Elon Musk is using the whistleblower playbook
As a former Justice Department lawyer and whistleblower, I recognize the bizarre and retaliatory techniques currently being wielded against public servants. The over-the-top tactics that Donald Trump and Elon Musk are using — placing people on administrative leave without due process, leaning on career civil servants to resign, locking people out of offices, accusing them of 'complete and utter incompetence' despite years of unblemished federal service — are very familiar to most federal whistleblowers. I was one of them and now defend these employees for a living.
I got into this line of work because, when I blew the whistle on America's first high-profile terrorism prosecution after 9/11, the government unleashed the full force of the entire executive branch against me — much of it over the top. Among other things, the Justice Department placed me under criminal investigation, though I was never told the reason (leaking unclassified information to the press is not a crime, and government whistleblowers are protected by law.) Then it got even stranger. Based on a secret report I was not allowed to see, the Justice Department referred me for discipline to the state bar associations where I was licensed to practice law. The state bars didn't know how to respond, so they kept me (and my livelihood) in licensing limbo for years. But then the government's improvised retaliation hit warp speed when it put me on part of the 'No-Fly List,' a terrorism watchlist that impeded my travel for years and had no redress mechanism. I thought things could get no worse than this Kafkaesque blackhole.
I was wrong. The government literally called the private law firm where I next worked and told them I could not be trusted. The Justice Department leaned on the firm to fire me, but they couldn't do so under the Whistleblower Protection Act. Instead, the firm placed me on indefinite administrative leave, which was paid for a while . . . until it was not. I sought unemployment benefits, a system I had paid into as a taxpayer since I was sixteen, but then the government leaned on my former employer to contest those meager unemployment benefits, which it obediently did. This forced me to hire an employment lawyer, an added expense at a time. I had no income and was pregnant with my third child. I eventually won, but the damage was already done to me and my young family.
Eventually, the criminal case was dropped without any criminal charges filed It took the Maryland State Bar Association three years to dismiss the case against me as unfounded. In further theater of the absurd, I was elected to (and served on) the D.C. Bar Legal Ethics Committee from 2005 to 2007, despite the fact that the D.C. Bar charges against me were still pending at the time. The D.C. Bar charges remained a Sword of Damocles over my head for ten years before they were also dismissed.
I now represent government whistleblowers who are facing similar retaliation. It is as though Musk and his cabal at the newly created Department of Government Efficiency have picked up a whistleblower retaliator's playbook and are using it against the entire federal civil service.
My government whistleblower clients have been suffering these same retaliatory tactics that are notoriously difficult to challenge in court, yet are almost impossible to live with. My clients have been unceremoniously banned from their workspaces or locked out of their email accounts; their telework arrangements have been suddenly and unpredictability changed; they have been told their well-documented disabilities are imaginary and denied reasonable accommodations (one client was disciplined because her wheelchair was deemed a 'tripping hazard'); they have been subjected to micro-management of their every move (including trips to the bathroom) despite years of successful work; they have been reassigned to meaningless and degrading "paper cup-stacking" roles; they have been told not to discuss projects that were once centerpieces of their jobs; they have been given personally insulting letters of reprimand, censure, or undefined discipline; they have been subjected to baseless or pretextual investigations; they have been placed on administrative leave for undefined amounts of time in unclear pay statuses; and they have been eventually fired.
On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that the Trump administration can carry out, for now, the controversial 'fork in road' mass buyout program. The mass 'deferred resignation' offer is a blunt instrument Musk used to drastically cut the workforce of Twitter after he was forced to purchase the social media site, now named X, in 2022.
But the stigma doesn't end when the job does. Even after an employee resigns or is forced out, often personnel files with inaccurate, negative information remain behind, which makes it impossible to get another job at the same agency, or in the government at large. Years after they were vindicated, 'Insider Threat Programs" vilified lawful whistleblowers like former NSA senior executive Thomas Drake by putting their images on 'WANTED'-style posters alongside actual spies and terrorists. Even more insidious, agencies in past crackdowns have issued McCarthyesque edicts that employees must report on suspected colleagues engaged in suspicious work activity like 'displaying questionable loyalty to the U.S. Government."Co-opting the insider threat model, DOGE has ordered federal workers to report on anyone resisting the sweeping and legally dubious changes. Whistleblowers have been told not to speak to colleagues, lawmakers or the press (all of which are communications protected by the First Amendment), much like federal agencies have now been instructed to shutter all internal oversight offices and halt all external communications.
In the face of this retaliation and humiliation, whistleblower clients have struggled with anxiety, depression, ulcers, and migraines brought on by stress, and exacerbation of auto-immune and heart disease, among countless other health and personal consequences. A number have been left bankrupt and broken, unemployed and unemployable. Now thousands of civil servants and their families will be dealing with similar consequences in a culture of fear, cruelty and uncertainty.
The improper, illegal and heavy-handed methods Trump is using — placing career employees in professional purgatory, denying them notice or an opportunity to respond, restricting access to their offices, personally denigrating them, and cutting off their recourse — from the mass firing of some 20 Inspectors General to purging career officials from the nation's top law enforcement agency — is not new territory. History has not forgotten Senator Joseph McCarthy's list of alleged Communists in the State Department and his use of unfair and evidence-free accusations of disloyalty and subversion in order to suppress opposition. His name now lives in ignominy as both a noun and an adjective used to describe such political witch hunts. Nor has history forgotten the 'Saturday Night Massacre,' when an embattled President Nixon fired the U.S. Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General from the Justice Department, contributing to a chain of events that eventually led to his resignation. What is new is the vast scale and record speed with which it is occurring, the neutering of government watchdog agencies and oversight mechanisms, and radio silence from the controlling party in Congress.
It is despicable when agency supervisors engage in draconian retaliation toward whistleblowers who are trying to improve government by exposing fraud, waste and abuse. It is an order of magnitude worse that the Trump administration has imposed these tactics on an entire federal workforce of dedicated career civil servants who actually care about their country.
Hashtags

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


Bloomberg
31 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Why Trump's Deployment Of Military in California Is So Controversial
President Donald Trump ordered the California National Guard on June 7 to dispatch at least 2,000 soldiers to the Los Angeles area as thousands of people demonstrating against immigration raids clashed with security forces. After vandalism and violence broke out, the Pentagon escalated the federal response by also mobilizing 700 active-duty Marines. The president said on his Truth Social platform that federal agencies were to take 'all such action necessary' to stop what he called 'migrant riots.' The rare move by a president to mobilize military forces to quell domestic unrest was quickly condemned as unnecessary and counterproductive by local authorities, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Governor Gavin Newsom.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump is acting like an authoritarian; California's crisis now rests on what he does next
Donald Trump is talking and acting like an authoritarian as he escalates a constitutional clash with California over his migration crackdown. Much now depends on whether he's simply talking tough or if he's ready to take an already-tense nation across a fateful line in his zeal for strongman rule. In a mind-boggling moment, on Monday, the president of the United States — the country seen as the world's top steward of democracy for 80 years — endorsed the arrest of the Democratic governor of the nation's most populous state. 'I think it would be a great thing,' Trump, the only convicted felon ever to serve as president, told reporters as he strode across the South Lawn of the White House. Later, Trump deployed hundreds of active-duty Marines to Los Angeles and authorized the arrival of 2,000 more National Guard reservists after a weekend of unrest that saw clashes with police and burning cars in contained areas of the city. The protests were triggered by Immigration and Customs Enforcement sweeps seeking undocumented migrants in a city and state that are epicenters of Democratic power. California and Los Angeles officials reject Trump's claims that they have lost control. On Monday evening, law enforcement officers pushed back demonstrators throwing projectiles with flash bangs. Trump's decision to deploy troops despite the opposition of California Gov. Gavin Newsom represented the latest example of his willingness to flex extraordinary executive power — often on questionable grounds — and marked a break with a first term when he was often talked out of his extreme impulses by establishment officials. For all Trump's multiple previous challenges to the rule of law and democracy, a grave new chapter may be opening. 'The president is forcibly overriding the authority of the governor and mayor and using the military as a political weapon. This unprecedented move threatens to turn a tense situation into a national crisis,' Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said on Monday evening. 'Since our nation's founding, the American people have been perfectly clear: we do not want the military conducting law enforcement on US soil,' Reed said in a statement. California Democratic Rep. Nanette Barragán, whose district encompasses Paramount, just south of Los Angeles, condemned Trump's mobilizations of troops that she said were not justified by the situation. 'This is where I think this is a sign of a dictator,' she told CNN's Jake Tapper. 'And the threat he is making against the governor to arrest him — I mean come on — that is pretty outrageous.' Top Trump administration officials are throwing around words like 'insurrection.' Not surprisingly, many observers have taken such rhetoric as a sign the White House is prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act — a law that would allow the president to activate troops to put down a rebellion in a state. There is no such revolt in California. Trump's claims on Monday that his swift action stopped Los Angeles being obliterated are also not true. The president's border czar Tom Homan, meanwhile, told CNN's Kaitlan Collins that claims by Democratic officials that protests intensified because Trump sent National Guard troops were 'ridiculous.' Joining 'The Source' from Los Angeles, Homan said, 'It all depends on the activities of these protesters— I mean, they make the decisions.' Protesters gathered in large numbers in Los Angeles on Monday night, raising the prospect of another cycle of tension and uncertainty. The trajectory of the crisis could now turn on whether Trump follows through on his dictator's theatrics by crossing lines not approached by modern presidents — notably on the use of troops in a law enforcement capacity. It may also rely on the restraint of protesters, who would play into Trump's hands by taking part in more unrest that creates alarming television pictures that can fuel Trump's dystopian rhetoric. Creating or escalating a law-and-order crisis or threat to public security and then using it to justify the use of the military on domestic soil would mirror the methodology of tyrannical leaders throughout history. And hopes of restraint are hardly supported by Trump's second term so far. The president has, for instance, invoked highly contentious national emergencies on immigration and trade to unlock rarely used executive powers with no pushback from the Republican Congress. He's used presidential authority against what he regards as centers of liberal authority and influence: at Ivy League universities, in the federal government and in the media. And even in his breakup with erstwhile DOGE chief Elon Musk last week, Trump threatened yet another abuse of power by cancelling federal subsidies for the SpaceX boss's firms. The administration is spoiling for a fight as it lays down a marker in California for other Democratic states where leaders are loath to cooperate with Trump's deportation purge. It obviously also perceives a political advantage in the president positioning himself as the guardian of public order in a way that allows Republicans to accuse Democrats of defending softer immigration enforcement. But as ever with Trump, there's a question as to whether he's serious with his threats or is staking out an extreme position to please his voters or even to create some perceived leverage for himself. Homan, for instance, told CNN's Collins that Newsom had 'absolutely not' done anything at this point to justify his arrest. And North Dakota Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer adopted the classic GOP line that not everything that the president says should be taken literally when asked about administration threats to detain Newsom. 'You guys could ask every day if I am comfortable with what he said. He hasn't arrested him. I can't imagine that he is going to arrest Gavin Newsom,' Cramer told CNN's Manu Raju. Cramer also voiced the view of many Republicans that, far from behaving like an authoritarian, Trump is rightfully addressing failures by Democratic leaders on immigration policy and public order. 'There's no question about it: Places like California have thumbed their noses at the American people and decided they want to be sanctuary for criminals,' Cramer said. So far, National Guard reservists mobilized by the president over the head of a state governor for the first time since the Civil Rights era in the 1960s have mostly been used to defend federal buildings in Los Angeles. While the announcement of a deployment of Marines to the city was superficially alarming, their orders prohibit them from conducting law enforcement activities like making arrests without Trump invoking the Insurrection Act. The Marines are expected to be used to bolster National Guard members on the ground while up to 2,000 reservists are mobilized. CNN's Evan Perez, meanwhile, reported on Monday evening that while officials like top White House aide Stephen Miller have been talking about an 'insurrection,' administration lawyers have been working to craft a much less confrontational way of protecting the federal government's ability to carry out immigration enforcement, hoping to avoid further inflaming the situation, according to multiple people briefed on the discussions. This may all signify that the president is not yet ready to push the nation toward an unprecedented authoritarian cliff — even if his personal history, not least over January 6, 2021, suggests that in the heat of the moment he often takes the most reckless course. And Trump may be playing with fire in a city and state where anger over his wild four-month-old presidency is boiling. By inserting troops into such a volatile and tense environment, he's opening the possibility that flashpoints could ignite and even that tragic circumstances could unfold. But then again, maybe that's the point, if the president is seeking a predicate to deploy active-duty troops on the streets of American cities. Another troubling omen is that Newsom — who, like Trump, relishes public fights — has no incentive to cave to the man he would like to replace as president in 2029. Newsom, for example, wrote on social media on Monday that the president was deploying another 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, even though only 300 from his initial 2,000-strong contingent had so far arrived in the city. 'This isn't about public safety. It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego,' the governor said. 'This is Reckless. Pointless. And Disrespectful to our troops.' The state has sued the administration over that initial call-up of reservists. State Attorney General Rob Bonta called Trump's federalization of the state's National Guard troops 'unnecessary, counterproductive, and most importantly, unlawful.' The suit created yet another legal morass around one of Trump's most aggressive power grabs. California has now lodged 24 lawsuits against the administration in 19 weeks. With every day that passes in the California public order crisis, the political incentives seem to be driving toward more confrontation rather than a peaceful resolution. But ultimately it's up to Trump how this ends.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Afghans in Northern Virginia react to first day of travel ban
ALEXANDRIA, Va. () — Monday marks the first day of President Donald Trump's latest travel ban, which includes mostly African and Middle Eastern countries. Over the past few years, thousands of Afghan refugees have come to the D.C. area. Afghanistan is now on that travel ban list. Can you still visit the countries listed under Trump's travel ban? At the Afghan Market in Alexandria, people who spoke with DC News Now discussed a level of disappointment at the ban. 'We are disappointed about the travel ban, especially for those Afghan allies that they left behind,' said Farid Younsei, who lives in Virginia. Younsei said many in the Afghan community in Northern Virginia came to the U.S. during mass evacuations once the Taliban took over, but not all of their family members joined them. 'Most of them are in neighboring countries, like in Pakistan, and in Qatar, and in United Arab Emirates,' he said. Those family members left behind are the people on the minds of those who spoke about the travel ban. 'I kinda worry about them because one day, or maybe another day, they're going to figure it out about them — that they used to work with the embassy, or used to work with the government. And your life would be in danger. 100%,' Fertaos Bakhshi, of Alexandria, said. Trump's rationale for the travel ban is public safety. 'We will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm,' the president said in a video on social media. International students confused, anxious about their futures under second Trump term At the market in Alexandria, there's a feeling that the ban can harm those looking for a better and safer life. 'If you compare Afghanistan to United States, it means like you compare hell to paradise,' Bakhshi said. 'The bad and good, now the immigrants, they're getting mixed with each other. So it's kind of difficult to separate them.' The leader of a local organization supporting newly arriving Afghan refugees tells DC News Now it's important to note that the U.S. government is continuing to issue special immigrant visas and is allowing the recipients of the SIVs and their families to travel. However, they also expressed that one of the most significant concerns is that it takes away some of the different tools to help reunite families who have been separated during the initial evacuation, or later due to the visa process. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.