Is Trump trying to purge the government of disloyal elements?

In his State of the Union speech this week Donald Trump asked Congress to give him the power to purge cabinet agencies. He said:

"Tonight I call on the Congress to empower every Cabinet secretary with the authority to reward good workers and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people."

In other words, Donald Trump is saying, "I would like Ryan Zinke over at Interior to be able to fire the government employees who are standing up for our public lands, I would like Scott Pruitt over at the EPA to be able to fire anybody who works for the Environmental Protection Agency who's really working to protect the environment. We'll replace them all with toadies provided to us by Monsanto and the big chemical companies - Koch Industries, ExxonMobil. They've got a lot of people that they'd be glad to stock the EPA with."

That's essentially what he was saying. Now, congressman Mark Pocan said on the show that he thought that this was maybe an effort to destroy the unions that represent federal employees, because he had seen Scott Walker do that with state employees in the state of Wisconsin, because the federal employees unions will go to bat for people who are arbitrarily fired.

And I think that would be a twofer, but I think the real big issue here is how you run a government. He was asking Congress to undo laws that have been passed over literally the last hundred years or more - this is not some recent unionization thing.

Back before Abraham Lincoln, prior to the Civil War and for the first 30 years or so after the Civil War, the executive branch of government was one of the most corrupt branches of government. The opinion of government had fallen so low because it was so corrupt.

Here's how it worked: every time a new president came in, they literally fired everybody and replaced all those hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands as time went on, and the federal government got larger and larger. They would fire everybody and replace them with cronies and donors. So the result of that was just massive widespread corruption within the executive branch - within the branch of government that is under the president's purview: within the Justice Department, within the EPA, within the Transportation Department, within the Education Department, within Health and Human Services. Whatever it would be if those agencies existed back a hundred years ago, they would be totally corrupt.

The Pentagon, the military, totally corrupt, filled with cronies of Ulysses S Grant, for example. So Congress said, we've got to do something about this. So what they did was they said okay, we're going to set it up so that at the highest level, the secretaries, the director and the assistant director, they can be appointed by the president.

So he gets to make I think it's around 3500 appointments, there's about 3500 people in the federal government that the president can say, okay I can put my campaign donor, I can put Betsy DeVos in as Secretary of Education - she made big contributions to my campaign, she's a multi-billionaire and she cares about education, she wants to have our federal support for public schools decimated and replace it all with private school money and particularly Christian school money. So cool I can do that.

But he can't go to his Department of Education employees and just randomly fire them because they support public education or because they might be registered Democrats. You can't do that and the government, our government, our Congress, a hundred years ago or in that neighborhood passed laws to put these into place to prevent corruption.

Now, with that background listen again to what Donald Trump said in his State of the Union speech:

"Tonight I call on the Congress to empower every Cabinet secretary with the authority to reward good workers and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people."

Now what the hell does 'fail the American people' mean? That is not a phrase of law. Those are political weasel words. So what he wants, what Trump is asking for, in my opinion, and I believe I'm absolutely right on this, is he wants Scott Pruitt to be able to do a purge of the Environmental Protection Agency - those damn people who believe in global climate change, we've got to get them out of there.

And I was shocked when I heard this.

As Mark Sumner writes over at Daily Kos, "Trump's State of the Union included a call to purge the government of disloyal elements". He writes:

"Most government workers are protected from being fired without cause explicitly so that each change in administration doesn't bring with it a wholesale swap of every slot. Those rules were put in place more than a century ago after the government faced enormous problems with patronage and corruption explicitly because every slot in the existing government was open to being flushed when a new resident moved into the White House."

What Trump is trying to do is he's trying to undo a hundred years of anti-corruption laws.

This is huge.

Comments

HotCoffee's picture
HotCoffee 8 years 9 weeks ago
#1

# 45

Finally a reasoned and well thought out response... agreeable or not.

HotCoffee's picture
HotCoffee 8 years 9 weeks ago
#2

All politicians spend most of their time raising money.....from whom??? Corporations...that rule the world.

Vote with your pocket book. It might not be much, it's better than stupid hats...and loud vulgar remarks.

jefflisse's picture
jefflisse 8 years 9 weeks ago
#3

Yes Legend. I remember it well. My parents followed it closely.
There is striking similarities. But also stark differences.

When Nixon had Archibald Cox fired as the special prosecutor of the Watergate investigation. It energized congress to start the impeachment process. But back then both branches of congress were controlled by the Democrats.
Unfortunately that's not the case this time..
[Another reason why the midterms are so IMPORTANT!]
Also..
Back in the early 70s, we had hundreds of legitimate, unbiased, news agencies that actually had investigative journalists.
Unfortunately that's also not the case this time..
Now we have a small handful of giant corporate media conglomerates with slanted political ideologies, who cater to a specific group of followers. And their only interest is in spreading propaganda and making a profit... Offering nothing more than sensationalism with one line headlines. And absolutely no investigative journalism anymore.

And one of the most stark differences between then and now is..
Back then we actually had a well informed public who (regardless of political views) wanted to see a crook brought to justice!!

HotCoffee's picture
HotCoffee 8 years 9 weeks ago
#4

So looking back we know some in the FBI sabatoged MLK...to the point of trying to get him to commit sucide... so we know there can be corruption. Why not lay everything out on the table so we can all see what's going on?

I don't trust whats going on especially considering all the bias texts between the lovers,et al. Do you? Why?

Why have SECRET courts? Lay out the case for all to see.

Chapin1's picture
Chapin1 8 years 9 weeks ago
#5

What is interesting is the "distraction" factor so common among those that just will not face the simple truth. Why is it that those that think to the "far right" (what the hell is that supposed to mean?) call the "other side" leftie/socialists and so on...and so on.. Jeepers, get off of the Hillary Clinton downer...for christ's sake...enough! When I was young and in trouble for something I did, I was not allowed to try and side-step by calling out what someone else did, or was doing. Okay, already! Hillary did not win, is not the president and has nothing to do with what Mr. Trump says and does! He does that all on his very own. By the way, the Presidential Campaign is over, Trump got elected. Legally or otherwise (unfortunately, from my point of view).

I don't necessarily agree with her or tactics she used, is using, will use in the future. What I am sick of is the far-right "faction". The damn civil war is over, and if a person can't stick to the problem at hand without drifting off into la la land, they will never solve any problem or even come close to finding resolution. You just want to hate and jab at others all the time. I am not responsible for anyone else's actions. I stand alone. If others do something I don't think is the proper or right thing to do, I have the right to disagree and call them out on it. Quit getting off on personal tangents and stick to the relevancy of the issues.

jefflisse's picture
jefflisse 8 years 9 weeks ago
#6

Hotcoffee #50

From what I've "now" read about Tulsi Gabbard, yes she sounds like a politician l would support for higher office. Elizabeth Warren would be another. But l NEVER was a Hillary supporter...
Yes, l went into the voting booth ( and held my nose ever so tight) and pulled the lever for her. And if circumstance repeated.. Considering the two choices we had... I'd do it again!
And whats this shit... throwing rocks into the left wing sexual predator pond?
Do you really want to go there?
Because the right wing sexual predator pond is wide and deep too!!
How about Roger Ailes or Bill O'Reilly or Roy Moore, or Patrick Meehan... Or... The womanizing, " pussy grabbing," commander n chief, himself!!
Hypocrisy cuts both ways...

Legend 8 years 9 weeks ago
#7

Page 2 #3. I agree with your 3 points. Especially that in 1974 we did not have Fox News brainwashing the weak minded. Interesting it was Nixon that proposed GOP TV which eventually became Fox News. Your third point is the result of Fox News and others. The Republican Party has dumbed down the population.

Another excellent Democratic Progressive Candidate is Kamala Harris.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris 

Dianereynolds's picture
Dianereynolds 8 years 9 weeks ago
#8

HotCoffee, I would love to see Tulsi Gabbard team up with another "non politician" and get on the ballot without being stepped on by someone who thinks it is their "right" to the job. Good luck with all that. Trump proved it could be done but I highly doubt the democrat party would ever let that happen.

As for you Rick Steve,

"Diane, It is your constant repetition of low IQ complaining."

Again, I await your version of conservatives "always complaining" here. I am not saying it doesn't happen, but I will feel better when you provide examples for us so we can defend ourselves.

"There is nothing intelligent about it and you are constantly repeating the same thing. Your calling people names is really immature. Where did you get that from?

I quite possibly got that trait from feather brain and pony boy among others. There are plenty of posts right in this very thread in case you are about to search for examples, and by the way, their comments are 10 times more vitriolic than anything I have ever said.

@jefflisse,

I am not fascinated by the genitals of either sex. I am intrigued that adults of either sex would choose to base their cause on the knitting of a little pink pussy hat and dressing up like a vagina while marching in the streets. Now that does cause me to question their mental health. Com'on kids you can do better than that.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 8 years 9 weeks ago
#9

I agree with Jeff...stopgap and deepspace are truly great wordsmiths! Where the hell are you deepspace?... join the fun.

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 8 years 9 weeks ago
#10

Hey Reynolds: Better not dismiss a night of homemade beer and Trump yard sign mischief as anti-fascist Patriot weakness...LMAO.... would be a very big mistake!

HotCoffee's picture
HotCoffee 8 years 9 weeks ago
#11

I'm in my 60's...I have voted a straight Dem ticket every election...up until the last election, therefore there is nothing,,politicaly speaking that I would like more than to forget about Hillary. However that was the other choice that brought us here. I don't think Trump would have had a chance if not for Hillary.

No I don't think anyone should be speaking about our private parts on blogs but it seems to be the main adjective whenever Trumps name is brought up.

Diane... a combo ticket might be the only thing that brings people back to there senses...but I too doubt people being that sane at this point.

I actually believe that the Clintons and Bushes are one big happy evil political family.

I really liked Warren until she joined the Hillary bandwagon I thought she was better than that...Ditto for Bernie. They sold out.

I do think Chapin is correct that the issues are what's important and not an allegance to either side.

Dianereynolds's picture
Dianereynolds 8 years 9 weeks ago
#12

HotCoffee, I could not agree more especially the combo ticket comment which could be very interesting to those in the swamp that is DC.

stopgap's picture
stopgap 8 years 9 weeks ago
#13

Here's a link to an article about Tulsi Gabbard. Something to think about.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democ...

Beware of strangers bearing gifts! Jumping on bandwagons can be hazardous to your health!!

Also, while I appreciate the kind words about my wordsmithing, I'm nothing compared to Deepspace. That guy is amazing!!! Still, I carry on…rant…rant…rant…F'ing Republicans…@#$%X!@…rant…rant...

changeX's picture
changeX 8 years 9 weeks ago
#14

For all the "IT 2017 Pennywise Georgie scene" movie clowns living the in the stormy daniels oops i mean stormy drain stop your trolling, hissing, and clawing.

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From Cracking the Code:
"Thom Hartmann ought to be bronzed. His new book sets off from the same high plane as the last and offers explicit tools and how-to advice that will allow you to see, hear, and feel propaganda when it's directed at you and use the same techniques to refute it. His book would make a deaf-mute a better communicator. I want him on my reading table every day, and if you try one of his books, so will you."
Peter Coyote, actor and author of Sleeping Where I Fall
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann channels the best of the American Founders with voice and pen. His deep attachment to a democratic civil society is just the medicine America needs."
Tom Hayden, author of The Long Sixties and director, Peace and Justice Resource Center.
From Screwed:
"Thom Hartmann’s book explains in simple language and with concrete research the details of the Neo-con’s war against the American middle class. It proves what many have intuited and serves to remind us that without a healthy, employed, and vital middle class, America is no more than the richest Third World country on the planet."
Peter Coyote, Actor and author of Sleeping Where I Fall