SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
layoffs
From Texas to Covid, Trump Washes His Hands of Deaths on His Watch
The president has a long history of refusing to take responsibility and shifting blame on to political rivals.
Jul 10, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump may not be very good at running things, but when it comes to shifting blame, he is truly world class. As the magnitude of the disaster in Texas becomes clearer, the one thing we can be certain of is that Trump will accept none of the responsibility.
He will insist that his decision to have mass layoffs at the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) and National Weather Service (NWS) had nothing to do with the state’s lack of preparedness for the storm and the inadequate response. At this point it is not clear whether the layoffs at the agencies played a role in the warnings given or the speed of the response to the floods.
The Texas offices were clearly understaffed. However, we don’t know whether that impeded their operations in important ways.
He routinely makes absurd and ridiculous statements which would be treated as a major scandal if they came from the mouth of any other politician, but instead are dismissed with an “Oh, that’s Trump” from the media.
We do know that global warming makes events like the Texas floods both more common and more extreme. For that reason, we certainly can blame Trump’s efforts to promote global warming with increased subsidies for fossil fuels and ending support for electric vehicles and clean energy. We can anticipate many more weather disasters in the years head thanks to Trump’s policies.
Weather and natural disasters are far from the only area where Trump refuses to take responsibility for his actions. The economy shrank at a 0.5% annual rate in the first quarter. This was after it grew 2.4% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 2.8% for the full year.
Nearly every forecaster expected the economy to keep growing at a healthy pace through 2025. However, Trump’s tariff threats, budget cuts, and layoffs at the federal level managed to quickly end the economy’s growth streak and push it into negative territory in the first quarter he was in office.
Naturally Trump responded to the bad news on growth by blaming former President Joe Biden for giving him an “economic disaster.” In reality land, Trump was handed the best economy of any president in more than half a century, with low unemployment falling inflation, rising real wages, and a unprecedented boom in factory construction.
Probably the all time classic for Trump denying responsibility was his response to the pandemic. He made it clear that he wasn’t especially concerned about how many people got sick or died from Covid-19, he was only concerned that he not be given the blame.
At the start of the pandemic, there was an outbreak on a cruise ship. Trump said that he wanted the passengers to be kept on the ship so that the number of infections reported in the United States would not increase. In a campaign speech that summer, Trump said he ordered his staff to slow down the testing for Covid so that there would not be so many cases reported.
But Trump’s best moment was when he complained “the cupboard was bare,” and blamed former President Barack Obama for a lack of equipment and protective medical gear needed to deal with a pandemic. In fact, Obama had left considerable stockpiles to deal with a pandemic, but the more important point is that Trump had been president for more than three full years at that point.
If there were inadequate stockpiles, that was 100% on Trump. If he is to be taken at his word, Trump never even bothered to check on pandemic preparedness the whole time he had been in office. That was an astounding level of ineptitude.
Trump’s complaint says everything about the way he thinks. Rather than owning up to the reality of the situation, Trump absurdly sought to blame Obama for what was obviously his own failing.
The reporting on Trump’s complaint also says a huge amount about how the media adjusts its reporting to Trumpian standards. Rather than ridiculing Trump for what was obviously his own failing, it tried to evaluate the accuracy of his complaint about the stockpile Obama had left more than three years earlier.
Unfortunately, this sort of affirmative action for the son of a billionaire has been a regular feature of reporting on Trump. He routinely makes absurd and ridiculous statements which would be treated as a major scandal if they came from the mouth of any other politician, but instead are dismissed with an “Oh, that’s Trump” from the media. The idea that Trump is an adult who should be held responsible for his actions seems too difficult for many reporters to grasp.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Deleter in Chief: How Trump Is Waging War on Our Knowledge of Ourselves
The Trump administration is functionally acting to rewrite the prevailing narratives of our past—a past of progress toward equal rights, fact-based education, and lessons learned from mistakes and achievements.
May 15, 2025
In these first 100-plus days of the nation’s 47th presidency, President Donald Trump and his sidekick Elon Musk have cast a frightful spell over the country. As if brandishing wands from inside their capes—poof!—offices and their employees, responsibilities and aims, norms and policies have simply disappeared. The two have decreed a flurry of acts of dismantlement that span the government, threatening to disappear a broad swath of what once existed, much of it foreshadowed by Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for drastically reorganizing and even dismantling government as we know it during a second Trump administration.
To my mind, the recent massive removals of people, data, photos, and documents remind me of the words of Czech novelist Milan Kundera in his classic novel The Book of Laughter and Forgetting: “The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.”
Dismantling the Institutions
By the middle of March, the new administration had already eliminated dozens of departments and offices, as well as thousands of staff positions, with the supposed goal of “government efficiency.” Buyouts, layoffs, reassignments, and a flurry of resignations by those who preferred not to continue working under the new conditions all meant the elimination of tens of thousands of government workers—more than 121,000, in fact, across 30 agencies. The affected agencies included the Department of Energy, Veterans Affairs, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Internal Revenue Service, as well as multiple offices within Health and Human Services, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the National Institutes of Health. The Department of Education lost nearly half its staff. And then there was the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). By the end of March, the administration had closed its offices and reduced its staff from approximately 10,000 personnel to 15.
The gutting of such offices and their employees is—I’m sure you won’t be surprised to learn—expected to cripple significant government services. At the Department of Education, for example, billions of dollars of institutional aid as well as student loans will be affected. Cuts at the Office of Veterans Affairs, which faced one of the largest staff reductions, are predicted to deprive veterans and their families of healthcare services. USAID’s end will cut programs that addressed poverty, food insecurity, drug trafficking, and human trafficking globally. At the Department of Health and Human Services, the availability of vaccines, the tracking of infectious diseases, and all too much more are threatened and could, according to the executive director of the American Public Health Association, “totally destroy the infrastructure of the nation’s public health system.”
But, as novelist Kundera reminds us, the toll won’t just be to government officials and the positions they’re leaving in the dust of history. The cuts also include a full-scale attack on the past.
Records Gone Missing
As part and parcel of this bureaucratic house-clearing, an unprecedented attack on the records of government agencies has been taking place. Basic facts and figures, until recently found on government websites, are now gone. As I wandered the Internet researching this article, such websites repeatedly sent back this bland but grim message: “The page you’re looking for was not found.”
Many of the deletions of facts and figures have been carried out in the name of the aggressive anti-DEI stance of this administration. As you’ll undoubtedly recall, in the first days of his second term in office, Donald Trump declared DEI programs to be “illegal” and ordered the elimination of all DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility) “policies, programs, preferences, and activities in the Federal Government, under whatever name they appear.” A Pentagon spokesperson then tried to explain such acts this way: “History is not DEI.”
The assault on the facts and figures of the past includes an adamant refusal to keep records for the future.
And indeed, at the Pentagon’s website, at least 26,000 portraits, ranging from a World War II Medal of Honor recipient to the first women to graduate from Marine infantry training, were scheduled for removal in the name of the administration’s anti-DEI agenda. In addition, articles were deleted from the site, including a story on baseball great Jackie Robinson, who had served in World War II, as well as mentions of women and minorities. On the website of Arlington National Cemetery, information about Blacks, Hispanics, and women went missing as well. At the Smithsonian Institution, where Vice President JD Vance was put in charge of the world’s largest museum enterprise, consisting of 21 separate museums and the National Zoo, the mandate similarly became to “remove improper ideology” from those museums, as well as from the education and research centers that its portfolio includes.
Following a storm of protest, some efforts at restoration have occurred, including the material on Jackie Robinson, The Washington Post reports that “the categories ‘African American History,’ ‘Hispanic American History,’ and ‘Women’s History’ no longer appear prominently.” Yet some information and artifacts, officials predict, have been lost forever.
The attack on history is perhaps most strikingly apparent in the disruption of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the institution whose mission is precisely to preserve government records. As The Associated Press summed it up, “As the nation’s recordkeeper, the Archives tells the story of America—its founding, breakdowns, mistakes, and triumphs.” The attack on NARA has come in the form of staff reductions, including the firing of the Archivist of the United States and the departure, owing to firings, buyouts, or resignations, of half of that office’s staff. (Remember, NARA was central to the federal criminal case brought against Trump for his alleged mishandling of classified documents, a case which was eventually dismissed.) Notably, the Department of Justice reportedly removed a database which held the details surrounding the charges and convictions that stemmed from the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
At USAID, an agency founded more than 60 years ago and now utterly eviscerated, the destruction of past records has been a top-line item. As ProPublica first reported, and other news sources later detailed, employees at USAID were ordered to destroy classified and personnel records. “Shred as many documents first,” the order read, “and reserve the burn bags for when the shredder becomes unavailable or needs a break.” Meanwhile, massive layoffs at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) are expected to drastically curtail the access of Americans to public records. At the CDC, cuts have included gutting the public records staff (though HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has claimed that he plans to reverse that).
Perhaps not surprisingly, the assault on the facts and figures of the past includes an adamant refusal to keep records for the future, a tendency that also marked the first Trump administration and has already proved striking in the first 100 days of his second term.
The Signalgate scandal is a case in point. In the group chat held by then-National Security Adviser Mike Waltz on the Signal app, instead of a designated classified communications channel, discussing an imminent attack on Yemen, national security officials communicated classified information outside of approved channels. In addition to violating norms and laws governing communications involving classified information, the fact that the app was set to auto-delete ignored the law that mandates the preservation of official records.
Nor was Signalgate a one-off. Trump administration officials have reportedly taken to using Gmail, while Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been relying on Google Docs for the drafting of government documents, in each case attempting to bypass laws regulating the archiving of public records by potentially “failing to preserve all iterations of its drafts as well as comments left on shared documents.”
Of course, the president’s aversion to creating records in the first place long predates the present moment. During his first term, for example, he had a tendency to rip up documents as he saw fit. “He didn’t want a record of anything,” a senior official told The Washington Post. Notably, he refused to have notes taken at several meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin and, after one encounter with the Russian president at a Group of 20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany, in 2017, he confiscated the interpreter’s notes.
Evading the Law
In such an ongoing obliteration of the records of government activities, the violations that have already taken place have essentially rendered the law invisible. The Federal Records Act, as Lawfare reminds us, requires any federal agency to ”make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency.” And when it comes to presidential records, the Presidential Records Act categorizes them as the property of the United States and requires the president to take “all such steps as may be necessary” to preserve those records.
There is, however, a giant carve-out to that requirement. During his tenure in office, the president can seek to withhold certain records on the grounds that the documents have ceased to have “administrative, historical, informational, or evidentiary value.” In order to make such a decision, however, the president must first consult with the national archivist, a position that at present belongs to the now four-hatted Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is currently the acting head of the National Security Agency (NSA) and USAID, as well as the National Archives. It’s worth noting that there is no enforcement mechanism in place to address a decision to dispose of documents, or to challenge the legality—or even the wisdom—of such a decision. The law, as one scholar argues, remains essentially “toothless.”
Why History Matters
Historians like me are particularly sensitive to the destruction of government records. Archival materials are our bread and butter. Who knows what new information we might find and what new insights we might gain from a fresh look at the letters of John Adams on the eve of the outbreak of the American Revolution or the records of the dissenters in George W. Bush’s administration in the run-up to the War in Iraq? With the new insights that documents and records provide can come new understandings of who we are as a country, what ills our leaders have (or haven’t) addressed, what tragedies might (or might not) have been avoided, what successes might (or might not) have been more likely to come about. In sum, the records of the past hold innumerable lessons that could guide us into a more sustainable and just future.
That documentary record helps—or at least until this fragile moment, helped—us understand the pathways that have brought us here in both moments of glory and times of trouble. The record feeds us, inspires us, and allows us to feed and inspire others. It’s through the telling of history that we have come to understand our collective selves as a nation, our individual selves as actors, and our leaders’ decisions about the future.
Expunging history was an early tactic of the Nazis, who sought to turn the clock back to a time before the French Revolution and its values altered the course of history.
All that is, of course, now changing and the spell cast by the administration’s ongoing destruction of those records, the emptying or altering of the nation’s cache of documents, has been enhanced by another spell—that of suspicion over the contents of what documents remain, based on accusations that the record itself is partisan and tainted, and so deserving of eradication.
For historians and the public we serve, when record-keeping is marred or even annihilated by a political agenda, as is happening today, such acts can carry special interest for scholars of the past. After all, purposeful deletions from and false additions to the historical record offer a truly grim possibility: the creation of what could pass for a new history of this country. As of now, the Trump administration is functionally acting to rewrite the prevailing narratives of our past—a past of progress toward equal rights, fact-based education, and lessons learned from mistakes and achievements. In sum, to alter or erase the historical record amounts to erasing our knowledge of ourselves.
David Corn, in his newsletter Our Land, recently posted a piece entitled “Trump’s War on History.” In it, he quotes George Orwell from his classic dystopian novel 1984: “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” As Corn points out all too ominously, expunging history was an early tactic of the Nazis, who sought to turn the clock back to a time before the French Revolution and its values altered the course of history. As Corn puts it, for the Nazis, “the animating ideas of the French Revolution, such as liberty, civic equality, and human rights, were to be crushed.”
For Orwell, as for Kundera, owning history with a firm grip is a power of immense consequence, never to be lightly dismissed. Memory and the records that sustain knowledge of the past are essential to humankind’s struggle against the worst sort of naked power grabs, never more so than now.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Fetterman Exposé is a Testament to How Badly Democracy Needs Fearless Journalism
Without good reporting, negligence and abuse would go unchecked, and corruption’s roots in democracy would be deeper and wider.
May 07, 2025
On May 2, New York Magazine’s Ben Terris penned a bombshell exposé that profiled Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman’s struggles with mental health, his maltreatment of staff, and his pervasive support for the genocide in Gaza, among other concerning discoveries. The coverage was extensively sourced and researched, and many of the revelations Terris uncovered were previously buried by stakeholders who counted on the Pennsylvania seat to hold blue. This sort of fearless and intrepid journalism, unattached to political or partisan interests, is a crucial requirement for our democracy to maintain a shred of integrity.
The shocking disclosures made in Terris’ piece did not all occur overnight—these indications of Fetterman’s inability to appropriately serve in the Senate date back years. The senator’s mental health, as described by his closest advisers in the coverage, has been detrimental to not only his ability to represent the people of Pennsylvania but also to his own well-being and the health of his family. All parties privy to any of this information would have had every reason to bury any trace of the senator’s behavior, except a reporter brave enough to tell the story.
Now more than ever, we need truth tellers who are willing to be uncomfortable.
Sen. Fetterman’s win in 2022 delivered Democrats the majority they needed to control the Senate. Per Terris’ reporting, that majority came at a cost. The standard that our partisan system places on individuals who will hold great power is dismal, including the lowest bar possible for a commitment to human dignity as represented in Fetterman’s consistently violent comments on the genocide in Gaza.
In a two-party system that continues to compromise below bare minimum standards for human rights to make partisan gains, there has to be a robust media ecosystem that uncovers those compromises. Just days before the Fetterman exposé, The Colorado Sun’s Jesse Paul released a year-long investigation covering former Rep. Yadira Caraveo’s (D-Colo.) significant struggles with depression, mental health, and alarming concerns from staff. Rep. Caraveo lost a razor-thin general election in November and is now seeking to regain her seat in 2026. With a swing district like Colorado’s 8th, the Democratic Party would gain nothing from being forward about Caraveo’s mental health status. Colorado needed this investigation by Paul to make an appropriate decision about who represents them in Congress. Rep. Caraveo’s party needed this investigation to hold them accountable for their dismissal of concerning behavior when a candidate seemed electable. Democracy needs more of this.
The far-right, including the Trump White House, continues to challenge the trustworthiness and ethics of our media landscape. Media conglomerates are constant in their pursuit of cutbacks and layoffs as an editorial recession continues to toxify the spaces where news is created. An estimated 1 in 10 editors and reporters have lost their jobs over the past three years. The future of traditional media is dark, as print, broadcast, and digital media continue to lose subscribers, make detrimental cuts to staff, and face continued attacks from political stakeholders. The decay of American media is concerning for a plethora of reasons, but most importantly because pieces like Terris’ and Paul’s would never have seen the light. Negligence and abuse would go unchecked, and corruption’s roots in democracy would be deeper and wider.
Now more than ever, we need truth tellers who are willing to be uncomfortable. Willing to negate personal political interests in pursuit of a story that loses a congressional race but holds power accountable and raises the bar for who power is afforded to. The Fetterman exposé is not an easy read, but democracy doesn’t need more fluff pieces.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular