Category: Transparency

DOJ Seeks to Seal Trump Report Amidst Ongoing Judicial Manipulation and Accountability Evasion

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has requested that a final report detailing Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents remain sealed. This comes after Trump publicly praised U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who presided over his case, echoing sentiments of a judicial system that has shown him favoritism. The DOJ’s position centers on the argument that releasing the report could violate the due process rights of Trump’s associates, specifically Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, who are implicated in the ongoing investigation.

Trump’s legal team, alongside DOJ attorneys, contends that the report was compiled using materials obtained through what they label as an unconstitutional investigation led by Special Counsel Jack Smith. They criticize the prosecutor’s actions as an overreach, expressing concerns about the potential fallout from the report’s public release, framing it as an assault on the rights of individuals entangled in an alleged conspiracy.

Despite the legal challenges at hand, Trump’s remarks at the DOJ highlighted his ongoing influence over certain judicial proceedings, with him describing Judge Cannon as a model of judicial strength and efficiency. This ongoing relationship raises serious questions about accountability and the impartiality of judicial members involved in cases surrounding the former president.

Interestingly, the classified documents taken from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate have since been returned to him by the FBI, though they no longer contain sensitive documents. This twist in the case underscores the chaos surrounding Trump’s handling of national security materials and the implications for U.S. governance. With the sensitive documents now secured by the White House, questions linger about what was once in Trump’s possession and the broader implications of mishandling classified information.

As the case unfolds, the legal maneuvers surrounding the sealed report reflect a broader trend within the Republican Party to shield Trump from accountability. The DOJ’s attempts to suppress the report continually serve the interests of an elite class that seeks to undermine democratic processes. Trump and his allies are clearly prioritizing their protection over public transparency, revealing an unsettling commitment to authoritarian governance.

(h/t: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/final-report-trumps-handling-classified-documents-released-doj/story?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dhfacebook&utm_content=app.dashsocial.com/abcnews/library/media/512448642&id=119823414)

Trump’s Second Term Secrecy: Ongoing Pattern of Withholding Visitor Logs Undermines Democracy

The Trump White House has opted not to release visitor logs during its second term, following the same policy that characterized his first administration. This decision has raised significant concerns among transparency advocates who believe that such disclosures are essential for accountability. Unlike former President Joe Biden, who provided monthly visitor logs, Trump’s administration operates under the Presidential Records Act, which allows for such logs to remain undisclosed to the public for five years after a president leaves office.

Both former Presidents Obama and Biden have made strides towards transparency by regularly releasing this information, while Trump’s refusal to do so represents a continued trend of withholding accountability from the public. The Obama administration responded to pressures from both conservative and progressive groups to disclose visitor logs, illustrating a contrast to the current administration’s lack of similar commitments. This absence of transparency cloaks the identities and interests of those who seek influence over Trump’s policies.

Supporters of Trump claim that his administration has shown a higher level of transparency compared to past administrations, citing his release of records related to President John F. Kennedy’s assassination and accessibility to the media. However, this assertion conveniently overlooks the fundamental need for openness regarding interactions with donors and lobbyists—an area where past administrations have been scrutinized. Regularly disclosing visitor information reflects a commitment to accountability and governance rather than the opacity that has become a hallmark of Trump’s time in office.

The administration’s justification for avoiding the release of visitor logs highlights a wider trend within the Republican Party to prioritize the interests of wealthy elites and special interests over ordinary citizens. This pattern of favoritism undermines the democratic principle of transparency, thereby allowing unaccountable power brokers to operate undetected. As other administrations embrace openness, Trump’s refusal continues to signal a troubling commitment to secrecy and manipulation.

Ultimately, the Trump administration’s stance on visitor logs illustrates a pattern of anti-democratic behavior that seeks to evade scrutiny and uphold a system that serves the powerful. By denying public access to the activities and meetings within the White House, the Trump administration perpetuates a culture of corruption and elitism, demonstrating a blatant disregard for the foundational principles of democracy.

(h/t: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/3316611/trump-white-house-will-not-release-visitor-logs/)

Trump’s Plan to Remove Government Spending from GDP Risks Economic Health and Equality

The Trump administration is considering a significant change to how gross domestic product (GDP) is calculated by excluding government spending. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick proposed this shift, claiming it would provide greater transparency, a view echoed by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). However, such a move can obscure the true health of the U.S. economy, as government spending plays a critical role in economic stability and growth.

Traditionally, GDP reports include government spending as it reflects the economic activity essential for understanding growth dynamics. Cutting government spending could lead to substantial layoffs among federal employees, resulting in decreased consumer spending and potential economic downturns. Lutnick’s remarks on Fox News suggest that the administration aims to undermine the value of government spending, ignoring essentials such as Social Security, infrastructure, and scientific research that are crucial for economic health.

Musk has publicly criticized the incorporation of government spending in GDP calculations, arguing that it artificially inflates economic metrics. This perspective dismisses the importance of government roles in supporting citizens and stimulating economic activity. By framing government expenditures as inefficiencies, the Trump administration risks deepening inequality and disregarding the foundational economic contributions of programs that support American workers.

The proposed exclusion of government spending amounts to a blatant effort to reshape economic narratives. The latest GDP report shows that federal spending contributes significantly to personal income, essential for understanding the economy’s overall performance. Trump’s push for budget cuts could diminish services vital for the welfare of millions, all under the guise of fiscal responsibility.

The Trump administration’s rhetoric surrounding economic growth obscures the detrimental effects of its policies. While claiming to create the ‘best economy,’ their strategy focuses on wealth accumulation for elites at the expense of the broader population. By undermining government functions that support the citizens, Trump and his allies reveal their commitment to an agenda rooted in inequality, further eroding the foundations of American democracy and economic integrity.

Trump Administration’s Data Restrictions Undermine Transparency and Economic Decision-Making

The recent actions by President Donald Trump regarding federal data management demonstrate a troubling trend towards decreased transparency and reliance on government information. In late January 2025, numerous federal websites removed datasets to comply with Trump’s executive orders, which reflect his authoritarian approach to governance. This has created a situation where critical data, vital for informed decision-making in both public policy and private sector operations, is becoming increasingly unreliable.

The Department of Government Efficiency, spearheaded by billionaire Elon Musk, has further exacerbated data accessibility by slashing contracts for data collection and cutting analytical staff across various government agencies. Such measures threaten the integrity of essential data related to education, housing, and consumer protection, ultimately undermining efforts aimed at improving American lives. Although some datasets have reappeared online, the fragility of this renewed access raises alarms among experts concerned about the long-term viability of trustworthy government data.

The implications of restricted data access extend beyond academia and journalism, touching the foundation of the U.S. economy. Businesses increasingly rely on government-generated data to make strategic decisions, set production targets, and assess market trends. Notably, industries that utilize government data have seen revenues soar, demonstrating the economic necessity of this information. Without reliable data to benchmark against, companies may struggle to gauge performance, affecting their operations and the overall market health.

Furthermore, Trump’s administration has initiated cuts to essential departments, including the National Center for Education Statistics, where significant funding aimed at data collection has been canceled. Such actions compromise the ability of government agencies to identify and address public policy challenges effectively, leaving gaps in knowledge that could inhibit effective governance and productive economic policy. The failure to leverage data for informed decisions risks perpetuating inefficiencies and ineffective programs, ultimately costing taxpayers in the long run.

The ongoing trend towards censorship of government data under Trump not only threatens the reliability of information used for economic decisions but also undermines public trust in institutions. As government transparency diminishes, skepticism towards official data could grow, leading to a society where misinformation flourishes. The repercussions of erasing valuable government data reverberate through communities, influencing everything from school district evaluations to individual financial decisions, thereby impacting all citizens.

(h/t: https://abcnews.go.com/538/matters-trump-deleting-government-data/story?id=119003153&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1z289YzwWrYPuF7bOheqZh1AKHZ3Z8DT3tTQLmHpV99ZUhRe_X37i2v4c_aem_e_qyj-tOIYPF617WRZW7NA)

Trump’s Supreme Court Appeal Threatens Independence of Federal Agencies

Donald Trump is pursuing his first Supreme Court appeal during his second term, seeking to overturn a ruling regarding the dismissal of Hampton Dellinger, the head of the Office of Special Counsel. This case challenges the extent of presidential power in firing officials from independent agencies that protect whistleblowers from retaliation. The outcome could have significant implications for the autonomy of federal agencies and the ability of the executive branch to exert control over them without accountability.

The central figure in this legal skirmish, Hampton Dellinger, was appointed by President Joe Biden and confirmed to lead the Office of Special Counsel in 2023. Trump claims the right to dismiss such officials at will, arguing that the executive branch should operate free from congressional constraints. Dellinger’s removal without citing valid reasons as required by law highlights Trump’s ongoing attempts to consolidate power and silence any dissent within federal institutions.

Trump’s appeal raises critical questions about the balance of power among the branches of government. Historically, Congress has established independent agencies with protections against arbitrary dismissal to ensure governmental accountability and independence. However, Trump’s administration seeks to undermine these protections, signaling a shift toward executive overreach reminiscent of authoritarian regimes that dismiss checks on presidential power.

Precedent exists that supports Congress’s authority to limit presidential power in this manner, notably in the 1935 Supreme Court case *Humphrey’s Executor v. US*, which upheld for-cause removal protections for officials overseeing independent agencies. Yet, several justices have suggested a willingness to overturn such foundations, reflecting a concerning trend toward legitimizing authoritarian practices under the guise of executive prerogative.

Trump’s quest to remove Dellinger exemplifies a broader strategy to dismantle the safeguards established to protect public servants who expose government misconduct. His administration is embroiled in multiple legal challenges that threaten the welfare of American democracy by pushing for an unchecked presidency. As this case proceeds, it’s crucial for the judiciary to resist Trump’s attempts to reshape the relationship between the government and its watchdogs, safeguarding the essence of accountability within American governance.

(h/t: https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/17/politics/what-to-know-about-trumps-appeal-to-the-supreme-court/index.html)

Trump and Musk Misrepresent Government Fraud Claims

Former President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk, during an Oval Office address, touted their supposed discovery of billions in government “fraud and abuse,” claiming significant cuts to spending. However, their assertions lack substantial evidence, indicating a troubling trend of misinformation aimed at justifying drastic policy changes.

Both figures have leveraged the term “fraud” repeatedly, yet no concrete examples of criminal activity have emerged from their claims. The White House Press Secretary pointed to specific contracts as examples of waste, equating these expenditures to fraudulent activity. Experts in government accountability clarified that misuse of funds does not inherently equate to fraud, which requires proof of intent and illegality.

Trump’s administration has been characterized by a systematic dismantling of accountability mechanisms. The former president not only removed numerous inspectors general—who were instrumental in identifying fraud and inefficiencies—but also halted essential anti-corruption laws. This creates an environment conducive to unchecked financial misconduct.

While fraud within the federal government is real, it is often misrepresented or downplayed in Trump and Musk’s narratives. The Government Accountability Office confirms substantial annual losses due to fraud but emphasizes that labeling every spending decision they disagree with as fraudulent is misleading. Waste, fraud, and abuse should not be conflated—each has specific definitions, and many activities described by Trump lack lawful classification as fraud.

Underlying these claims is an agenda to reshape federal governance without necessary oversight, favoring corporate interests over public accountability. The failure to provide evidence of fraud serves as a facade for an administration increasingly riddled with ethical violations and diminishing democratic institutions.

(h/t: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fact-checking-trump-and-musks-claims-that-they-are-cutting-government-fraud-and-abuse?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR112yW0jTHclZf-z2J4xIMskB45qm0spbkxBHZIzdznpbHJeCBqNUVt9Ks_aem_yOvoQzWy3SxVVGeuLfzSPA)

Trump Purges 12 Independent Inspectors General to Install Loyalists

In a shocking late-night purge, President Donald Trump dismissed the independent inspectors general of at least 12 federal agencies, signaling a dangerous consolidation of power aimed at replacing unbiased overseers with loyal allies. This unprecedented action undermines the very foundation of accountability within the government, as these inspectors play a crucial role in identifying and reporting fraud, waste, and abuse.

The inspectors were abruptly informed of their termination via emails from White House personnel, with the dismissals appearing to violate federal law requiring a 30-day notice to Congress prior to firing any Senate-confirmed inspector general. This blatant disregard for established regulations reflects Trump’s authoritarian inclinations, facilitating a shift towards widespread corruption.

Among the ousted inspectors were those overseeing significant departments such as Defense, State, and Veterans Affairs, raising concerns about the intent behind these dismissals. Trump’s prior history of targeting watchdogs, particularly those who investigated his administration, supports the notion that these firings are intended to eliminate any checks on his power and further his agenda without scrutiny.

Senator Elizabeth Warren has decried the actions as a “purge of independent watchdogs,” highlighting the grave implications for government transparency. By removing inspectors general who serve as critical counterweights to executive power, Trump is effectively dismantling the mechanisms designed to prevent misconduct and ensure accountability.

The fallout from this purge may leave remaining inspectors general in a precarious position, as they face tough decisions about the rigor of their oversight under a Trump-controlled government. This pattern of loyalty over integrity in leadership roles poses a dire threat to American democracy, with implications that could resonate for years to come.

(h/t: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/01/24/trump-fire-inspectors-general-federal-agencies/)

President-elect Donald Trump continues to avoid si…

President-elect Donald Trump continues to avoid signing the legally required ethics agreement mandated for a smooth presidential transition, raising serious ethical concerns about his leadership. This agreement is crucial for ensuring that Trump does not engage in conflicts of interest that could arise from his extensive business dealings, a fact that has been a significant point of contention throughout his presidency.

Trump’s reluctance to sign the ethics pledge illustrates his ongoing battle with transparency and accountability, as he attempts to shield his financial interests from scrutiny. Despite the fact that the ethics requirement was established under the Presidential Transition Act—legislation that Trump himself endorsed—his transition team has not prioritized compliance, jeopardizing national security as deadlines for essential agreements are missed.

Transition experts are alarmed by this delay, emphasizing that it could severely impair the incoming administration’s preparedness. The Biden administration’s General Services Administration had set deadlines for agreements that would provide Trump’s team with necessary resources and briefings, which are crucial for national security. The failure to comply with these requirements could leave the future administration unprepared to handle urgent issues from Day 1.

Furthermore, Trump’s ongoing business ventures, including his significant stake in Truth Social and other licensing deals, raise additional ethical questions. This lack of adherence to ethical standards, coupled with his refusal to sign the pledge, suggests a disregard for the foundational principles of governance that are essential for maintaining public trust.

As the transition process hangs in the balance, lawmakers like Rep. Jamie Raskin have expressed deep concerns about the implications of Trump’s actions, stating that ignoring established norms poses a threat to the fundamental institutions of American democracy. Without the necessary agreements in place, the implications for national security are dire, echoing past failures that have had catastrophic consequences.

(h/t: https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/09/politics/trump-transition-ethics-pledge-timing/index.html?)

Trump administration orders hospitals to send coronavirus data directly to the White House, not the CDC

The Trump administration ordered hospitals to bypass the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and send all COVID-19 patient information to a central database in Washington, starting Wednesday, according to a Health and Human Services document updated July 10.

The handoff had an immediate effect. Wednesday afternoon one of the important CDC pages that tracked changes over time in how many hospital beds in the nation are occupied by COVID-19 patients ceased working. The CDC confirmed the page’s disappearance was a consequence of the switch.

It was first noted by Charles Ornstein from the news non-profit ProPublica.

The data came from the National Healthcare Safety Network, the most widely used hospital infection tracking system in the United States. It is run by the CDC.

In a call with reporters Wednesday, CDC director Dr. Robert Redfield said the agency has agreed to remove the NHSN from the collection process in order to streamline reporting.

The disappearance of the site takes away a useful metric of the pandemic for health care workers.

Changes in time of the number of hospital beds being occupied by COVID-19 patients tells public health officials how close to being unable to accept new patients a hospital or a region is, or if things are getting better.

Michael Caputo, HHS assistant secretary for public affairs, said in a statement earlier Wednesday the new coronavirus data collection system would be “faster,” and the CDC has a one-week lag in reporting hospital data.

“The President’s Coronavirus Task Force has urged improvements for months, but they cannot keep up with this pandemic,” he said. “Today, the CDC still provides data from only 85 percent of hospitals; the President’s COVID response requires 100 percent to report.”

The disappearance of the site takes away a useful metric of the pandemic for health care workers.

Changes in time of the number of hospital beds being occupied by COVID-19 patients tells public health officials how close to being unable to accept new patients a hospital or a region is, or if things are getting better.

Michael Caputo, HHS assistant secretary for public affairs, said in a statement earlier Wednesday the new coronavirus data collection system would be “faster,” and the CDC has a one-week lag in reporting hospital data.

“The President’s Coronavirus Task Force has urged improvements for months, but they cannot keep up with this pandemic,” he said. “Today, the CDC still provides data from only 85 percent of hospitals; the President’s COVID response requires 100 percent to report.”

Caputo added: “The CDC, an operating division of HHS, will certainly participate in this streamlined all-of-government response. They will simply no longer control it.”

Wednesday afternoon, Redfield described the data collection system as a way to streamline the process and make it easier for the nation’s hospitals to get information to state and federal authorities.

“We at CDC know that the life blood of public health is data,” he said. “Collecting, disseminating data as rapidly as possible is our priority and the reason for the policy change we’re discussing today.”

The CDC, along with many federal agencies, has long struggled to provide state-of-the-art data systems with lagging funding and sought to upgrade its systems. 

Redfield indicated the change would not be detrimental, saying the new system would streamline the process, reduce duplication and the reporting burden on medical providers and “enable us to distribute the scarce resources, using the best possible approach,” he said. 

“We’ve merely streamlined data collection for hospitals on the front lines,” he stressed. “No one is taking access or data away from CDC.”

Public health experts and infectious disease scientists sounded an alarm on the protocols, noting that further politicization of the pandemic will hurt health workers and patients.

“Placing medical data collection outside of the leadership of public health experts could severely weaken the quality and availability of data, add an additional burden to already overwhelmed hospitals and add a new challenge to the U.S. pandemic response,” Dr. Thomas File, president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, said in a statement.

He said collecting and reporting public health data is a “core function of the CDC,” and bypassing the agency would “undermine our nation’s public health experts.”

“As infectious diseases physicians, front-line providers and scientists, we urge the administration to follow public health expertise in addressing this public health crisis,” File said.

[USA Today]

Trump tears into ’60 Minutes’ after segment with whistleblower Bright

President Trump took aim at CBS News and its flagship news magazine program, “60 Minutes,” on Sunday after the program interviewed whistleblower Rick Bright, former head of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA).

In a tweet, the president excoriated CBS and its “third place anchor, @NorahODonnell,” whom he accused of “doing everything in their power to demean our Country, much to the benefit of the Radical Left Democrats.”

“Tonight they put on yet another Fake “Whistleblower”, a disgruntled employee who supports Dems, fabricates stories & spews lies. @60Minutes report was incorrect, which they couldn’t care less about. Fake News!” he tweeted.

“This whole Whistleblower racket needs to be looked at very closely, it is causing great injustice & harm. I hope you are listening [Sen. Susan Collins.] I also hope that Shari Redstone will take a look at her poorly performing gang. She knows how to make things right!” Trump added. Redstone is the chairwoman of ViacomCBS.

Bright, who last week slammed the Trump administration’s response to the COVID-19 crisis during testimony before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, told CBS News that he was not “disgruntled,” as Trump has described him, but instead was frustrated with the administration’s response to the virus threat.

“Remember, the entire leadership was focused on containment. There was a belief that we could contain this virus and keep it out of the United States,” he said. “Containment doesn’t work. Containment does buy time. It could slow. It very well could slow the spread. But while you’re slowing the spread, you better be doing something in parallel to be prepared for when that virus breaks out. That was my job.”
“I am not disgruntled,” Bright added. “I am frustrated at a lack of leadership. I am frustrated at a lack of urgency to get a head start on developing lifesaving tools for Americans. I’m frustrated at our inability to be heard as scientists. Those things frustrate me.”

Bright told the House committee last week that “unprecedented illness and fatalities” would occur if the U.S. coronavirus response does not improve in upcoming months, and cast doubt on predictions that the U.S. would see a COVID-19 vaccine developed in the next year and a half.

[The Hill]

1 2 3 … 8