was unpaid as part of a law school externship program), so I can speak to the chaos from a personal lens. All of us federal workers received an email from OPM with the subject line Fork in the Road. It offered almost all federal workers the “opportunity” to resign but still receive pay through the end of September. Seemed to me like an odd method of creating “efficiency” to start paying people not to work, but I digress.
It also threatened us all with the risk of losing our jobs later down the line if we did not resign. In a post on X, Musk’s America PAC claimed this would lead to $100 billion dollars in savings (how far down the line we’d have had to go for that to work out, even based on this over-estimate, is quite unclear).
In my own office of 100 employees, 4 chose to resign. Three of those employees were going to resign regardless of whether this option had been presented. So, basically, the federal government spent 8-month’s salary more on each of those three than they would have without this program. But hey! One should take anecdotal evidence with a grain of salt. The accurate percentage turned out to be 3.75% (less than the minimum projection), and it’s thus far unclear how much of that was regular admin turnover.
On top of this incredibly strange incentive program, the Trump administration obviously cannot go a day without firing people—and it didn’t. Day 9 also included the firing of NLRB General Counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo, and one of the Board’s Democratic members, Gwynne Wilcox.
The general counsel thing? Actually not that crazy. Biden dismissed Trump I’s NLRB Counsel on his first day in office. But the Democratic board member? Insane territory. In fact, there was simply no precedent for such a move. Not only had it never been done before, but the move left the board with only two members. Under federal law, that’s one too few for the board to act – at all.
Why it matters
The "resignation incentive" program and abrupt firings destabilize the federal workforce, creating uncertainty and reducing efficiency in agencies critical to public services. Paying employees to leave, especially those already planning to resign, wastes taxpayer money and undermines the administration’s stated goal of fiscal responsibility.
Firing a Democratic NLRB member without precedent effectively paralyzed the board, halting its ability to resolve labor disputes or enforce labor laws. This move prioritizes political loyalty over institutional stability, potentially leaving workers and unions without recourse during disputes. It’s quite clear he continued to erode public trust in our leaders when we contemplate this move. When agencies are deliberately hamstrung or employees are pressured to leave, it fosters a perception of chaos and politicization.
Trump vs. Protecting Patriots
Also on Day 9, SecDef Pete Hegseth removed former Chair of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley’s (1) security detail and (2) security clearance. This move was life-threatening enough for Milley that it received negative attention from Republican Senator Tom Cotton, of Arkansas (for anyone unfamiliar with Mr. Cotton, that says a lot). While Trump was bitter enough to remove the portrait of Milley from the White House back on Day 1, it took an almost impressive week and two days for Trump and his new unqualified advisor to make the choice to put the man’s life at risk.
On an entirely unrelated note, except that it also demonstrates a lack of compassion; indeed, a contempt, for Americans dedicated to bettering society: Day 9 saw the start of Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy’s push-back against the promotion of American electric vehicles. On Duffy’s first day post-confirmation, he immediately cast a shadow over electric vehicle manufacturers by deciding to roll back all fuel economy standards from the previous administration. It was apparently too problematic that we attempt to curb carbon emissions from automobiles.
In a memo directed to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Duffy told the agency that from now on, cars should emit pretty much as much as our oil reserves would permit. In essence, it said: fossil fuels = good.
Why it matters
Stripping Milley’s security detail and clearance, especially given his high-profile role and potential threats (Iran), prioritizes personal vendettas over the safety of a decorated military leader. This sets a dangerous precedent for retaliating against public servants who challenge the administration.
Rolling back fuel economy standards undermines genuine, good-faith efforts to combat climate change, favoring short-term fossil fuel interests over long-term environmental sustainability. This move risks America’s global leadership in green technology and exacerbates pollution-related health issues.
Both actions reflect a broader pattern of prioritizing political loyalty and personal interests over the public good. Whether endangering a patriot like Milley or dismissing environmental concerns, these decisions dismantle the idea of efficient or trustworthy governance.
Trump vs. American Values
We don’t all agree on everything – or even anything. That’s surely true, and it’s certainly okay. That said, one might think that a President of the United States would care to respect basic human liberties and the active pursuit of a better life.
On both of those fronts, Trump’s Day 9 failed. Trump ordered that the Department of Health and Human Services ensure the removal of any gender-affirming care from public health insurance coverage until age 19. Why the President finds it acceptable to interfere in decisions that clearly should belong to individual children and teens, their families, and their doctors, is entirely beyond me. And honestly, why he cares so much about the genitalia of any Americans under the age of 19 is even further beyond me. This one was both un-American and plainly weird.
When it came to immigration and the liberty this country holds out to the rest of the world as a promise, he again took steps backward for America. On Day 9, Trump rescinded Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for approximately 600,000 Venezuelan legal immigrants, a move that put them at immediate risk of deportation to a country plagued by violence, economic collapse, and political repression.
Noem justified the move as part of a broader crackdown on immigration, claiming it would deter further migration. In reality, it’s clear as day that this was a heartless betrayal of American values, punishing vulnerable people who had built lives here.
Why it matters
By targeting vulnerable populations—whether transgender youth or desperate immigrants—Trump’s policies on Day 9 prioritized control over empathy, division over unity. They undermine the promise of a nation that champions individual liberty and offers refuge to those in need, replacing it with a vision that feels punitive and exclusionary. For a country built on the idea of opportunity, these moves are a step away from the dream that inspires so many, both at home and abroad.
Banning gender-affirming care for minors through public insurance infringes on personal and familial decision-making, denying young people access to medical care deemed necessary by professionals. This sets a precedent for government overreach into private lives, undermining individual freedom. Revoking TPS for Venezuelans disregards America’s legacy as a beacon of hope for those fleeing persecution. Deporting people to a dangerous and unstable Venezuela prioritizes political posturing over human lives, damaging the U.S.’s moral credibility globally.
What’s the Point?
The point is: this is what it looks like when power forgets its purpose. When government becomes a tool for vengeance instead of service, a show of strength instead of a source of support.
It’s a politics of fear, where efficiency means gutting institutions, freedom means denying it to others, and patriotism is measured by obedience, not principle. What’s at stake isn’t just the damage done to civil servants, or veterans, or trans teens, or immigrants. It’s the kind of country we become if we let this happen without calling it what it is: a government that works only for the powerful, at the direct expense of everyone else. And it had only been 9 days…
See you tomorrow for Day 10.