
Musk's DOGE took control of the U.S. Institute of Peace. It brought roaches and rats to D.C. headquarters, court docs say
The head of the United States Institute of Peace says its Washington, D.C. headquarters near the Lincoln Memorial was left to rot after billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency took it over in March, resulting in water damage, graffiti – and, worse yet, an infestation of roaches and rats.
After DOGE replaced the independent, fully government-funded nonprofit's board with MAGA loyalists and fired the entire staff, Musk's crew left it with a 'level of staffing… woefully insufficient to properly protect and maintain' the $500 million Moshe Safdie-designed concrete-and-glass structure, according to a May 23 affidavit filed in D.C. federal court by USIP President and CEO George Moose.
'Vermin were not a problem prior to March 17, 2025, when USIP was actively using and maintaining the building,' Moose's affidavit states.
The filing, which is part of a broader legal action by USIP in an attempt to regain full control of the organization, was first reported on Friday in the weekly Court Watch newsletter.
The office, which is congressionally funded but is not part of the U.S. government, was established in 1984 by Ronald Reagan with a stated mission to advance international stability and conflict resolution. Still, shortly after he was sworn in for his second term as president, Donald Trump issued an executive order taking aim at USIP as 'unnecessary.'
On Friday, March 14, Moose, a career diplomat who served as U.S. Ambassador to Benin and Senegal in West Africa, was abruptly terminated by the White House. He went back to the office on Monday and was removed from the USIP offices by police and replaced by Kenneth Jackson, a DOGE administrator, a move Moose immediately vowed to fight.
Speaking to reporters outside after he was shown the door, Moose dubbed USIP's unilateral annexation 'an illegal takeover by elements of the executive branch of a private nonprofit corporation,' saying it had been 'very clear that there was a desire on the part of the administration to dismantle a lot of what we call foreign assistance.'
On May 19, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that the DOGE seizure of USIP was unlawful, and ordered Moose and his staff reinstated.
In handing down her opinion, Howell said Trump's 'efforts here to take over an organization… represented a gross usurpation of power and a way of conducting government affairs that unnecessarily traumatized the committed leadership and employees of USIP, who deserved better.'
The following day, Moose became concerned after hearing from USIP employees that the building's condition had been allowed to deteriorate, his affidavit states. With the help of his attorneys, and following Judge Howell's order, Moose arranged to get back into USIP headquarters on May 21.
'When my team and I arrived, the only persons in the building were two security guards and a small cleaning crew,' he says in the affidavit. 'In my experience, that level of staffing is woefully insufficient to properly protect and maintain the building.'
However, Moose told reporters that, at first glance, nothing immediately seemed amiss.
'We just did a quick walk-through – externally, visibly, things look to be in pretty good shape,' he said. 'I didn't see anything, any destruction, if you will, no damage that I can see that is visible.'
Yet, the following day, a more thorough inspection turned up myriad problems, according to Moose's affidavit.
'On May 22, members of my staff, including our chief of security and our contract building engineer, spent the day surveying and documenting the condition of the building, to include photographs,' he stated.
'They reported evidence of rats and roaches in the building,' which he said was a first.
Moose says in his affidavit that staff reported 'other deficiencies in the maintenance of the building, including the failure to maintain vehicle barriers and the cooling tower, water leaks, damage to the garage door, and missing ceiling tiles in multiple places in the building (which I have been told suggest likely water damage).'
'In addition,' the affidavit contends, 'I learned from my team that sometime in the past several days, before we regained control of the property and assumed control for security, someone had scrawled graffiti on one of the outside spaces.'
This occurred, according to the affidavit, because 'the building ha[d] been essentially abandoned for many weeks,' during which time DOGE left USIP HQ with 'only a few security guards on site, with no perimeter patrols.'
According to Moose's affidavit, he 'immediately resumed' his duties at USIP, and reached out to staff and board members to begin working there again.
It says USIP has once again assumed control of their building, has engaged a private security firm to guard the premises, and has taken over responsibility for the building's maintenance. At the same time, Musk is leaving DOGE as his 130-day tenure as a 'special government employee' comes to an end.
Trump and DOGE have appealed Howell's ruling.
Moose did not respond on Friday to The Independent 's requests for comment, nor did the attorneys representing him and USIP in court.
Messages seeking comment from Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Carilli, DOGE's lawyer in the case, and the White House, also went unanswered.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Record
17 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Mixed reaction from politicians to news Galloway will not become national park
The decision was slammed by Labour's Colin Smyth, while Tories Finlay Carson and John Cooper criticised the NatureScot consultation. There has been a mixed reaction from politicians to the news that Galloway will not become Scotland's third national park. The decision was slammed by Labour's Colin Smyth, while Tories Finlay Carson and John Cooper criticised the NatureScot consultation. The SNP's Emma Harper believed the decision showed the Scottish Government had listened to local people. Reacting to Thursday's announcement from Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon at Holyrood, South Scotland MSP Mr Smyth said: 'For too long, Galloway has been Scotland's forgotten corner – and the government made it clear it wants to tear down the 'Welcome to Dumfries and Galloway' signs and put up 'No Entry' instead. 'The Cabinet Secretary knows she could've brought forward plans for Galloway that supported farming and forestry and helped them thrive. She could have built something special. Made a change for the better. Instead, she has taken the easy way out and walked away. 'The government has failed to set out an alternative to its inaction. No plan B to fix a local economy built on low pay. No action to stop the fastest depopulation in mainland Scotland'. 'This isn't just about ditching a national park – this is about ditching Galloway's future.' The Tories were critical of the consultation process. Dumfries and Galloway MP, Mr Cooper, said: 'The consultation on a Galloway National Park was deeply flawed – it was always far too vague. 'And while I raised right at the start questions about what weighting would be given to the opinions of those living in Dumfries and Galloway compared to those outwith, I never got a satisfactory answer. 'There were attempts to portray the 'blank sheet of paper' approach of the consultation as a good thing, but it was nebulous, and led to claim and counterclaim about what a Galloway National Park might be like. 'Galloway is not like the other two parks – our hills have hill farms, not just hillwalkers – and no way should remote and distant national park bureaucrats be anywhere near decisions on some of the most productive grassland in the UK. 'Agriculture is the backbone of the economy in Dumfries and Galloway, and it's not just about farmers and stockmen – it's about the hundreds of jobs in associated businesses, from seed merchants to machinery firms, to accountants who do the books.' Galloway and West Dumfries MSP Mr Carson added: 'The government's handling of the national park selection process has been opaque, inconsistent, and dismissive of genuine local engagement. 'Communities across Galloway invested time, energy, and hope into a process which could and should have united communities, but that process was poorly communicated and ultimately felt predetermined. 'Rather than fostering trust and collaboration, the Government's approach has sown division and confusion. It has left many wondering whether rural voices are truly being heard in this parliament. 'We could have avoided months of uncertainty and frustration. We should have had an independent review of the existing parks so that lessons could be learned.' Naturecot's consultation revealed the majority of people who responded were from the area that would be covered by the national park, with 54 per cent of respondents against the idea. South Scotland MSP Emma Harper said: 'Too often the Scottish Government and its agencies are accused of not listening to the voices of the people, so I hope those accusations can be brought to a peep now that the consultation process has been shown to be open, transparent and fair, and was one of the major factors determining the Government's decision. 'Going forward we need to strike the right balance between biodiversity, the natural environment, tourism and the economic development all of our communities are striving for regardless of their views on the park itself. 'I firmly believe that whatever views each of us held on the proposals that were on the table and expressed through the consultation process, we all collectively need to work together on how we develop Galloway economically, socially, and culturally over the years and decades ahead. 'That work would require to be done regardless of whether national park status was a reality, but now the decision has been made it's more relevant and urgent than ever.'


Reuters
17 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK factories struggle as trade uncertainty, higher costs hit, PMI shows
LONDON, June 2 (Reuters) - The downturn in British manufacturing was less steep than first feared in May but output, orders and jobs continued to drop as companies cited recent tax hikes and U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs, a survey showed on Monday. The final reading of the S&P Global UK manufacturing Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI), a measure of activity among factories, was 46.4 in May compared to 45.4 in April. It was the highest since February but remained below the 50 threshold for growth. The provisional PMI figure for May was 45.1. While the rates of contraction across new orders, output and exports eased, survey compiler S&P Global said the environment for manufacturers was still tough. "May PMI data indicate that UK manufacturing faces major challenges, including turbulent market conditions, trade uncertainties, low client confidence and rising tax-related wage costs," Rob Dobson, director at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said. May's decline in output was linked to a reduced intake of new business as demand from domestic and overseas fell. The fall in exports orders was mainly linked to weaker demand from the U.S. and Europe. The survey showed 49% of manufacturers expected to see output increase over the coming year, slightly above 44% in April. Manufacturing firms cut employment at the fastest pace in three months in response to uncertain economic outlook - plus a rise in employers' social security contributions and 6.7% increase in the minimum wage that came into force in April. But there were signs that the worst of the inflation surge may have passed, S&P said, as the pace of increases in input costs and selling prices slowed.


Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
The reason why Americans like William and Kate more than Meghan and Harry
Americans like Prince William more than Prince Harry - and the Princess of Wales more than Meghan Markle - because the Sussexes' have chosen celebrity and self-martyrdom over royal duty, it was claimed today. A recent YouGov poll in the US revealed Prince William enjoys a 63 per cent favourability rating among Americans - comfortably above Harry's rating of 56 per cent. The Princess of Wales has a 49 per cent rating in the US compared to the only American on the list, Meghan Markle, who has a 41 per cent rating. Even worse for the Duchess of Sussex, 25 per cent of Americans view her unfavourably compared to six per cent for her British sister in law, best known as Kate Middleton across the Atlantic. UK-US politics expert and policy maker Lee Cohen has said that the polls show that Americans prefer the 'unshowy sense of duty' of the Wales' over the 'self-promoting' Sussexes. He believes that Meghan and Harry have come to 'personify grievance, vanity and betrayal'. 'Even in a land that rejected monarchy, public sentiment favours hands down the Prince and Princess of Wales over the rogue runaways who swapped Buckingham for Beverly Hills', he said. Mr Cohen is a trade expert and senior Fellow of the London Centre for Policy Research who worked in Congress. Having worked in both countries he has also become a commentator for issues on both sides of the Atlantic. Writing for The Spectator US, he said that Americans are tiring of Meghan and Harry, who is viewed negatively by one in five in the US - but is more popular than his wife. 'In an age of cultural decay and institutional collapse, Americans crave continuity. We are drawn to symbols of permanence and poise', he said. 'William and Kate, with their unshowy sense of duty, offer exactly that. The Sussexes, by contrast, offer only the fleeting buzz of celebrity – and worse, a corrosive kind of self-martyrdom disguised as liberation. Fame is not the same as honour. Accepting disingenuous awards, peddling lifestyle brands and monetizing private grievances may pay the bills, but it commands revulsion rather than respect. True nobility lies in service, not self-promotion'. He said that the Sussexes, in 'casting off' royal duties, have also lost their 'mystique' and Americans are 'running out of patience'. 'William and Kate, by simply showing up, remind us of a forgotten truth: that dignity, loyalty and service are not relics of the past but virtues still worth aspiring to. 'As Harry and Meghan sink into self-inflicted irrelevance, the Wales' soar – not because they bully nor shout the loudest, but because they understand Queen Elizabeth's example of the power of humble duty done well'. The most popular royal overall is William and Harry's late mother Princess Diana, who died in 1997, with a 79 per cent positive rating and 4 per cent negative. The late Queen Elizabeth II, who died in 2022, is in second place with a 73 per cent positive and 8 per cent negative ranking. William is in third overall and Harry fourth. The Prince of Wales has a 63 per cent positivity rating in America and 10 per cent negative, which puts him in first place among living royals. Some 56 per cent of US adults have a positive view of the Duke of Sussex while 21 per cent a negative opinion, according to the YouGov study for The Times. The Princess of Wales has a 49 per cent positive rating and 6 per cent negative All the senior royals are more popular than Meghan, the only US citizen on the list, whose ratings are 41 per cent positive and 25 per cent negative. The poll of 1,296 US adults was carried out between April 21 and 23, before Harry's bombshell BBC interview in which he called for 'reconciliation' with his family. Some 61 per cent have not changed their opinion on the couple since their move to the US, but 17 per cent said it was now worse and 10 per cent said it was now better. Yesterday it emerged that Prince Harry sought advice from Princess Diana 's brother about changing his family name to Spencer. Sources told the Mail on Sunday the Duke of Sussex actively explored ways to assume his mother's surname – a move that would have involved ditching Mountbatten-Windsor, used by his children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet. It is understood he discussed the issue with Earl Spencer – whose family seat is Althorp in Northamptonshire – during a rare visit to Britain, but was told that the legal hurdles were insurmountable. 'They had a very amicable conversation and Spencer advised him against taking such a step,' said a friend of Harry. Nevertheless, the fact that he consulted the Earl over the issue – a proposal that would dismay his brother and father – is a vivid expression of the toxic rift with his family. Mountbatten-Windsor is the surname available to descendants of the late Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip. It combines the Royal Family 's name of Windsor and the Duke of Edinburgh 's adopted surname. On their birth certificates, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's children are Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. Royal author Tom Bower has claimed that 'Meghan decided her real object in life was to be Diana'. If the name change had succeeded, Meghan's daughter, who is believed to have met the King only once, would have become Lilibet Diana Spencer, a more fulsome tribute to Harry's late mother. The move would be particularly hurtful to King Charles, who cherishes the Mountbatten name just as his father did. A mentor to Prince Philip, the 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma was also a strong influence on his great-nephew, the future King Charles. Philip adopted the Mountbatten name when he became a naturalised British subject and renounced his Greek and Danish royal title in 1947. The Queen and Philip decided in 1960 that they would like their own direct descendants to be known as Mountbatten-Windsor. According to the Government, you do not have to follow a legal process to start using a new name, but it suggests on its official website using a 'deed poll' to apply for or to change official documents such as a passport or driving licence. Names and titles are a highly sensitive subject for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. They were given their Sussex titles by Queen Elizabeth on the day of their wedding in 2018. Meghan recently insisted her surname is Sussex, correcting a guest on her Netflix cookery and lifestyle programme. In episode two of With Love, Meghan, which was released in March, the 43-year-old former actress was joined by comedienne Mindy Kaling. Meghan told her: 'It's so funny you keep saying 'Meghan Markle' – you know I'm Sussex now.'