Government

Home Government

Trump Admin. To Direct Agency Leaders To Brace For ‘Large-scale Reductions In Force’

3
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54325633746/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159707159

The Trump administration will direct heads of agencies across the federal government to prepare to initiate “large-scale reductions in force” and develop reorganization plans by mid-March, Fox News reports. 

Fox News Digital obtained the memo that will be sent Wednesday to agency heads by Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought and acting Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Charles Ezell. The memo directs them to prepare to eliminate roles and submit plans for reorganization by March 13. 

Notably, the memo states that government positions “necessary to meet law enforcement, border security, national security, immigration enforcement, or public safety responsibilities” are exempt from the order, as well as officials nominated and appointed to positions requiring presidential appointment or Senate confirmation, officials in the Executive Office of the President and U.S. Postal Service workers. 

The memo is titled “Guidance on agency RIF and Reorganization Plans Requested by Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Workforce Optimization Initiative.” 

Read:

The memo points to the president’s February executive order, which directed agencies to “eliminate waste, bloat and insularity” in order to “empower American families, workers, taxpayers, and our system of Government itself.” 

The memo provides guidance to agency heads about the reduction-in-force and reorganization plans, along with instructions for how those plans should be submitted to OMB and OPM. 

“President Trump required that ‘Agency Heads shall promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force, consistent with applicable law,’” the memo states, noting that agencies have to submit reorganization plans “no later than March 13, 2025.”

The reorganization plans, according to the memo, should provide “better service for the American people; increased productivity; a significant reduction in the number of full-time equivalent positions by eliminating positions that are not required; a reduced real property footprint; and reduced budget topline.” 

President Trump said during Wednesday’s White House Cabinet meeting that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin has floated cutting the agency’s workforce by up to 65 percent.

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

White House Budget Office Rescinds Federal Funding Freeze

4
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Just in…

The Trump’s administration’s Office of Management and Budget released a memo Wednesday rescinding a controversial order that froze a wide swath of federal financial assistance, which had paralyzed many federal programs and caused a huge uproar on Capitol Hill.

The decision came amid strong behind-the-scenes pushback from Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill, according to a GOP senator who was apprised of the decision to reverse the policy order.

The reversal was signed by Matthew Vaeth, the acting director of the White House budget office.

The order, issued Monday evening from Matthew Vaeth, the acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, sent shockwaves across the country and drew outrage from politicians

The funding freeze was originally scheduled to kick in at 5:00 pm ET on Tuesday and expected to remain in place through at least mid-February, The New York Times reported. Vaeth’s memo ordered that all federal agencies “must temporarily pause all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance, and other relevant agency activities that may be implicated by the executive orders, including, but not limited to, financial assistance for foreign aid, nongovernmental organizations, DEI, woke gender ideology, and the green new deal.”

The memo swiftly drew a legal challenge filed by several nonprofit groups, arguing that it violated both the First Amendment and federal law on how executive orders can be implemented, and the plaintiffs secured an emergency hearing that took place just minutes before the funding freeze was set to go into effect.

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

Letitia James Sues Federal Government

The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) sued the federal government Tuesday, arguing that a new Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) policy unlawfully ties major federal funding streams to compliance with the Trump administration’s new restrictions on gender-related medical care for minors.

The lawsuit challenges an HHS policy that, according to the attorneys general, conditions billions of dollars in health, education and research funding on compliance with a presidential executive order addressing sex and gender-related treatments.

Fox News reports:

“The federal government is trying to force states to choose between their values and the vital funding their residents depend on,” James said in a statement. “This policy threatens healthcare for families, life-saving research, and education programs that help young people thrive in favor of denying the dignity and existence of transgender people.”

The dispute stems from President Donald Trump’s January 2025 executive order directing HHS to take steps to curb what the administration calls “chemical and surgical mutilation” of children. President Trump has made limits on transgender-related medical care for minors a central part of his second-term domestic agenda.

NYC Public Advocate Tish James via Wikimedia Commons

Last month, HHS announced a sweeping package of proposed regulatory actions aimed at ending what it described as “sex-rejecting procedures” for minors. In guidance accompanying the announcement, the department warned that doctors and health systems could be excluded from federal health programs — including Medicare and Medicaid — if they provide treatments such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and gender surgeries to minors.

James’ lawsuit argues that the federal government is using funding leverage to pressure states, hospitals, universities, and other institutions to change policies on transgender care.

The attorneys general also claim HHS lacks legal authority to impose the conditions and is attempting to rewrite federal law through executive action. They argue the policy is vague and fails to spell out what recipients must do to remain compliant, creating uncertainty for states and institutions that rely on federal dollars.

Failure to comply with the policy could lead to termination of grants, repayment of funds already spent, or potential civil or criminal penalties, according to the complaint.

The lawsuit asks a federal court to declare the policy unlawful and block HHS from enforcing it, allowing states and institutions to continue receiving federal funding without changing existing policies.

The legal fight also adds to the long-running political and courtroom clash between Trump and James. James has positioned herself as one of the country’s most aggressive state-level opponents of Trump, repeatedly using New York’s legal powers to pursue high-profile cases involving his businesses and allies. Trump has frequently accused James of pursuing politically motivated investigations.

Trump officials have defended the executive order as a child-protection measure and a pushback against what they say is ideological medicine being imposed through federal agencies and school systems.

The case is expected to intensify a national debate already playing out in Congress and state legislatures, where Republican-led states have moved to restrict or ban gender-related treatments for minors, while Democrat-led states have expanded protections and access.

READ NEXT: Sen. Marsha Blackburn Pushes To Make Fraud A Deportable Offense

Texas Blocks Biden From Continuing To Sell Border Wall Materials

1
Construction continues on new border wall system project near Yuma, AZ. Recently constructed border wall near Yuma, Arizona on June 3, 2020. CBP photo by Jerry Glaser.

President-elect Trump celebrated the blocked sale of border wall materials following a Friday ruling.

The incoming president, in a Saturday Truth Social post, called the ruling a “major, crucial WIN for America,” calling out President Biden and “his cronies” for seeking to stall the construction of the border wall, which was a central piece of Trump’s first administration.

“The Judge has also ordered an investigation into the illegal selling of the materials, which will expose just how corrupt and anti-American Radical Democrats are,” he added.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced the victory in a statement on Friday evening after he filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration “to uncover potential legal violations” the administration was committing by selling off the materials.

“We have successfully blocked the Biden Administration from disposing of any further border wall materials before President Trump takes office,” Paxton said. “This follows our major victory forcing Biden to build the wall, and we will hold his Administration accountable for illegally subverting our Nation’s border security until their very last day in power, especially where their actions are clearly motivated by a desire to thwart President-elect Trump’s immigration agenda.”

The Biden administration agreed to an order that prevents it from disposing of any further border wall materials over the next 30 days—allowing President Trump to use those materials as he sees fit.

Paxton’s office added:

If it is shown that the Biden Administration disposed of border wall materials purchased with funds subject to that injunction in violation of a court order—or that the Department of Justice made misrepresentations regarding the border materials that have been auctioned off—this would constitute unethical and sanctionable conduct, and the responsible parties could be held in contempt of court.

Videos obtained exclusively by The Daily Wire from a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agent earlier this month show unused sections of the wall being hauled away on the back of flatbed trucks from a section of the border just south of Tucson, a hotspot for illegal crossings during the Biden administration. 

House Democrat Puts Trump Chief Of Staff ‘On Notice’ Over Vanity Fair Article

4
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54327362226/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159757968

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) is escalating his rhetoric against the Trump White House, warning chief of staff Susie Wiles to preserve internal communications as he vows to launch investigations into what he claims is political “retribution” by President Donald Trump.

The threat follows months of controversy surrounding criminal referrals involving prominent Democrats, including Swalwell himself, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), and New York Attorney General Letitia James—cases Democrats have repeatedly framed as evidence of a politicized justice system, despite a lack of formal charges to date.

In a video posted Monday to his social media accounts, Swalwell said he had formally put Trump officials “on notice,” citing remarks by Wiles in a recent Vanity Fair interview that he claims amount to an admission that Trump is willing to pursue perceived enemies when opportunities arise.

“I want you to hear from me first. I’m going on offense against Donald Trump, and I just put senior Trump officials on notice,” Swalwell said. “Donald Trump once again is trying to weaponize the Department of Justice to go after his enemies list. That’s me, Adam Schiff, Tish James, and (Federal Reserve Governor) Lisa Cook.”

Background: Referrals, Not Charges

The confrontation comes after Trump-appointed Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte referred Swalwell to the Justice Department earlier this year over alleged mortgage and tax irregularities. Swalwell dismissed the referral as politically motivated. Similar referrals or allegations have been made against Schiff and James, though James’ case was dismissed in early December.

Republicans have argued that referrals themselves are routine and that Democrats are attempting to preemptively discredit oversight efforts by framing them as retaliation—particularly given Democrats’ own extensive use of investigations, subpoenas, and prosecutions during Trump’s first term.

The Vanity Fair Interview That Sparked the Fallout

Swalwell’s latest escalation centers on comments made by Wiles—widely viewed as one of Trump’s most disciplined and media-averse operatives—in an unusually candid Vanity Fair interview that has drawn criticism from both sides of the aisle.

When pressed by the magazine about whether prosecutions of Trump critics could appear vindictive, Wiles acknowledged the political optics were problematic.

“I mean, people could think it does look vindictive. I can’t tell you why you shouldn’t think that,” she said.

Wiles added that Trump is not consumed by revenge but does not shy away from confrontation when opportunities present themselves.

“I don’t think he wakes up thinking about retribution,” she said. “But when there’s an opportunity, he will go for it.”

On New York Attorney General Letitia James—who built her political profile around investigations and prosecutions of Trump—Wiles was more blunt.

“Well, that might be the one retribution.”

The remarks quickly circulated online and were seized upon by Democrats as proof that Trump’s critics are being targeted for political reasons, despite the absence of new indictments.

Swalwell Escalates With Threat of Investigations

Swalwell framed Wiles’ comments as an admission that undermines claims that the referrals are routine or apolitical. He said his office has already sent a letter to Wiles demanding the preservation of records.

“So we just sent a letter to Susie Wiles telling her, save your sh*t: your emails, your text messages, everything that records or documents Donald Trump going after his political enemies,” Swalwell said. “Save it because we’re coming for it because we want the truth.”

He vowed to pursue inquiries into Trump’s decision-making process and the actions of his administration.

Watch:

“What did Trump know? What did he order? What do others do on his behalf?” Swalwell asked. “We’re not going away. And the American people are always going to choose the truth over Trump.”

Santos Breaks Silence Following Trump Commutation

By U.S. House Office of Photography - https://santos.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/santos.house.gov/files/evo-media-image/rep_santos_george_official.jpg, Public Domain,

Disgraced former congressman George Santos broke his silence after President Donald Trump unexpectedly commuted his sentence for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft.

During an interview on Sunday, Santos said he wanted to make it clear he was not “getting away” with his crimes.

“I understand people want to make this into ‘He’s getting away with it.’ I’m not getting away with it, I was the first person to ever go to federal prison for a civil violation … I don’t want to focus on trying to rehash the past and want to take the experience and do good and move on with the future. Repentance is an understatement. I have been dealt a second chance,” Santos said.

As part of his plea deal, Santos agreed to pay nearly $600,000 in restitution and forfeiture.

Asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” if he planned to pay back donors, Santos said he would “do my best to do whatever the law requires of me.”

According to the clemency grant, a photo of which was posted on X by U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin, Trump granted Santos an “immediate commutation of his entire sentence to time served with no further fines, restitution, probation, supervised release, or other conditions.”

In an interview on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends Weekend,” Santos said, “I do not have any pendencies with the law anymore. I have no restitution. I have no probation.”

Santos, 37, was less than three months into serving a seven-year sentence in federal prison when President Trump shared the news.

In announcing the commutation on his social media platform, Trump said Santos had been “horribly mistreated” and called him a “bit of a ‘rogue,'” but “at least Santos had the Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!”

Santos pleaded guilty in August 2024 and admitted to claiming relatives had made contributions to his campaign when, in fact, they had not. Santos conceded he was trying to meet the fundraising threshold to qualify for financial help from the National Republican Congressional Committee.

He also stipulated that he committed other fraud, including charging donor credit cards without authorization and convincing donors to give money by falsely stating the money would be used for TV ads. He also stipulated he stole public money by applying for and receiving unemployment benefits during the pandemic to which he was not entitled.

Santos claimed Sunday that others, like former President Joe Biden, had also used their pardon power for politically charged reasons, “So pardon me if I’m not paying too much attention to the pearl-clutching of the outrage of my critics, and of the people, predominantly on the left, who are going to go out there and try to make a big deal out of something like this.”

“People are going to like me. People are going to hate me. It doesn’t matter whoever gets clemency in the future, or whoever that person might be,” he said. “I’m pretty confident if President Trump had pardoned Jesus Christ  off the cross, he would have had critics. So that’s just the reality of our country.”

Santos said he wasn’t ruling out future political plans, but said he likely wouldn’t consider it within the”next decade.”

“I’m 37 years old. I can tell you this, not that I can see in the next decade,” he said. “I am all politicked out.”

Santos said his time behind bars made him want to focus on prison reform. 

“America today has 250,000 federal inmates, approximately, and I think it would be much nicer to look at reducing that number. And if I can be a part of helping that, I would, I think that would be a great road to follow in the future,” Santos said.

Senate Panel Blocks Trump’s FBI HQ Plan

I, Aude, CC BY-SA 3.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

A Senate committee voted Thursday afternoon to block President Donald Trump’s plan to keep the FBI headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C., escalating a simmering power struggle over the agency’s future location.

The dispute pits the White House against a bipartisan coalition in Congress that had long backed moving the agency’s headquarters out of the decaying J. Edgar Hoover Building and into suburban Maryland.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) introduced an amendment to the fiscal 2026 Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill that would restrict funding exclusively to the original relocation site in Greenbelt, Maryland.

The measure gained unexpected bipartisan traction, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) siding with Democrats. The decision to cross party lines prompted a backlash from several Republican senators, who argued the decision was outside the committee’s authority.

Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) pushed back, saying the panel does not “get to choose sites.”

The dispute led Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) to call for a “very long recess,” delaying further consideration of the bill. Collins said she hopes the standoff can be resolved before the next markup session.

“I think it’s better we withdraw the bill for now than watch this bill go down,” she said.

The panel is not expected to reconvene before next week.

Trump’s plan would relocate the FBI to the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center — a federal property just blocks from the White House. The administration argues the move keeps the FBI close to other national security agencies while avoiding the massive cost of building a new complex from scratch.

But Maryland officials aren’t backing down, determined to secure the economic and strategic benefits of hosting the new FBI campus.

Politico has more on the reaction and outlook from lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

The blowup exasperated some Democrats on the panel, who questioned why the Republican majority could not accept Van Hollen’s provision. “Because there was a bipartisan amendment adopted we’re going to tank this bill?” asked Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz.

Others expressed confidence the issue would ultimately get settled.

“I honestly think we’ll be able to resolve it,” said Washington Sen. Patty Murray, the panel’s top Democrat. “We’ve always been able to work out issues.”

Murkowski, who was spotted chatting on the floor on Thursday afternoon with Murray, said she had “volunteered” a path for members to hit pause on the bill and “get a little more information about what it is the administration is seeking to do with the [new headquarters plan], because it seems to me that is kind of the blank spot right now.”

Despite cautious optimism, Thursday’s vote throws another wrench into the increasingly politicized debate over the FBI’s future headquarters — and highlights the broader friction between Congress and the Trump administration.

READ NEXT: Trump Mulling Federal Takeover Of DC To Tackle Crime

Federal Judge Orders Limited DOGE Access To Treasury Payment System

10
UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

On Thursday, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from obtaining access to certain Treasury Department payment records.

Treasury officials “will not provide access to any payment record or payment system of records maintained within the [Treasury] Bureau of Fiscal Service,” Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly wrote in a temporary restraining order.

That program handles an estimated 90% of federal payments. 

The order comes after the Justice Department on Wednesday agreed in a proposed court order to limit access to the sensitive records to only two “special government employees” within DOGE, who will have read-only permission. Kollar-Kotelly approved the motion in a brief order Thursday.

Several government employee unions brought suit over who could access the material as part of a government-wide evaluation of programs and systems, led by DOGE. 

The lawsuit claimed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent allowed improper access to Elon Musk’s team, potentially exposing personal financial information to unauthorized individuals. 

Under the order, only Musk ally Tom Krause, CEO of Cloud Software Group, and Marko Elez – an engineer and former Musk company employee — will continue to have access to Treasury’s Fiscal Service, but they will not be allowed to make any changes to the program. 

Former FBI Director Indicted But Trump Remarks Signal Potential Problems

1
Image via Wikimedia Commons

A grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia has indicted former FBI Director James Comey.

Comey was reportedly indicted on one count of making false statements and one count of obstruction of justice for allegedly lying under oath to Congress. The 12 grand jurors reportedly declined to indict on additional charges.

Comey declared he’s “not afraid” in a video posted to his Instagram responding to his historic indictment on two charges.

“My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn’t imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn’t either,” began Comey. “Somebody that I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool of a tyrant and she’s right. But I’m not afraid and I hope you’re not either. I hope instead you are engaged. You are paying attention. And you will vote like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does.”

“My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system and I’m innocent,” he concluded. “So let’s have a trial and keep the faith.”

Comey’s son-in-law, a senior federal prosecutor, abruptly resigned Thursday just hours after the former FBI director was indicted on charges of false statements and obstruction.

Troy A. Edwards Jr., a national security prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia, stepped down Thursday night with a brief note to his boss.

“To uphold my oath to the Constitution and country, I hereby resign as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia in the Department of Justice effective immediately,” Edwards wrote in the letter, posted to X.

The case follows the firing of Comey’s daughter, Maurene Comey, a federal prosecutor who has since sued the Justice Department, claiming retaliation tied to her family name.

President Donald Trump unloaded on James Comey, deeming him a “destroyer of lives” in an early morning Truth Social post Friday that also saw him brand the former FBI director a “DIRTY COP.”

On Friday morning, the president unleashed on Comey as “corrupt,” insisting that the former FBI boss “lied” in his testimony and demanding he pay “a very big price”:

Whether you like Corrupt James Comey or not, and I can’t imagine too many people liking him, HE LIED! It is not a complex lie, it’s a very simple, but IMPORTANT one. There is no way he can explain his way out of it. He is a Dirty Cop, and always has been, but he was just assigned a Crooked Joe Biden appointed Judge, so he’s off to a very good start. Nevertheless, words are words, and he wasn’t hedging or in dispute. He was very positive, there was no doubt in his mind about what he said, or meant by saying it. He left himself ZERO margin of error on a big and important answer to a question. He just got unexpectedly caught. James “Dirty Cop” Comey was a destroyer of lives. He knew exactly what he was saying, and that it was a very serious and far reaching lie for which a very big price must be paid! President DJT

Trump followed minutes later with an all caps quip:

JAMES COMEY IS A DIRTY COP. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

Since the indictment, some legal analysts have warned that Trump’s social media posts about Comey could arm the defense with an argument for a selective prosecution motion to dismiss the indictment.

GOP Rep. Introduces Bill To Stop Foreign Adversaries From Buying American Homes

Republican Texas Rep. Chip Roy introduced legislation Tuesday to block foreign adversaries and state sponsors of terrorism from purchasing homes and residential property in the United States.

The bill, obtained exclusively by the Daily Caller, would prohibit foreign adversaries, nationals from designated foreign countries of concern and state sponsors of terrorism from acquiring American housing. It would also require existing property holdings covered under the legislation to be sold within two years to American citizens.

Roy said the legislation is intended to prevent hostile foreign powers from gaining influence over American land and housing markets while many Americans struggle with rising housing costs.

“American homes belong to American families — not the Chinese Communist Party, foreign Islamists, or our geopolitical foes,” Roy told the Daily Caller.

“While Americans struggle to afford housing, hostile regimes are buying up our land and neighborhoods,” Roy said. “This bill slams the door on foreign adversaries owning American housing and forces them to sell what they already control. We’re putting America’s homes back in American hands.”

The proposal comes amid growing concern among congressional Republicans over foreign ownership of American land, particularly purchases linked to Chinese investors and entities associated with the Chinese Communist Party.

According to a U.S. Department of Agriculture report, foreign ownership of American land totaled nearly 46 million acres at the end of 2024, representing more than $86 billion in value.

Documents reviewed by the Daily Caller indicate that as much as 338,000 acres owned by foreign adversaries could become subject to forced divestiture under Roy’s legislation, totaling an estimated $1.1 billion in property value.

Texas — Roy’s home state — has become one of the focal points in the debate over foreign land ownership.

The USDA report found that non-Americans own more than 5.6 million acres across Texas. Under Roy’s proposal, properties in 20 Texas counties totaling roughly 124,000 acres could potentially be required to change ownership.

Roy and other Republicans have repeatedly raised alarms about Chinese-linked land purchases near military installations, critical infrastructure and growing residential developments.

One Texas development cited by the Daily Caller reportedly spans 342 acres zoned for residential and commercial use, with roughly 70% allegedly tied to Chinese Communist Party-linked investors.

Another property linked to Chinese ownership reportedly stretches across more than 123,000 acres in 15 Texas counties and is estimated to be worth approximately $900 million, according to USDA figures.

Several Republican-led states, including Florida and Texas, have already pursued or enacted laws limiting property ownership by citizens or entities connected to adversarial foreign governments.

Supporters of such measures argue they are necessary for national security, food security and economic sovereignty, especially as geopolitical tensions between the United States and China continue escalating.

Roy’s legislation additionally reflects growing Republican focus on housing affordability as broader economic concerns remain central heading into the 2026 election cycle.

The issue also intersects with the national debate over birthright citizenship, which is currently being litigated before the Supreme Court.

Critics of current birthright citizenship policy have pointed to reports over the years of Chinese nationals traveling to the United States specifically to give birth — sometimes referred to as “birth tourism” — in order to secure automatic American citizenship for their children. Federal authorities have previously investigated businesses accused of helping wealthy foreign nationals coordinate such operations, including arranging housing, medical care and travel logistics for expectant mothers entering the United States.

Others have raised the alarm over reports involving foreign nationals paying American surrogates to carry and deliver children in the United States, after which the children obtain citizenship and are then taken back to China shortly after birth.

Supporters of stricter immigration and property ownership laws argue such arrangements could create long-term loopholes allowing foreign adversaries, including those tied to the CCP, to maintain indirect or proxy influence over American land and assets.

This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. Republished with permission.