[[link removed]]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN - JANUARY 25, 2025  
[[link removed]]


 

Heather Cox Richardson
January 25, 2025
Letters from an American
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Since the very earliest days of the United States, class was a
central lens through which Americans interpreted politics . . . in the
1960s politicians began to focus on race and gender . . . Now, with
Trump . . . class appears to be back . . . _

,

 

We have all earned a break for this week, but as some of you have
heard me say, I write these letters with an eye to what a graduate
student will need to know in 150 years. Two things from last night
belong in the record of this time, not least because they illustrate
President Donald Trump’s deliberate demonstration of dominance over
Republican lawmakers.

Last night the Senate confirmed former Fox News Channel weekend host
Pete Hegseth as the defense secretary of the United States of America.
As Tom Bowman of NPR notes, since Congress created the position in
1947, in the wake of World War II, every person who has held it has
come from a senior position in elected office, industry, or the
military. Hegseth has been accused of financial mismanagement at the
small nonprofits he directed, has demonstrated alcohol abuse, and paid
$50,000 to a woman who accused him of sexual assault as part of a
nondisclosure agreement. He has experience primarily on the Fox News
Channel, where his attacks on “woke” caught Trump’s eye.

The secretary of defense oversees an organization of almost 3 million
people and a budget of more than $800 billion, as well as advising the
president and working with both allies and rivals around the globe to
prevent war. It should go without saying that a candidate like Hegseth
could never have been nominated, let alone confirmed, under any other
president. But Republicans caved, even on this most vital position for
the American people's safety.

The chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Roger Wicker (R-MS),
tried to spin Hegseth’s lack of relevant experience as a plus: “We
must not underestimate the importance of having a top-shelf
communicator as secretary of defense. Other than the president, no
official plays a larger role in telling the men and women in uniform,
the Congress and the public about the threats we face and the need for
a peace-through-strength defense policy.”

Vice President J.D. Vance had to break a 50–50 tie to confirm
Hegseth, as Republican senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan
Collins of Maine, and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky joined all the
Democrats and Independents in voting no. Hegseth was sworn in early
this morning.

That timing mattered. As MSNBC host Rachel Maddow noted, as soon as
Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA), whose “yes” was secured only through an
intense pressure campaign, had voted in favor, President Trump
informed at least 15 independent inspectors general of U.S. government
departments that they were fired, including, as David Nakamura, Lisa
Rein, and Matt Viser of the _Washington Post_ noted, those from
“the departments of Defense, State, Transportation, Labor, Health
and Human Services, Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development,
Interior, Energy, Commerce, and Agriculture, as well as the
Environmental Protection Agency, Small Business Administration and the
Social Security Administration.” Most were Trump’s own appointees
from his first term, put in when he purged the inspectors general more
gradually after his first impeachment.

Project 2025 called for the removal of the inspectors general. Just a
week ago Ernst and her fellow Iowa Republican senator Chuck Grassley
co-founded a bipartisan caucus—the Inspector General Caucus—to
support those inspectors general. Grassley told _Politico_ in
November that he intends to defend the inspectors general.

Congress passed a law in 1978 to create inspectors general in 12
government departments. According to Jen Kirby, who explained
inspectors general for _Vox_ in 2020, a movement to combat waste in
government had been building for a while, and the fraud and misuse of
offices in the administration of President Richard M. Nixon made it
clear that such protections were necessary. Essentially, inspectors
general are watchdogs, keeping Congress informed of what’s going on
within departments.

Kirby notes that when he took office in 1981, President Ronald Reagan
promptly fired all the inspectors general, claiming he wanted to
appoint his own people. Congress members of both parties pushed back,
and Reagan rehired at least five of those he had fired. George H.W.
Bush also tried to fire the inspectors general but backed down when
Congress backed up their protests that they must be independent.

In 2008, Congress expanded the law by creating the Council of
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. By 2010 that council
covered 68 offices.

During his first term, in the wake of his first impeachment, Trump
fired at least five inspectors general he considered disloyal to him,
and in 2022, Congress amended the law to require any president who
sought to get rid of an inspector general to “communicate in writing
the reasons for any such removal or transfer to both Houses of
Congress, not later than 30 days before the removal or transfer.”
Congress called the law the “Securing Inspector General Independence
Act of 2022.”

The chair of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and
Efficiency, Hannibal “Mike” Ware, responded immediately to the
information that Trump wanted to fire inspectors general. Ware
recommended that Director of Presidential Personnel Sergio Gor, who
had sent the email firing the inspectors general, “reach out to
White House Counsel to discuss your intended course of action. At this
point, we do not believe the actions taken are legally sufficient to
dismiss” the inspectors general, because of the requirements of the
2022 law.

This evening, Nakamura, Rein, and Viser reported in the _Washington
Post_ that Democrats are outraged at the illegal firings and even
some Republicans are expressing concern and have asked the White House
for an explanation. For his part, Trump said, incorrectly, that firing
inspectors general is “a very standard thing to do.” Several of
the inspectors general Trump tried to fire are standing firm on the
illegality of the order and plan to show up to work on Monday.

The framers of the Constitution designed impeachment to enable
Congress to remove a chief executive who deliberately breaks the law,
believing that the determination of senators to hold onto their own
power would keep them from allowing a president to seize more than the
Constitution had assigned him.

In Federalist No. 69, Alexander Hamilton tried to reassure those
nervous about the centralization of power in the new Constitution that
no man could ever become a dictator because unlike a king, “The
President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried,
and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or
misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to
prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law.”

But the framers did not anticipate the rise of political parties.
Partisanship would push politicians to put party over country and
eventually would induce even senators to bow to a rogue president.
MAGA Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming told the Fox News Channel today
that he is unconcerned about Trump’s breaking the law written just
two years ago. “Well, sometimes inspector generals don't do the job
that they are supposed to do. Some of them deserve to be fired, and
the president is gonna make wise decisions on those.”

There is one more story you’ll be hearing more about from me going
forward, but it is important enough to call out tonight because it
indicates an important shift in American politics. In an Associated
Press/NORC poll released yesterday, only 12% of those polled thought
the president relying on billionaires for policy advice is a good
thing. Even among Republicans, only 20% think it’s a good thing.

Since the very earliest days of the United States, class was a central
lens through which Americans interpreted politics. And yet, in the
1960s, politicians began to focus on race and gender, and we talked
very little about class. Now, with Trump embracing the world’s
richest man, who invested more than $250 million in his election, and
with Trump making it clear through the arrangement of the seating at
his inauguration that he is elevating the interests of billionaires to
the top of his agenda, class appears to be back on the table.

—

Notes:

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

Bluesky:

macfarlanenews.bsky.social/post/3lgl4v3bzok2r
[[link removed]]

atrupar.com/post/3lgljigrlc32e
[[link removed]]

maddow.msnbc.com/post/3lglkcliga22f
[[link removed]]

* class
[[link removed]]
* Working Class
[[link removed]]
* class struggle
[[link removed]]
* race
[[link removed]]
* Gender
[[link removed]]
* Inequality
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]