🧵🧵BREAKING: Trump signs new Executive Order defining DOGE & fighting back against lawfare and judicial overreach!
The new EO focuses on defining DOGE more concisely but underlying that appears to be a clear message to the courts - DOGE is legal and here is how it works. @realDonaldTrump @elonmusk @DOGE @RealAlexJones @VigilantFox
A number of the lawsuits challenging DOGE initiatives lob unsupported allegations about what DOGE might do based on what seems to be simple rhetoric on X or elsewhere. The purpose of this EO is really to better define and provide clarity regarding DOGE’s role and authority. This should provide ammo for the attorneys defending against the lawsuits the swamp is filing.
The core of the order is related to DOGE’s role in reducing the federal workforce. Remember - DOGE looks at the existing or potential software to improve efficiency so it makes sense that they would use that knowledge coupled with feasible software development solutions to provide input on the necessity of personnel.
Right off the bat Trump asks for a plan to reduce the size of government and initiates a hiring to firing ratio directive. The request for a plan requires that the OMB Director figure out how to reduce the size of the federal workforce through “efficiency improvements and attrition.”
The plan must include a requirement that an agency can only hire one new employee for every 4 that are terminated or depart.
This order will essentially modify the hiring freeze. The BEST part of this order is that the hiring ratio and freeze do not apply to public safety or immigration enforcement but a total freeze remains on the IRS.
The next part of the EO defines how DOGE plays a role in hiring. Remember that DOGE is fundamentally about using data and innovation to drive efficiency. To that extent, Agency heads are being asked to develop a “data-driven plan” with their internal DOGE teams regarding hires.
DOGE teams include (at minimum) a lead, an HR person, an engineer, and an attorney. The EO requires hiring be done in accordance with the law which will limit these nonsensical political lawsuits. This will also be easier to do because of the structure of the DOGE teams.
DOGE is also given limited “veto power” over hires. If the hire is not aligned with the law or otherwise appears wasteful then the team lead can say no. The agency head can override the team lead - which is required under the law - but will likely have to be able to explain his or her self if that happens frequently.
DOGE teams will then provide monthly hiring reports to USDS so the President and Elon can keep an eye on the project.
The EO also tells agency heads to prep for major lay-offs or terminations. These are called “reductions in force” or RIFs. The President wants to eliminate unnecessary employees not required by law. This means that anyone whose job is not required by statute or not in public safety/security or immigration enforcement is probably on the chopping block.
The President specifically points out DEI hires as being unnecessary and is clearly planning to terminate those personnel. He also is terminating anyone working on projects not required by law that run in opposition to his policies. This is well within his authority under the law and makes complete sense - why would he allow people to work on projects that are not required and he doesn’t like?
Trump also tipped his hand as to part of the legal strategy here. By noting that he is looking at employees that are typically not designated as essential during appropriations lapses he is signaling that he will use that non-essential designation as a legal justification for being able to terminate some positions.
Part (d) is 100% a legal maneuver. The President cites CFR 731.202(b) which is titled “Criteria for making suitability determinations.” This regulation is about ensuring federal hires are “suitable” for employment under the law. Anyone not meeting these standards is generally considered “unsuitable” for hire. Trump orders the OPM to initiate a rulemaking that will revise the CFR to include certain other criteria that would allow for termination of potentially undesirable federal employees. Trump is requesting 4 additions to the current rule:
1. Federal employees should be paying taxes just like the rest of us; 2. Federal employees should be legal citizens; 3. Feds must certify that they are complying with the law as it pertains to personnel practices… this basically means that you can no longer break the rules of employment and keep your job because you are buddies with the supervisor or you and the supervisor may get fired. 4. You can no longer steal, misuse, or “lose” government resources without risking termination.
These are very basic and common sense additions the will be a tremendous shock to these unaccountable bureaucrats.
Part (e) might appear to be boilerplate but it is important for legal reasons. Trump wants to clean house but the absurd amount of law that governs our nation is more than any one person can grasp. As such, Trump asks for reports on the relevant law so he can make sure he is precisely following the law when implementing these massive RIFs.
In Part(f) Trump makes people accountable for this order. The head of DOGE (USDS) is required to submit a report to the President within 240 days of the order so he can see how it is going and decide what to do next.
Section 4 provides exclusions for the military and allows for other specific exemptions to ensure we keep our country safe. It also allows for common sense exemptions from the OPM. This section both protects our nation and injects common sense humanity into the order to ensure it is successful.
The last part of the order is legal boilerplate. By defining DOGE better Trump is providing legal cover for the attorneys that have to defend against the lawfare against DOGE. I think this EO was another brilliant maneuver and will help clarify what DOGE is doing to the public. It should allow attorneys defending the President’s actions to do their jobs and clarifies that DOGE is about producing results.
Thanks for reading and please consider supporting us by watching the Tom Renz show here on X, subscribing here on X, checking us out at TomRenz.com and donating to GiveSendGo.com/renzlaw.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Charlie Kirk was an incredible person and a tremendous loss but i simply disagree with this.
The breakdown in MAGA is not a result of his death. The breakdown in MAGA is 100% because of the failure of the administration to do what it said it would. The GOP was voted in to put America first and Trump was the de facto king of that concept. The crooks Trump has hired and the rest of the GOP:
- Just sent another $800 million to Ukraine.
- They’ve failed to prosecute anyone important
- Lied endlessly about Epstein demonstrating their support for a broken justice system while similarly screaming endlessly about crooked judges that they also refuse to do anything about.
- Continued to support the mRNA jabs and people like Gates and Bourla.
- Enacted universal digital IDs
And more. The right isn’t coming apart because of the tragic death of Charlie Kirk. The right is simply being divided into those that value true MAGA and America First policies and those that care more about profit and access than truth.
This isn’t division is simply exposure resulting from corruption. I’m praying Trump steps up and fixes the situation… he’s the only one that can. @GenFlynn @laralogan
🧵🧵🧵 Digital ID is now the law in the United States & it is being implemented as we speak.
As a lawyer - the destruction of our privacy rights is making me sick. It is getting worse by the day and people seem unaware that it’s happening.
The implementation of digital ID in the U.S. is not driven by a single law, but rather by updates to existing regulations, primarily based on the “Patriot Act,” post-9/11, trade our freedom for security mindset.
The most relevant laws facilitate digital identification through state-issued Mobile Driver's Licenses (mDLs) and set the foundational technical requirements.
This thread gives an overview of the laws and regulations, along with the relevant text, that provide and facilitate digital ID in the United States.
@VigilantFox @RealAlexJones
1. Foundational Federal Law: The REAL ID Act of 2005
This law, codified in 49 U.S.C. § 30301 note, established minimum security standards for state-issued driver's licenses and identification cards to be accepted for federal purposes (like boarding commercial flights). Although it governs physical IDs, its mandates for "digital" features and databases laid the groundwork for modern digital ID. This law was updated with the REAL ID Modernization Act signed into law as part of a larger bill in 2020.
Relevant Text from the REAL ID Act of 2005 (Title II, Sec. 202)
The Act sets the minimum information and features required on an acceptable ID. These include key digital components that paved the way for digital ID:
Requirement:
Relevant Text (Summary of Sec. 202(b))
Digital Photo
"(5) A digital photograph of the person..."
Machine-Readable Tech
"(9) A common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements."
The Act also outlines minimum issuance standards for states, requiring an infrastructure built on digital data retention. Keep in mind that the “facial image capture” is a form of biometric identification:
Requirement Relevant Text (Summary of Sec. 202(d))
Digital Source Document Retention
"(1) Employ technology to capture digital images of identity source documents so that the images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format."
Facial Image Capture
"(3) Subject each person applying for a driver's license or identification card to mandatory facial image capture."
So how bad is California really? It's bad... and it's about to get worse. California is trying to pass some of the worst and most dangerous legislation in the country. Thanks to my friend @NicolePearsonJD for the great insight. @VigilantFox
BAD BILLS RUN DOWN: All of these bills are on the Governor's desk for signing or veto by October 12 and can be signed any day making California a dangerous state for every child in the country.
SB 59 (Wiener, D, SF): currently in California, only the petitions for birth record changes (name, sex, gender marker) of minors are sealed. SB 59 would make it so that the petitions of adults are also sealed. You know, so that child and their predator can have their identities erased without anyone knowing. SB 59 also imposes a minimum fine of $5,000.00 for revealing the petitions, in addition to punitive damages, which you know will be liberally awarded to prevent "trans hate." leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavC…
AB 1084 (Zbur, D, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Hollywood): will eliminate the mechanism to file objections to birth record change petitions (name, sex, gender) of adults, including the requirement that there first be a hearing in uncontested cases, and will expedite the ordering of such changes (6 weeks). With respect to minors, currently a name change petition requires a hearing, an order to show cause, opportunity for objection, and a separate judgment process. If AB 1084 passes, and the petition is signed by all living parents, the court must grant the name change without hearing and within 6 weeks after filing. If it is not signed by all parents, the court must serve the non-signing parent and allow objections; however, the hearing will not be set unless a (1) timely objection is filed and (2) the objecting parent shows "good cause." AB 1084 does not define "good cause" but does specifically state that objections based solely on a belief that the proposed change is not the petitioner’s “actual gender identity” or objections based on “biological sex” are not "good cause" and are actually barred from being considered to trigger a hearing, or prevent the change being made. AB 1084 will also expedite the order of minor's petitions -- consented or objected -- to 6 weeks so, if a parent does not timely receive notice, their opportunity could be waived if they do not act immediately.
AB 1084 allows a single petition to handle both name change and recognition of change in gender/sex identifier, including issuance of updated vital records (birth, marriage certificates, etc.), where, currently, these are two separate petitions and proceedings, thereby eliminating interested parties' notice and opportunity to be heard on the same.
Finally, AB 1084 expedites issuance of new vital records within 2 weeks of entry of order.
🚨🚨🚨 BREAKING: Merck has released a potentially very dangerous saRNA product for pets with NO study on the potential to shed self amplifying mRNA to humans or other animals!!!
The Nobivac product was NOT tested for shedding to humans and no one knows how this self amplifying material will impact people or other animals exposed to it via shedding. In fact no proper shedding studies were done at all but it’s very likely that shedding will happen.
🧵🚨🚨🚨BREAKING 🚨🚨🚨: Grok admits it is misleading the public AND that:
“There is legitimate reason to be concerned that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines may have contributed to PRESIDENT BIDEN’S stage 4 prostate cancer or its aggressive nature.”
The good news is that Grok can get to truth when you point out real data and the new info from Grok is SHOCKING. @elonmusk @johnrich @RealAlexJones @VigilantFox
President Biden may not be my favorite president but I would not wish cancer on anyone. That said we need to critically ask questions about what is happening and if we can learn from Biden’s experience we should.
@grok has been used to “fact check” me but my work has uncovered real evidence demonstrating Grok was incorrect so I challenged Grok to see if we could get to the truth and the results are here.
Whatever you think about my work, I’m pretty solid at dealing with fake fact checks at this point so I set out to see if Grok would act only as a propaganda tool or if it could learn and admit mistakes. As you will see I was pleasantly surprised but am concerned that @grok will not reflect its newfound knowledge to everyone that asks whether Biden’s cancer is related to the mRNA COVID vaccines.
🚨🧵BREAKDOWN: SCOTUS grants TRO delaying Trump’s removal of illegals under the Alien Enemies Act.
This is pretty viral already and I wanted to provide some context. The SCOTUS just ordered that Trump halt deportations under the AEA for a limited class. This was done in response to a case where a group of detained illegals were told they were being removed.
This is all based on the separate case that Bondi was just on Fox News telling everyone she won - it was definitely not a win if you care about accomplishing Trump’s agenda. Here’s what is really happening with this and part of the reason I’ve been so frustrated with the DOJ:
@HealthRanger @annvandersteel
The case in question is in a district court in Texas. The litigants claim they are in eminent risk of deportation without a hearing (they probably are).
After the separate 5-4 ruling at the SCOTUS in Trump v JGG, Bondi went on a Fox News victory tour telling everyone the case was a big win and that she was coming after the bad guys. The problem was that it was really not a win at all.