He began by saying that he just finished talking to President Macron of France, who said the French were celebrating “our victory” in World War II. Trump scoffed.
Then he said he had a conversation with President Putin. This reminded Trump that the Russians had been our allies in World War II, that they had lost 51 million people fighting the Nazis, and that Putin had fought with them. Yes, Putin himself assured our victory.
So why, he wondered, does everyone now hate Russia, but love Germany and Japan, who were our enemies?
“Macron was a good man. I said ‘what are you doing?’ he goes, uh, ‘we’re celebrating World War Two, our victory.’ I said ‘your victory? heh, your victory. tell me about that.’ and then I called somebody else, and I happened to speak to President Putin at the time. now, in all fairness to him, he lost 51 million people, and he did fight. Russia fought. sort of interesting, isn’t it? he fought with us at World War Two, and everybody hates him. and Germany and Japan, they’re fine, you know? someday, somebody will explain that, but I like Germany and Japan, too. but Putin is a little confused by that, you know? he said ‘we lost 51 million people and we were your ally and now everybody hates Russia, and they love Germany and Japan.’ I said ‘let’s explain that some time, ok?’ it’s a, uh, it’s a strange world.”
Here are a few pointers for Trump:
Stalin and Hitler signed a friendship pact in 1939 (non-aggression pact). Hitler invaded the USSR in 1941. After Hitler’s attack, the USSR became an ally of the anti-Nazis.
Stalin was one of the worst dictators in history. But the UK, other European allies, and the U.S. welcomed him into the alliance against the Nazis.
The Russians had more casualties than any other nation, but not 51 million.
AI summarized the sources:
An estimated 27 million Soviet citizens, including both military personnel and civilians, perished during World War II. This figure represents the highest number of casualties for any nation involved in the war. Of these deaths, around 8.7 to 10.7 million were military personnel, while 10.4 to 13.3 million were civilians. The majority of Soviet citizens who died were civilians.
So, no, 51 million Russians did not die in WWII.
Contrary to Trump, Putin did not fight “with us” in World War II. He was born in 1952.
Why do people hate Russia now–our wartime allies– but love Germany and Japan–iur enemies in World War II?
Most Americans remember that the U.S. and the USSR parted ways after that war. Stalin continued to rule Russia and satellite nations with an iron fist. He was always a brutal dictator who crushed dissent and murdered enemies and banned criticism and sent poets and playwrights into Siberian work camp.
When the USSR collapsed in 1991, western nations and Russian democrats hoped that Russian would shed its authoritarian past and join the western world as a free society.
Meanwhile, Germany and Japan shed their history of fascism and built sturdy democracies (Germany was split in two, with a democratic West Germany and a Soviet-controlled East Germany until the USSR disintegrated in 1991).
Americans today admire Germany and Japan because they are now stable democracies with thriving economies.
Most Americans do not like Putin because he is a dictator who has been in power since 2000 (with a brief power when he was the shadow leader), and the Russian parliament has extended his term to 2036.
Putin disappears his rivals. They are murdered in broad daylight, or mysteriously fall out of buildings, or are poisoned, or–like Alexei Navalny–die of unknown causes in remote prisons. No free press. No free speech. No dissent permitted.
AI summary of deaths attributed to Stalin:
Estimates of the number of people who died under Stalin’s rule range from 10 to 30 million, with most historians agreeing on a figure around 20 million. This includes both intentional killings and deaths due to starvation, forced labor, and neglect.
Elaboration:
Estimates Vary:Different sources provide varying estimates, reflecting the difficulty in compiling accurate data from the Soviet archives.
Official Records:Declassified Soviet archives revealed official records of executions, Gulag deaths, and deaths related to forced resettlement and deportations, totaling around 3.3 million.
Soviet Famine:The Holodomor, a man-made famine in the 1930s, resulted in the deaths of millions, with estimates ranging from 5.5 to 6.5 million. (Ukraine)
“Purposive” vs. Neglect:Historian Stephen Wheatcroft estimates that around 1 million of the deaths were intentional, while the rest resulted from neglect and irresponsibility.
Context Matters:It’s important to remember that Stalin’s policies led to widespread suffering and death, not just through executions but also through starvation, forced labor, and the overall repressive nature of his regime.
If Trump liked to read (he doesn’t), I would recommend that he read The Black Book of Communism, written by French historians.
If others can explain better to Trump why most Americans don’t like Putin, please add your thoughts.
Last week, ICE was rounding up immigrant workers in agriculture, swooping them up in the fields where they were picking berries and radishes, trimming the vines in vineyards, and preparing the soil for planting. This is backbreaking work. The videos I’ve seen were taken in California, so this must be part of Trump’s focus on crippling the big Blue state.
The slogan of the farm workers’ union, United Farmworkers, is “We feed you.” If they are all detained and deported, who will do the hard work they do?
Farmers in California are typically pro-Trump; some of them must have called Trump to plead that he stop arresting their loyal workers. That would explain why, on Friday, Trump directed ICE to stop arresting agricultural workers, as well as immigrants employed in hotels and the restaurant industry.
Trump heard them and posted this incoherent response on Truth Social:
“Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace. In many cases the Criminals allowed into our Country by the VERY Stupid Biden Open Borders Policy are applying for those jobs. This is not good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!”
Does Trump really believe criminals are slipping across the border to take jobs as farm workers?
Maybe Trump could launch a campaign to persuade MAGA patriots to pick the crops, not only in California but in Florida, Texas, the Deep South, Midwest and other states that voted for him. How many applicants would he get?
The conservative, Murdoch–owned Wall Street Journal editorialized that Trump’s immigration plan is in deep trouble, and rightly so. His goal (Stephen Miller’s) is to deport 11 million immigrants (one of every 20 people in the country. That’s led to raids at workplaces. Even his supporters are shocked. They voted to deport criminals, “the worst of the worst,” not the hard-working people who contribute to the economy.
Vincent Scardina is a Trump voter in Key West, Fla., who owns a roofing company. Six of his workers, originally from Nicaragua, were en route to a job late last month when they were detained, according to a report by a local NBC affiliate. Their attorney says five of those men have valid work permits, pending asylum cases, and no criminal records. We haven’t been able to verify that, but if it’s correct, jailing them is a strange enforcement priority.
“It’s going to be really hard to replace those guys,” Mr. Scardina said. “We’re not able, in Key West, to just replace people as easily as, say, a big city.” He also got emotional. “You get to know these guys. You become their friends,” he said. “You see what happens to their family.” Mr. Scardina’s message to the President that he helped to elect: “What happened here? This situation is just totally, just blatantly, not at all what they said it was.”
Four hours after that post about farms and hotels, Mr. Trump was back on Truth Social. President Biden let in “21 Million Unvetted, Illegal Aliens,” who have “stolen American Jobs,” he said. “I campaigned on, and received a Historic Mandate for, the largest Mass Deportation Program in American History.” For the record, the Census Bureau says the U.S. population is about 342 million, so he’s talking about maybe deporting 1 person in every 20.
Meanwhile, Mr. Trump’s deportation maestro, Stephen Miller, wants the immigration cops to arrest 3,000 migrants a day. That means raiding businesses across the country. Mr. Trump prefers to talk about “CRIMINALS” because he knows that’s where he has broad public support.
But his federal agents are out raiding job sites full of non-criminal, hard-working people who are contributing to the American economy. The real policy isn’t what Mr. Trump says, but what his agents do on the ground.
How can immigration czar Miller meet his goal without deporting farm workers, construction laborers, restaurant staff, and hotel workers?
I’m sick at heart about the targeted assassinations in Minnesota. As everyone surely knows by now, a gunman dressed as a police officer entered the home of Melissa Hortman, a top Democratic legislator, and murdered her and her husband Mark. The same gunman attempted to kill State Senator John Hoffman and his wife Yvette, who are hospitalized.
Both legislators were leaders of their party, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, which functions as the Democratic Party. Both houses of the legislature are almost evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. Both legislators championed humane, liberal policies.
Governor Tim Walz asked the people of the state not to attend “No Kings” demonstrations for fear that the gunman might attack them.
This is not normal. Sure, we have a history that includes lots of political violence, including the assassination of Presidents and Presidential candidates and outspoken activists like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Medger Evers, and Malcolm X.
Every time something like this happens, we say “never again,” but then it happens again.
Our politics are hyper partisan, polarized, and inflamed. Almost all gun limits have been stricken down by the zealots on the Supreme Court. We have a President who encourages violence, who failed to call out the national Guard on January 6, 2021, who called the perpetrators of violence against law officers that day “patriots,” and who pardoned all of them, including those who brutally assaulted law officers. Trump has also speculated about pardoning the militia members in Michigan who planned to kidnap and murder Governor Whitmer.
This is one of those days when I fear for the future of our democratic experiment. I can’t think of a silver lining.
Social media was ablaze yesterday and today with videos of ICE agents grabbing farm workers as they did their jobs in the fields and arriving at hotels and other places of employment to arrest undocumented workers.
Trump must have been bombarded with calls from farmers and business owners, outraged that their long-time workers were seized. Who will pick the fruits and vegetables? Who will clean the hotel rooms? Who will staff the kitchen and bus tables?
These were his supporters. They wanted the illegals deported, but not their workers. How would they function without their staff and their laborers?
Trump heard them. Late Friday he issued an order to ICE to avoid farms, restaurants, hotels, and meat packing facilities.
Maybe it suddenly occurred to him that removing the workforce from so many basic industries would be bad for the economy. Maybe Stephen Miller was out of town and turned off his cell phone.
The Trump administration has abruptly shifted the focus of its mass deportation campaign, telling Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to largely pause raids and arrests in the agricultural industry, hotels and restaurants, according to an internal email and three U.S. officials with knowledge of the guidance.
The decision suggested that the scale of President Trump’s mass deportation campaign — an issue that is at the heart of his presidency — is hurting industries and constituencies that he does not want to lose.
The new guidance comes after protests in Los Angeles against the Trump administration’s immigration raids, including at farms and businesses. It also came as Mr. Trump made a rare concession this week that his crackdown was hurting American farmers and hospitality businesses.
The guidance was sent on Thursday in an email by a senior ICE official, Tatum King, to regional leaders of the ICE department that generally carries out criminal investigations, including work site operations, known as Homeland Security Investigations.
“Effective today, please hold on all work site enforcement investigations/operations on agriculture (including aquaculture and meat packing plants), restaurants and operating hotels,” he wrote in the message.
The email explained that investigations involving “human trafficking, money laundering, drug smuggling into these industries are OK.” But it said — crucially — that agents were not to make arrests of “non-criminal collaterals,” a reference to people who are undocumented but who are not known to have committed any other crime.
Republicans have wanted to gut the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities for many years. In the past, they targeted the National Endowment for the Arts by focusing on artists whose work offended them. Somehow the Endowments managed to survive. But not this year. Elon Musk’s DOGS eliminated their funding. One victim of the cuts was National History Day, a competition that encourages the study of history.
This week, thousands of students traveled to the University of Maryland for the annual National History Day contest. However, this year’s competition celebrating America’s history almost didn’t happen after the Trump administration abruptly gutted the organizing nonprofit’s funding in April.
The organization received termination letters for its four-year grant totaling $650,000.
For more than 50 years, students at middle and high schools across the country attempt to qualify for the competition by submitting a historical research project based on that year’s theme. Students can write papers, prepare exhibits or performances, produce documentaries or create a website. After qualifying at the local and state levels, contestants are invited to take part in the national competition in College Park, Maryland.
But in April, the event was put in jeopardy after the Department of Government Efficiency terminated more than 1,000 National Endowment for the Humanities grants, including money for National History Day. The organization received termination letters for its four-year grant totaling $650,000, USA Today reported.
Without the government’s assistance and the competition just weeks away, the executive director of National History Day turnedto social media. “We need your help,” Cathy Gorn said in a video posted to Instagram in earlyApril. “We need to raise in the next few months about $132,000 to make History Day happen in June.”
Gorn’s public plea worked: NHD raised the money it needed, and about 3,000 students were able to present their projects on this year’s timely theme, “Rights and Responsibilities in History.”
“They are very in tune to what’s happening in the world, and they’re concerned, and they want to know more,” Gorn told USA Today. “And they’re drawn naturally to topics of fairness. So you’ll see a lot of civil rights, human rights, justice-type of topics here, but that’s so natural for a young person to kind of gravitate in that direction.”
While this year’s competition survived, the future of National History Day remains uncertain.
“Everybody is here, but I don’t know what next year is going to look like,” Gorn told USA Today. “It’ll be a horrible, horrible shame for kids and teachers not to be able to participate.”
Please read and take action to oppose Trump’s tyranny:
Earlier this week Donald Trump called for a second civil war at a US military base. This scenario can be resisted and prevented, if we have the courage to listen, interpret, and act. And this Saturday we will have the occasion to act.
The listening is important. The speech was given at the base now known again as Ft. Bragg. The fort was named for a confederate general. It was renamed Ft. Liberty. Under this administration, it was renamed Fort Bragg, now ostensibly to honor another American serviceman, not the confederate general. It is a dishonest pretense that dishonors everyone. The fort is now named again after a confederate general, as Trump made clear. The tradition that is now in fact being honored, that of oathbreakers and traitors.
In Trump’s speech, the existence of the United States is placed in doubt. We are not a country but a divided society in which some of us deserve punishment by others. He made no mention of the world today, nor of any common American interest that might necessitate national defense. There was no concern about threats from China or Russia. Middle Eastern dictatorships, the only countries that Trump singled out, garnered great praise because their leaders gave Trump money. There was no mention of any wars that are actually underway, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Trump invoked battlefields across the decades to create a sense of individual heroism, in which of course the history the the US Army is very rich. But that individual heroism is usually cited by commanders in chief as evidence of a nation that is worthy of defense. No such America figured in Trump’s speech. America did not exist Trump’s speech, except as a cult to him personally.
In the actual history of the United States, one war is central: the Civil War. Trump, who has never seen the point of the Union Army defending the republic, now seems now to have moved on to the position that the Confederacy should have won. He promised to rename Fort Gregg-Adams, the first base named for African-Americans, to Fort Robert E. Lee. The base in question hasn’t been known by the full name of the confederate commander since 1950. Lee was a traitor, an oathbreaker, a defender of slavery and the commander of a force whose mission was to break up the United States of America.
In his speech, Trump claimed that seizing undocumented migrants in 2025 shows the same courage as fighting in the Revolutionary War, or the First World War, or the Second World War, or Korea or Vietnam. It would have been news to the soldiers at the time that charging a trench or jumping from a plane is no different than ganging up on a graduate student or bullying a middle-aged seamstress.
But here we see the magic of Trump’s rhetoric: he seeks to transform the courage of the past into the cowardice of the future. He is preparing American soldiers to see themselves as heroes when they undertake operations inside the United States against unarmed people, including their fellow citizens.
All of this, of course, trivializes actual US military achievements. The actual battles of our history just become a “show,” to use one of Trump’s keywords. They are deeds performed for the pleasure of a Leader who then invokes them to justify his own permanent power. Denuded of all context, military glory becomes a spectacle into which any meaning can be injected. And he who injects the meaning is he who rules. That is the fascist principle that Trump understands. There is no politics except struggle, and he who can define the enemy in the struggle can stay in power. But whereas historical fascists had an enemy without and an enemy within, Trump only has an enemy within. The world is too much for him. The army is just for dominating Americans.
In his speech, Trump was trying to transform a legacy of battlefield victory around the world into a future willingness to take illegal orders regarding his own policy on the territory of the United States. The defiance of the law was clear. Trump cannot, for example, legally just rename those bases. The forts were named by an act of Congress. And he cannot legally deploy the Marines to Los Angeles. He has no authority to do so. The president is expressly forbidden by law from using the armed forces to implement domestic policies.
Trump defined himself not as a president but as a permanent Leader. In repeatedly mocking his predecessor, he was summoning soldiers to defy the fundamental idea that their service is to the Constitution and not to a given person. “You think this crowd would have showed up for Biden?” Whether or not it is unprecedented, as I believe it is, such mockery certainly dangerous. It suggests that something besides an election, something like individual charisma, some personal right to rule, is what matters. That soldiers should follow Trump because he is Trump, and not for any other reason.
In general, we imagine that the US Army is here to defend us, not to attack us. But summoning soldiers to heckle their fellow Americans is a sign of something quite different. Trump seized the occasion to summon soldiers to join him in mocking the press. Reporters, of course, as the Founders understood, are a critical check on tyranny. They, like protestors, are protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. Trump was teaching soldiers that society does not matter, and that law does not matter. He “loves” soldiers. He is personally responsible for the pay raises: “I gave you so much money for four years it was crazy.” “We’re giving you an across-the-board raise” This is the way a dictator speaks to a palace guard, or a fascist to a paramilitary.
Trump is putting himself above the army and the army above the country: “we only have a country because we first had an army, the army was first.” That ridiculous: the Continental Army was formed in 1775 from the people, for the very specific and time-limited purpose of ending colonial oppression. Trump wants the armed force to be the end in itself, and freedom to be its enemy. Generally, presidents who speak to soldiers of military glory have had in mind the defense of American freedoms, such as the freedom of expression, including the freedom of the press and the freedom to assemble. Trump said nothing about freedom, except as a “flame” or a “shield.” He said nothing about rights. There was not a word about democracy.
We are witnessing an attempt at regime change, rife in perversities. It has a historical component: we are to celebrate the oathbreakers and the traitors. It has a fascist component: we are to embrace the present moment as an exception, in which all things are permitted to the Leader. And of course it has an institutional component: soldiers are meant to be the avant-garde of the end of democracy. Instead of treating the army as defenders or freedom, Trump presented soldiers as his personal armed servants, whose job it was to oppress his chosen enemies — inside the United States. Trump was trying to instruct soldiers that their mission was to crush fellow Americans who dared to exercise their rights, such as the right to protest.
Referring to migration as an “invasion,” as Trump did during the speech, is meant to blur the distinction between his immigration policy and a foreign war. But it is also meant to transform the mission of the US Army. The meaningful border here is that between reality and fantasy. If soldiers and others are willing to accept that migration is an “invasion,” then they enter into an alternative reality. Inside that alternative reality, they will see those who do not accept the invasion fantasy as enemies. And this is exactly what Trump called for when he portrayed elected officials in California as collaborators in “an occupation of the city by criminal invaders.”
The US Army, like other American institutions, includes people of various backgrounds. It depends heavily on African-Americans and non-citizens. One can try to transform the army into a cult of the Confederacy and a tool to persecute migrants, but this will cause, at a minimum, great friction. Beyond this, using the Army to enforce domestic policy risks ruining its reputation. Deploying the armed forces in cities risks US soldiers killing US civilians. It also risks that provocateurs, including foreign ones, including allies of Trump, will try to kill an American soldier to provoke a disaster. (Trump’s birthday parade seems practically designed for such an incident, by the way.)
Trump will welcome and exploit such situations, of course. He doesn’t have the courage to say things clearly or start conflict directly, but instead sets up others for situations in which they suffer and he profits. The question is whether civil war is the future Army officers and soldiers want. When Trump promises to celebrate Robert E. Lee, he is telling the Army that oath-breakers and traitors will be celebrated in the future. This is not in his gift. Officers who bring the US armed forces to battle American civilians will be remembered by the heirs of a broken republic and as the people who started a second American civil war.
It is clear what Trump is trying to do. He wants to turn everything around. He wants an army that is not a legal institution but a personal paramilitary. He wants it not to defend Americans but to oppress them. He wishes the shame of our national history to become our pride. He wants to transform a republic into a fascist regime by transforming a history of courage into a future of cowardice.
This can only succeed if it goes unchallenged. All of us can think about his words and their implications. Officers and soldiers can remember that not all orders are legal orders. Those in the media can interpret Trump’s speeches clearly rather than just repeating them or seeing them as one side in a partisan dispute. Our courts can name the limits of his authority. And even a Republican Congress can recognize when its powers are being usurped in a way that risks the end of our country.
Though he did not mention the Civil War, Trump did refer to “the sacred soil of Gettysburg.” It is worth recalling Lincoln’s very different sense of the sacrifice of American soldiers in his Gettysburg Address:
The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
In the end, and in the beginning, and at all moments of strife, a government of the people, by the people, for the people depends upon the awareness and the actions of all of us. A democracy only exists if a people exist, and a people only exists in individuals’ awareness of one another of itself and of their need to act together. This weekend Trump plans a celebration of American military power as a celebration of himself on his birthday — military dictatorship nonsense. This is a further step towards a different kind of regime. It can be called out, and it can be overwhelmed.
Thousands of Americans across the land, many veterans among them, have worked hard to organize protests this Saturday — against tyranny, for freedom, for government of the people, by the people, for the people. Join them if you can. No Kings Day is June 14th.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday temporarily blocked a federal judge’s order that directed President Donald Trump to return control of National Guard troops to California after he deployed them there following protests in Los Angeles over immigration raids.
The court said it would hold a hearing on the matter on June 17. The ruling came only hours after a federal judge’s order was to take effect at noon Friday.
Earlier Thursday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled the Guard deployment was illegal and both violated the Tenth Amendment and exceeded Trump’s statutory authority. The order applied only to the National Guard troops and not Marines who were also deployed to the LA protests. The judge said he would not rule on the Marines because they were not out on the streets yet.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who had asked the judge for an emergency stop to troops helping carry out immigration raids, had praised the earlier ruling.
“Today was really about a test of democracy, and today we passed the test,” Newsom said in a news conference before the appeals court decision.
The White House had called Breyer’s order “unprecedented” and said it “puts our brave federal officials in danger.”
A federal judge issued an order late Thursday blocking President Trump from deploying members of the California National Guard in Los Angeles, and ordered the administration to return control of the forces to Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The restraining order from District Judge Charles R. Breyer, which takes effect Friday at noon Pacific time, delivered a sharp rebuke to President Trump’s effort to deploy thousands of National Guard troops on the streets of an American city, a move has contributed to nearly a week of political rancor and protests across the country.
“His actions were illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution,” Judge Breyer wrote of Mr. Trump’s orders. But he gave the administration a chance to appeal.
A federal judge in San Francisco on Thursday ordered the Trump administration to “return control” of the California National Guard to Gov. Gavin Newsom after the president issued an extraordinary order deploying them to Los Angeles over the weekend.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, presiding over the case, granted California’s request for a temporary restraining order, granting the federal government a stay until Friday to appeal the ruling.
Breyer had expressed skepticism at a hearing Thursday over the matter, questioning whether President Trump had operated within his authority.
“We’re talking about the president exercising his authority, and of course, the president is limited in his authority,” Breyer said. “That’s the difference between the president and King George.”
“We live in response to a monarchy,” the judge continued, adding: “Line drawing is important, because it establishes a system of process.
In the lengthy decision, Breyer wrote that he is “troubled by the implication” inherent in Trump administration’s argument “that protest against the federal government, a core civil liberty protected by the First Amendment, can justify a finding of rebellion.”
When Trump named Doug Collins, a Baptist preacher and former member of Congress, to be Secretary of the Veterans Administration, even Democrats were relieved because Collins had a long record as a chaplain in the military and was expected to be a responsible advocate for veterans.
When Doug Collins first appeared before the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (SVAC) for his confirmation hearing, his comforting bromides about his commitment to the VA and veterans lulled Democratic members, who, with only a few exceptions, voted to confirm Collins as President Trump’s new secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs. As one Capitol Hill insider told the Prospect, many believed that, unlike Pete Hegseth or RFK Jr., Collins was “a man they could work with.”
Democrats on the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (HVAC) came to the same conclusion. Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA), ranking member of the HVAC, said he was ready to welcome the former Georgia congressman back into the fold because “I think we will be able to do some good work at VA with Doug Collins.”
Fast-forward four and a half months to May 6th, when Collins appeared for the second time in front of the Senate Committee, and May 15th, when he made his first appearance before the HVAC. Assessing his first months on the job, Democrats now clearly viewed Collins as someone working not with, but against, them—and against the nation’s veterans. They expressed anger at his firing of 1,000 probationary employees, his cancelation of hundreds of contracts with vendors that supply VA with critical resources, and his termination of VA researchers, thus interrupting clinical trials that could benefit veterans. And, of course, there was Collins’s vow to lay off 83,000 VA employees.
Government Executive reported that Collins is pressing forward and is contracting with another federal agency to help organize the mass layoffs:
The Veterans Affairs Department has signed an agreement with the federal government’s human resources office to help it conduct mass layoffs later this year, with VA saying it requires the assistance due to the unprecedented nature of the upcoming cuts.
VA will pay OPM $726,000 for its layoff consultation services, according to the agreement, a copy of which was reviewed by Government Executive, which will “ensure legally compliant reductions in force (RIF) procedures.” The department previously announced it would cut more than 80,000 employees, though VA Secretary Doug Collins subsequently said that number was an initial target and the final total could be revised upward or downward.
“VA [Human Resources and Administration/Operations, Security, and Preparedness] has never undertaken such a large restructuring, and does not have the capabilities, expertise or the internal resources to fulfill the requirement,” the department said in the memo. “Therefore, OPM, an outside resource, will be essential for this effort.”
OPM will provide “qualified, seasoned” HR specialists to help VA reach a level of cuts necessary to meet the demands laid out in President Trump’s executive order calling for workforce reductions and subsequent guidance from OPM and the Office of Management and Budget. VA, like most major agencies, is currently blocked by a federal court ruling from implementing any RIFs or otherwise carrying out its reorganization plans. The administration has requested an emergency stay on that injunction before the Supreme Court, however, which is expected to weigh in within a few days.
“This Interagency Agreement (IAA) will indirectly support veterans by directly supporting VA’s veteran workforce,” VA wrote in the memo.
McLaurine Pinover, an OPM spokesperson, said the work would go through the agency’s Human Resources Solutions group that routinely provides strategic consulting advice to agencies employing restructurings and RIFs.
“HRS exists to assist, advise, and consult with agencies to ensure best practices and full legal compliance throughout a personnel action, including a RIF,” Pinover said. “HRS’s work is done entirely pursuant to interagency agreements with other agencies who hire HRS to consult, advise, and help implement via HRS’s revolving fund authority.”
VA did not respond to a request for comment.
One VA executive directly involved in the RIF planning told Government Executive that department leadership is creating challenges for the team overseeing the cuts because it refuses to put its goals in writing and will not spell out the rationale for its decision making. The verbal instruction, the executive said, is for layoff notices to go out in June. In official communications, however, the executive said leadership will not confirm RIFs are a foregone conclusion.
The cuts are expected to focus overwhelmingly on headquarters staff in Washington and employees in regional offices, known as Veterans Integrated Service Networks. Still, the executive added there was not enough to cut there to spare individual health care facilities entirely if the 80,000 reduction target remained in effect.
Because the goal remains a moving target, the executive added, planning has become difficult. On a Monday one appointee will approve a reduction target and by Tuesday another appointee will tell the group the figure is not significant enough.
“You expect change,” the official said of a new administration, “but if they can’t even articulate the in-state expectation, you can’t execute on any sort of change.”
That executive added that senior VA leaders entered the department with a predetermined idea and are not adjusting to the realities they have encountered.
“There seems to be a genuine desire to just dismantle things that were working effectively,” the official said. “They came in with the mindset that everything was screwed up and everything needed to be retooled.”
Former Department of Government Efficiency staffer Sahil Lavingia, who served as a liaison to VA, said the veterans agency mostly worked fine and was not as inefficient as he thought. Lavingia was fired the day after making those comments.
Collins has maintained that only back-end roles will be impacted by cuts and patient-facing staff will be spared. Several employees questioned that proposition, however, noting that doctors and nurses rely on support personnel to do their jobs. While VA recently cleared more positions to resume onboarding, employees said that services remain hindered by the hiring freeze otherwise in place and such obstacles would be exacerbated by layoffs.
“You can hire a surgeon but if no one is there to buy the supplies to do the surgery, what the hell’s the difference?” the VA executive said.
VA is currently developing its final workforce plan and has solicited feedback from executives throughout the department. In an unusual move, it has asked those employees to sign non-disclosure agreements related to the planning. VA supervisors have told employees that as a result, they cannot respond to questions to which they know the answers.
VA’s expected reductions have received some bipartisan pushback, with key Republicans saying the department should proceed with caution and without a set number of cuts in mind. Collins has criticized lawmakers for asking him about the plans, saying the matter was predecisional and scaring veterans. The cut target became public only after Government Executivereported on an internal memo discussing it.
“A goal is not a fact,” Collins said last month of the projected cuts. “You start with a goal. You start with what you look for, and then you use the data that you find from your organizations to make the best choices you can.”
He added his adjustments could lead to even more significant reductions.
Diane Ravitch's blog 