Staff Reports
The saga unfolding at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has all the makings of a political drama, complete with bureaucratic intrigue and a protagonist willing to stand up to the unelected elite. After a charmingly audacious refusal to comply with directives from President Trump’s transition team, Nick Gottlieb, the Director of Employee and Labor Relations, has found himself in hot water—what an unexpected turn of events! It seems that standing in the way of adherence to the President’s orders doesn’t come without consequences.
In a bold move, Jason Gray, acting USAID Administrator, ordered a mass exodus of nearly 60 senior officials from the agency, placing them on indefinite administrative leave with full pay and benefits. This action follows the identification of behaviors by these employees that appeared designed to circumvent the executive orders of President Trump, as if bureaucrats need special training in how to rebel. Gray’s memo clearly indicates that the American people’s mandate would not be ignored, unlike during past administrations where such disregard went unchecked. The message is clear: those who resist the will of the people will face swift and certain repercussions.
More than 50 career civil servants and foreign service officers at USAID attempted to circumvent the EO aimed at pausing federal aid funding… those responsible have been placed on leave.
"Senior leaders in bureaus across the agency were removed, as well as several senior… pic.twitter.com/g0Ek0CTIFu
— Feisty-n-Friends ⭐⭐⭐ (@FriendsFeisty) January 28, 2025
But Gottlieb was not about to let that memo stand. In a stunning act of defiance, he swiftly countermanded the leave orders, effectively undermining the authority of the acting administrator. It’s almost poetic: here is a man who thought he could wave his bureaucratic wand and magically erase the President’s directives, but what he didn’t count on was encountering the will to enforce them. Gottlieb’s message to senior staff was confusing at best and disobedient at worst, suggesting they deserved better than a temporary leave simply because their decisions ran contrary to the new administration’s goals. It’s hard to believe that Gottlieb, sitting atop his bureaucratic throne, felt he could outrank every executive order issued from the Oval Office.
Just when one thought the drama couldn’t intensify, the agency saw thousands more of its contractors sent home without a dime while a foreign aid freeze settled over the operations of USAID. With the trumpet of fiscal restraint sounding, the same folks who once believed in perpetual funding for every pet project found themselves on the unemployment roll. Yet in the middle of this chaos, Secretary of State Marco Rubio managed an additional waiver for essential humanitarian assistance, proving that even amidst a freeze, the government can find ways to prioritize spending. One can’t help but chuckle at the irony of those who thought their lofty ideals would be immune to budgetary scrutiny.
In a classic attempt to play the victim, Gottlieb turned the tables by opposing orders intended to thin out redundant and ineffective staffing, portraying them as violations of due process. If he had any doubts about his newfound status as a martyr for cause, they quickly evaporated. Instead of strengthening the duty of due process, Gottlieb may have inadvertently proven that the old bureaucratic ways, which often served to keep ineffective employees on the payroll indefinitely, were being replaced with accountability and efficiency. After all, what a novel idea it is to prioritize the taxpayers’ hard-earned cash.
As the dust settles around these explosive actions, it becomes clear that this administration’s approach is markedly different from its predecessors. Resistance may have previously been tolerated, but this time around, the heavy hand of accountability is swinging into action. While Gottlieb may find a warm welcome among leftist circles bemoaning his sacrifices, the reality will not be lost on other civil servants who are quietly reassessing their commitment to transgressing the bounds of the law. The message is loud and clear: follow the directives, or risk the consequences.
