The Trump disaster: Pride in prejudice
What do you do when you've screwed up so badly that any competent president would be demanding your resignation? Easy. Attack women.
That's the solution Pete Hegseth, reeling from an unauthorized disclosure of war plans to his wife (and his brother and his lawyer), adopted this week. On Tuesday, in what his leaking-like-a-sieve aides reportedly described to NBC News as an effort to distract attention from his own wrongdoing, Hegseth took to social media to announce that he was terminating the bipartisan Women, Peace and Security (WPS) program championed by the first Trump administration and his fellow Cabinet members Kristi Noem and Marco Rubio.
“WPS is yet another woke divisive/social justice/Biden initiative that overburdens our commanders and troops — distracting from our core task: WAR-FIGHTING,” Hegseth — who has previously opposed women holding combat roles — wrote on X, adding that the program was “pushed by feminists and left-wing activists.”
Wrong.
The bill was written by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem when she was in the House, and cosponsored by Secretary of State Marco Rubio when he was in the Senate. It was signed into law by then-President Donald Trump in 2017, who directed the Departments of State, Defense and Homeland Security to implement it. Hegseth doesn't have the authority to repeal it, as he acknowledged, writing that his department would have to do the “minimum” required by statute and then “fight to end the program for our next budget.” Fight to end a program that Noem herself praised because it “ensures women have a seat at the table during peace negotiations through meaningful congressional oversight.”
Meanwhile, in Michigan, the president was celebrating his 100 days in office, which polls establish has been, politically speaking, an unprecedented disaster, by taking pleasure in the inability of his opponents to stop his efforts to reward his friends and punish his enemies. According to The New York Times, “he seems particularly proud of how he has wielded extraordinary executive power in slashing the federal workforce — by far one of the most disruptive acts in his first 100 days in office — eliminating what he calls 'incompetent and unnecessary deep state bureaucrats.'”
Not so fast. It's true that Trump and his soon-to-be ex-best friend Elon Musk have raised havoc with the bureaucracy, laying off essential workers and standing by as long-standing civil servants who we need leave rather than work for him. But not everyone is going gently into the night.
Civil servants aren't supposed to be fired by the White House because right-wing whisperer Laura Loomer targets them, as career prosecutor Adam Schleifer was, or because they disagree with restoring Mel Gibson's gun rights, as pardon attorney Elizabeth Oyer was. They are among the thousands of civil servants who have appealed their dismissals to the Merit Systems Protection Board, whose rulings can then be appealed to the federal courts in Washington.
Federal law holds that civil servants are not supposed to be fired for political reasons, for whistle blowing or simply to clear positions for political loyalists. Trump officials have done all three, triggering a litigation explosion. This is what the president is reveling in.
But my personal winner for the outrage of the week (so far) was the announcement by the Department of Education and Health and Human Services that they are investigating the Harvard Law Review for alleged bias in the selection of articles for publication. The Harvard Law Review, a student-run publication, is near and dear to my heart because many years ago I was its first woman president. But why it commands the attention of two Cabinet departments, and merits an investigation, is utterly beyond me.
According to news reports, the investigation is based on reports that one student said “a piece should be subject to expedited review because the author was a minority” and another student allegedly was concerned that most of those who wanted to reply to an article on police reform “are white men.” What two students allegedly said about supporting diversity triggers a federal investigation?
“No institution — no matter its pedigree, prestige or wealth — is above the law,” Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary for civil rights at the Department of Education said in announcing the investigation.
What about the president?
© 2025, Creators