Trump's Reckless Flurry of Firings Could Have Disastrous Repercussions

Also a piano could fall on your head out of nowhere. Where's the lie?

Truth was a big deal in our house when my daughters were growing up. “You could literally kill someone,” I told the girls on a loop, “and I could find a way to forgive you. Under certain circumstances, I might even help you bury the body. But if you lie to me about it, you’re on your own.”

Lies are slippery suckers. Most decent people would agree, in theory at least, that honesty is the best policy, but then you find yourself at a dinner party and the host asks How’s the chicken? and the truth is I’ve never had a worse meal or even imagined such unappealing food existed. So sometimes, out of kindness, we round the truth’s sharp edges. The grit of sandpaper we use will vary from day to day and relationship to relationship and could range from, “Next time I might take it out of the oven a minute or thirty sooner,” to “I love it, I’m just forcing myself to stop at a few bites so I can enjoy it again tomorrow.”

NOTE: If you ask your partner “do these pants make my butt look big?”
you’re also on your own.

But unless you’re gallantly trying to spare someone’s feelings or you don’t want to ruin a surprise, most lies are told out of self-preservation (“Shoot, I never got your message.”), for personal gain (“I thrive in a fast-paced environment.”), or to get people to do something they otherwise wouldn’t (“Did you put away your toys like I asked you to? Remember, Santa’s watching.”). It’s one thing if the lie merely benefits the liar in some way; it’s another thing entirely when it actually hurts the recipient; when deception stops being a social lubricant and instead becomes a tool of coercion, manipulation, oppression, or some combination of the three.

We expect a certain level of spin from a salesman trying to close a deal or a politician jockeying for votes, but we were made to believe that we could trust the institutions we rely on to guide our choices and keep us from grave harm. When the media distorts facts, cherry-picks figures, or intentionally misleads the masses, the stakes aren’t just a bruised ego or a wasted meal—they’re escalating conflicts, false narratives, lost freedoms, public panic, and perilous policies that ultimately shape our lives.

Contrary to common belief, lies aren’t only told in whispers; as often as not, they’re blasted from every screen we own.

“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth,” the saying (routinely attributed to infamous Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels) goes. Don’t believe it? Kindly enjoy a quick pop quiz:

• If you swallow your gum, how long will it take to digest?

• What were George Washington’s teeth made of?

• What happens if you cross your eyes too long or too often?

• How long must you wait after eating a meal before swimming if you don’t want to immediately sink like a pregnant hippo?

• Whose mouth is cleaner: yours or your dog’s?

*Answers: 24-72 hours; a combination of animal and human teeth; literally nothing; doesn’t matter; you’re both gross.

If the media is made up of nothing but a bunch of spin doctors, Politico is DJ Khaled.

Case in point: We heard and saw all over the socials that USAID had paid Politico $8.2 million for subscriptions. But, you guys, that was fake news! Trump lying again. Musk abusing the power of his platform to amplify a conspiracy. In reality, USAID actually only funded $44,000 worth of Politico subscriptions, the media was quick to insist:

From what I can find online, technically, the “fact-checkers” are correct. USAID did “only” spend $44,000 on Politico subscriptions. $8.2 million is what the entire federal government—of which USAID is merely one agency—was doling out to help prop up just that single propaganda machine. So even though the only part people really cared about was true (our tax dollars were funding biased reporting), the publicists-in-journalists’-clothing focused on a technicality—in perfect unison, to boot—to deflect attention from the damning facts.

Take Politico’s most recent hit piece on DOGE: “Stunned federal workers brace for the real-world repercussions of Trump’s purges,” the headline bellowed. The article goes on to detail the unprecedented mass chaos and destruction we are about to experience as a “host of services vanish.”

Cue the locusts.

Never in a single editorial have I seen more hyperbolic half-truths, unfounded doomsday predictions, or misleading implications dumped on an unsuspecting populace. Since you’re likely to hear a chorus of this exact nonsense, I’m going to break down some of the more outrageous claims and counter them with a little reality check.

THE CLAIM: “At the U.S. Forest Service, where some 3,400 workers are slated to be cut, wildfire prevention will be curtailed as the West grapples with a destructive fire season that has destroyed millions of acres in California.”

THE FACTS: The U.S. Forest Service employs 35,000 people, so the cut represents less than ten percent of the workforce and excludes firefighters and law enforcement. The terminations target primarily probationary employees, a group that is commonly let go during transitions. In other words, cool your jets, Karen.

THE CLAIM: “‘Morale is tanked,’ said a forest service official close to the situation.”

THE FACTS: “Jenna is the best writer on Substack,” said an anonymous subscriber.

THE CLAIM: “Almost half of [the CDC’s] 2,800 probationary employees were cut while about 400 employees appeared to have taken the “buy-out” offer, meaning the agency responsible for protecting Americans from disease outbreaks and other health hazards [emphasis mine] will lose about a tenth of its workforce.”

THE FACTS: The CDC has around 13,000 employees, including more than 2,000 who work in other countries. Again, “probationary employees” are not experienced, essential workers. Also protecting Americans from disease outbreaks and other health hazards hahahaha don’t make me laugh. ‘Bye, guys! Maybe Kelly could use some temps who prefer remote work. You never know.

THE CLAIM: “[The firings] could also imperil Trump’s own plans to boost energy production on public land if there aren’t enough employees in place to steadily process oil and gas drilling permits.”

THE FACTS: Eating donuts could imperil your health if you scarf down three dozen old-fashioneds every morning. Speculation is fun!

THE CLAIM: “‘For sure there will be accidental firings,’ [another unnamed] employee said.”

THE FACTS: “For sure there will be people who love this Substack,” a source close to this Substack said. (Also, what’s an accidental firing? “Dang it, I tripped and accidentally fired Harold. Third time this week.”)

THE CLAIM: “Haphazard cuts at General Services Administration could be* disastrous for the millions of Americans who rely on the agency’s services.”

THE FACTS: Per their own government website, the GSA “[provides] workplaces by constructing, managing, and preserving government buildings and by leasing and managing commercial real estate.” Like the 7,500 buildings DOGE found sitting empty? Great job, GSA! [*also could not be. We don’t know, TBH.]

THE CLAIM: “The flurry of firings across agencies has raised anxieties and also halted productivity among the federal workforce who have survived the mass firings so far.”

THE FACTS: Oh, you can’t be expected to work because it’s all too much, I mean, what if you’re next? Welcome to the real world, Princess. Maybe try making yourself so good at your job that you’re literally unfireable. It’s an option.

THE CLAIM: “At the Department of Energy, cuts could directly impair management of a sprawling network of nuclear weapons storage and disposal sites, as well as efforts to combat nuclear terrorism around the world.”

THE FACTS: The DOE has more than 100,000 employees, 65,000 of which work for the National Nuclear Safety Administration. A total of 325 NNSA staffers were let go—so one half of one percent of the total—and I’d be willing to bet my last nickel they were not the ones who know how to manage nuclear weapons and combat nuclear terrorism.

THE CLAIM: “Holly Otterbein, Natalie Fertig, Kelsey Tamborrino and Brakkton Booker contributed to this report.”

THE FACTS: Holly Otterbein, Natalie Fertig, Kelsey Tamborrino and Brakkton Booker if those are even real names might want to enroll in actual journalism school, where they teach things like quoting reputable, first-hand sources, avoiding bias and conflicts of interest, editing for accuracy, and not building an entire dispatch on speculation.

Alas, the media is going to media. Good news doesn’t sell ad space. Painting government efficiency measures as nefarious and portraying efforts to cut federal spending as a categorical disaster (rather than a desperately needed cost-saving initiative) keeps the public in panic mode, which is right where they want us. Reporting on exactly how wasteful our government has been and the steps the new administration is taking to undo the damage would undermine the carefully crafted narrative of bureaucratic benevolence and indispensability. It’s faster, easier, and far more beneficial to just… lie.

“We have been excellent stewards of your generous tax monies. Really.”

Truth be told, the lies are wearing thin. The media isn’t rounding the edges of fact anymore; they’ve taken a belt sander to it and are trying to drown us in the dust. And I don’t know about you, but I refuse to help bury the bodies.

What do you think of DOGE’s performance so far? LMK below. And wishing everyone except Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Biden #SorryNotSorry a very happy President’s Day! Hope you get to spend the day like a soon-to-be-terminated federal employee (i.e. not working and getting paid). ;)