Andrea Delgado-Fink served on Biden's "environmental justice" advisory council, and now she's in the Trump admin, which is rightly rooting that DEI nonsense out of the government.
The USDA Forest Service confirmed to me that she's still there...
🧵5/10
Sarah Scheinman worked as a lawyer on Joe Biden's campaign team in 2020, and Biden appointed her to the Office of Management and Budget.
Now, she's an attorney-advisor in the DOJ's antitrust division—under Trump. She posted this pic in Feb.
I don't have certain evidence that these people are working to oppose Trump from within the administration, but my series highlights the potential deep state threat they may pose.
They represent the echoes of Obama and Biden policy in an admin dedicated to rooting out those policies.
How does corporate America blacklist conservatives? Companies don't do it outright. Instead, they outsource it: to the very same leftist "hate watchdog" that allegedly paid for KKK hoods and cross burnings😲
Meet Benevity. This software companies connects nearly 1K companies to 513K nonprofits, managing $16B in grants and 99M employee volunteer hours. It's the middleman between companies and the charities they voluntarily support.
🧵2/16
But Benevity also systematically excludes mainstream conservative and Christian nonprofits. Its former CO bragged about using the Southern Poverty Law Center's "hate list" to "vet" nonprofits.
Today, Society for the Rule of Law moved to file an amicus brief in U.S. v. SPLC, suggesting the DOJ engaged in vindictive prosecution. I can't help but wonder, what sort of conservative group takes the SPLC's side?
🧵1/15
The society claims it wants to protect prosecution from "political influence." The group says it "has not always concurred with" the SPLC's rhetoric, action, or tactics, but "opposes vindictive prosecution of any target."
🧵2/15
The society notes: @FBIDirectorKash condemned the SPLC as a "partisan smear machine" (it is), @Jim_Jordan asked the AG to examine the SPLC's influence under Biden, Pam Bondi was fired reportedly in part for not being aggressive enough, and Trump attacked SPLC.
Reminder: the SPLC raises money by claiming it exists to "dismantle white supremacy," but DOJ says the SPLC was actually propping up the hate it told donors it aimed to destroy. SPLC paid "field sources," whom SPLC says were merely informants.
🧵2/20
Yet the field sources used the SPLC's $ to:
1⃣Attend extremist rallies
2⃣Host rallies
3⃣Grow existing chapters
4⃣Create new chapters
5⃣Recruit individuals
6⃣Donate to extremist leaders
7⃣Purchase cross-burning material
8⃣Create racist paraphernalia
9⃣Pay living expenses
What if I told you an EPA lawyer who is also a union leader signed a document explicitly stating that she is "opposing this administration’s policies," but still seems to have kept her job?
On June 30, 2025, Cantello signed a "Declaration of Dissent," condemning the Trump "administration’s focus on harmful deregulation, mischaracterization of previous EPA actions, and disregard for scientific expertise."
🧵2/5
As a citizen, she has every right to take this stand. But as an executive branch employee, she needs to follow lawful orders from the president on down.
This mentality captures the essence of the deep state—opposition to the president's agenda from within the gov't.
The SPLC, which now faces a federal indictment for allegedly funding members of the hate groups it claims it exists to oppose, is once again attacking @donoharm for the sin of disagreeing with the SPLC's transgender and CRT agenda.
🧵1/6
SPLC is trying to shame Google into blacklisting Do No Harm from its grants program (available to most 501(c)(3) nonprofits). The SPLC demonizes "'detransitioner' rehtoric" as if people like @ChloeCole are not real victims of "gender-affirming care."
🧵2/6
But it gets worse! @DoNoHarm rightly opposes CRT in medicine, but the SPLC claims its efforts are rooted in "white supremacist conspiracy theories." Do No Harm is concerned about high standards in medicine, but the SPLC claims it's only about "white people's health."
The New York Supreme Court's ethics commission refused to investigate NJ Gov. Mikie Sherrill—because she hasn't been convicted of a crime. Neither had @RudyGiuliani... So the watchdog group that filed the complaint is appealing.
In March, @SecureUSA filed a complaint against Sherrill, claiming that she had violated the ethics code for NY attorneys when she claimed @Jack4NJ "went on to kill tens of thousands of people in New Jersey, including children."😲
Sherrill also urged Garden State residents to report on ICE activity—which the Center to Advance Security in America claimed amounted to combatting the lawful detention of illegal aliens.