Musk’s directive to federal workers.

Summary

Podcast Summary: Tangle – "Musk’s Directive to Federal Workers"

Episode Details:

• Title: Musk’s Directive to Federal Workers
• Host: Isaac Saul
• Release Date: February 25, 2025

---

Introduction

In this episode of Tangle, host Isaac Saul delves into a contentious directive issued by Elon Musk to over two million federal workers. The directive, part of the Elon Musk DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) initiative, demands that federal employees list five accomplishments from the past week or face termination by Monday at midnight. Isaac navigates through the multifaceted responses from both the political left and right, providing listeners with a comprehensive analysis of the situation.

---

Main Story Breakdown

John Law kickstarts the discussion by outlining the key events surrounding Musk's directive:

• UN Resolution Vote: The U.S., North Korea, Russia, and Belarus voted against a UN Resolution that labeled Russia as the aggressor in the Ukraine war. Subsequently, the U.S. introduced a resolution that excluded blaming Russia but called for conflict resolution, which passed with support from Russia and China, while five European nations abstained. (00:03:07)

• High-Level Meetings: Former President Donald Trump hosted French President Emmanuel Macron to discuss strategies for ending the Ukraine conflict, emphasizing the need for collaborative security guarantees. (00:03:07)

• Legal Challenges: A federal judge temporarily barred the Department of Education and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from sharing personally identifiable information with the Department of Government Efficiency. Concurrently, the Associated Press faced a denied restraining order preventing the White House from excluding its reporters from press events. (00:03:07)

• Political Moves: Vivek Ramaswamy announced his candidacy for Ohio governor, and Apple committed $500 billion to U.S. manufacturing, including establishing a new AI facility in Houston by 2026. (00:03:07)

The focal point, however, remains Elon Musk's email to federal employees:

• Directive Details: Sent via OPM, the email instructed federal workers to list five accomplishments from the past week by Monday at 11:59 PM ET, threatening termination if unaddressed. Notable agencies like the Department of Defense, FBI, and the Office of National Intelligence advised employees against responding. (00:04:47)

• Administrative Response: While some departments complied, others directed employees to adhere to existing procedures, leading to a split in how the directive was enforced. President Trump initially lauded the initiative as a stride toward workforce efficiency but later suggested deferring to agency heads for further guidance. (00:05:26)

• OPM’s Justification: McLaurin Pinover from OPM defended the request as part of the Trump administration’s commitment to accountability within the federal workforce, though it has faced significant backlash and legal challenges from employee unions. (00:05:26)

---

Reactions from the Left

The left perceives Musk’s directive as an ill-conceived maneuver to trim the federal workforce without proper oversight:

• Legal and Ethical Concerns: Nicholas Bednar of Just Security criticized the ambiguity of the directive, noting that it fails to align with existing federal employee evaluation frameworks and potentially violates principles of fairness and due process. He emphasized that "five bullet points describing one workweek cannot capture the importance of the work performed by most federal employees" (00:08:11).

• Authority and Coherence Issues: Aaron Blake from The Washington Post highlighted the contradiction between the White House's stance on Musk's authority and the aggressive nature of the directive. He remarked, "It’s perhaps the first big example of would-be allies publicly resisting Musk's influence," underscoring the internal conflict within the administration (00:08:11).

• Operational Inefficiency: Scott Politic of Slate pointed out the procedural flaws, asserting that the directive operates outside established federal evaluation systems. He illustrated the inefficiency by calculating the excessive time federal employees would spend responding to the email, deeming it a "cartoonish example of government waste" (00:08:11).

---

Reactions from the Right

Conservative perspectives on Musk’s directive are more mixed, with some defending Musk while others express skepticism:

• Public Relations Stunt: Andrew C. McCarthy from National Review described the incident as a "farcical episode," suggesting that it serves more as a public relations stunt to energize Trump's base rather than a genuine effort to enhance government efficiency. He noted, "Still, a sudden court ruling that Musk is wielding power unconstitutionally would stop the murky operation in its tracks" (00:08:11).

• Practical Concerns: Jeff Charles from Town Hall acknowledged the harshness of Musk's approach, stating, "Threatening someone's job over an email might not be the most efficient leadership strategy," and advocated for agency heads to manage employee evaluations independently (00:08:11).

• Authority and Fairness: Conservative columnist Chuck Ross echoed Isaac Saul’s sentiments, emphasizing that "no self-respecting person would respond to this request," and highlighting the overreach in Musk and Trump’s authority (00:08:11). Rick Moran of Town Hall questioned the legitimacy of Musk and Trump's authority to impose such directives, calling into question the constitutionality of their actions.

---

Host’s Take

Isaac Saul offers a critical analysis of the situation, highlighting the inefficiency and disrespect embedded in Musk’s directive:

• Ineffectiveness and Disrespect: Isaac argues that Musk’s approach is counterproductive and demeaning, stating, "No self-respecting person would take an email preceded by an explicit threat of losing their job" (00:18:32). He underscores the emotional and practical turmoil caused by such abrupt directives, illustrating personal stories of affected employees.

• Questioning Musk’s Motives: Saul speculates that Musk may be using this directive as a pretext for mass layoffs rather than a genuine attempt to enhance efficiency. He points out the lack of transparency and the potential personal gains Musk could have from reducing the federal workforce, questioning the sustainability of DOGE’s cost-saving claims.

• Long-Term Implications: Isaac foresees significant backlash from the public and within political spheres, predicting that both Republicans and Democrats will demand greater accountability from Congress regarding the management of federal agencies and employee welfare. He emphasizes the human cost, citing real-life examples of employees facing severe personal hardships due to the layoffs (00:18:32).

---

Reader Question: Steve Bannon’s Gesture

Toward the episode’s conclusion, Isaac addresses a listener’s query about Steve Bannon’s gesture at CPAC:

• Clarification of the Gesture: In response to Trent from Oklahoma City, managing editor Ari Weitzman confirms that Steve Bannon’s gesture was an intentional Nazi salute. Weitzman differentiates it from Elon Musk’s actions, asserting, “He can’t claim to be socially awkward...I think his Sieg hail was meant to troll people who were bothered by what Elon Musk did” (00:26:59).

• Implications for the GOP: Weitzman criticizes the lack of condemnation from Republican leaders, noting, “This mainstreaming of Nazi salutes...is just an enormous problem for the right right now” (00:26:59). This incident highlights deeper issues within the GOP regarding extremist behaviors becoming normalized.

---

Additional Insights

Under the Radar:

• Housing Market Trends: Home prices in the U.S. rose for the 19th consecutive month in January, while sales of previously owned homes declined by 4.9% from December. Elevated mortgage rates, hovering around 7%, have significantly impacted housing affordability. (00:29:41)

Numbers Section:

• Federal Workforce Statistics:

  • Competitive Service: 1.5 million federal workers.
  • Excepted Service: 735,000 federal workers, including roles like lawyers and chaplains.
  • Senior Executive Service (SES): 8,700 managers with 850 subject to removal without cause.

• Public Opinion Polls:

  • Government Efficiency Agency Support: 72% favor.
  • DOGE’s Expenditure Cuts: 60% approval.
  • Elon Musk’s Job Performance:
    • Overall: 34% approve, 49% disapprove.
    • By Party: 6% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans approve. (00:29:41)

Have a Nice Day Story:

• Accessible Dental Care Initiative: A Massachusetts community college's clinic offers free teeth cleanings to children and discounted rates to adults, addressing affordability issues and educating patients on oral health. (00:29:41)

---

Conclusion

This episode of Tangle provides an in-depth exploration of Elon Musk’s controversial directive to federal workers, dissecting the multifaceted reactions from both political spectrums and offering a critical perspective on the operation and implications of the DOGE initiative. Isaac Saul effectively highlights the administrative chaos, legal quandaries, and human impact resulting from this directive, while also addressing broader political tensions exemplified by Steve Bannon’s actions at CPAC.

Listeners gain a nuanced understanding of the complexities involved in federal workforce management and the broader political strategies at play, underpinned by insightful commentary and critical analysis from all sides of the debate.

Transcript

[Boost Mobile Representative]

The new Boost Mobile network is offering unlimited talk, text and data for just $25 a month for life.

That sounds like a threat.

Then how do you think we should say it?

Unlimited talk, text and data for just $25 a month for the rest of your life?

I don't know.

Until your ultimate demise.

What if we just say forever? Okay, $25 a month. Forever.

Get unlimited talk, text and Data for just $25 a month with Boost Mobile Forever.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

After 30 gigabytes, customers may experience slower speeds. Customers will pay $25 a month as long as they remain active on the Boost Unlimited plan.

Ever wonder just how good or bad your diet really is? The Mayo Clinic Diet has just launched its new Diet Score, a game changer in tracking your health. Your Diet Score is personalized, based on tracking key activities that deliver healthy habits, support weight loss, and deliver long term sustainable success. The Mayo Clinic Diet was developed by doctors and dietitians from the world renowned Mayo Clinic. It's real foods, no gimmicks or fad diets. Just life changing healthy nutrition. Join today for access to customizable meal plans, tracking tools, group coaching and at home workoutseverything you need for long term success. Get your free Diet score [e-mail] go no sign up needed now. The Mayo Clinic Diet accepts the CareCredit credit card. The Mayo Clinic Healthy Weight Loss for Life.

[Il Makiage Representative]

Did you know one in two women wear the wrong foundation. Matching foundation is hard, but il maquillage makes it easy. Take the Power Match quiz to find a perfect match in seconds customized to your unique skin tone, undertone and coverage needs. With 600,000 5 star reviews woke up like this is our best selling foundation for a reason. Available in 50 shades of weightless Natural Coverage and with Try before youe Buy, you can try your full size at home for 14 days. Just pay shipping. Take the quiz at ilmaquillage.com Quiz that's IL M A K I A G E.com Quiz Foreign.

[Boost Mobile Representative]

This is Tangle.

[Isaac Saul]

Good morning, good afternoon and good evening and welcome to the Tangle Podcast. A place where you get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today today's episode, we're going to be talking about the email that was sent to over 2 million federal workers over the weekend asking them to explain five things they've done in the last week, accomplish in the last week or be fired by Monday at midnight. This is part of the Elon Musk Doge initiative. So we're going to dive in and break it down, share some views from the left and the right and then my take as always, if you have thoughts, feel free to write in and let us [e-mail] with that, I'm going to send it over to John to break down today's main story and I'll be back for my take.

[John Law]

Thanks, Isaac, and welcome everybody. Here are your quick hits for today. First up, the United States, North Korea, Russia and Belarus voted against a UN Resolution designating Russia as the aggressor in the Ukraine war. The US later introduced a resolution to the UN Security Council that did not blame Russia for starting the war and and called for a resolution to the conflict, which passed with Russia and China's support. Five European countries abstained. Number two, President Donald Trump hosted French President Emmanuel Macron at the White House, where the two discussed efforts to end the war in Ukraine. Macron said that the United States and France need to work together to determine lasting future security guarantees. Number three, on Monday, a federal judge temporarily banned the Department of Education and Office of Personnel Management from sharing personally identifying information with members of the Department of Government Efficiency. Separately, a federal judge declined the Associated Press's request for a temporary restraining order to prevent the White House from excluding its reporters from press events over its refusal to refer to the recently renamed Gulf of America by its new official name. Number four, former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy formally announced his bid for governor of Ohio. And number five, Apple said it will commit $500 billion to US manufacturing over the next four years, including opening a new facility in Houston by 2026 to support the company's artificial intelligence system.

[News Anchor]

Well, federal employees suing Elon Musk over this email. You see it right here behind me, sent to millions. It happens. Sent. Here's what it asks. What did you do last week? The email demands employees list five things that they accomplished. The directive, previewed in a post by Elon Musk on X, threatens, quote, failure to respond will be taken as a resignation. And by the way, there's a deadline, a ticking clock here. Midnight tonight. So here's the five agencies encouraging employees not to respond. The Department of Defense, the FBI, and the Department of National Intelligence among them. Those are some heavy hitter organizations there.

[John Law]

On Saturday, Elon Musk posted on X that federal employees must respond to an email from the Office of Personnel Management detailing their work in the past, adding that failure to respond will be taken as resignation. Shortly after, OPM emailed federal employees asking for a list of five bullet points of what you accomplished last week by Monday at 11:59pm Eastern Time. However, many agencies have instructed their workers to not reply to the email while unions representing federal employees filed suit to challenge the order. McLaurin Pinover, a spokeswoman for OPM, said the request was part of the Trump administration's commitment to an efficient and accountable federal workforce. President Donald Trump also praised the initiative, calling it genius and saying if people don't respond, it's very possible that there is no such person or they're not working. However, on Monday, the White House appeared to soften its position, saying that employees should defer to their agency heads for guidance on how to respond to the email. Also on Monday, Elon Musk posted on X that at the discretion of the president, federal workers will be given another chance to respond before facing termination. The Department of Health and Human Services issued competing instructions to employees, with department head Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Telling workers to comply with the email after the agency's acting general counsel instructed some not to. Many other agencies and departments, including the Justice Department, Federal Bureau of Investigation, State Department, the Department of Defense, the National Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence told employees not to respond. Others, however, instructed workers to reply to the email, and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy posted his five actions on X. Musk's directive follows a series of efforts by the Department of Government Efficiency, or dogecoin, and the OPM, to reduce the size of the federal workforce. Notably, OPM offered full pay and benefits through September to workers who agreed to resign by February 6th. Approximately 65,000 employees accepted the offer. Separately, the Trump administration is attempting to lay off thousands of probationary employees. On Sunday, unions challenging the probationary employee layoffs added a claim to their existing lawsuit that the email did not follow any existing requirement for these employees to report to opm. The unions are seeking a court order barring any action against a federal employee who does not comply with the email. Today, we'll share arguments from the left and the right about Musk and OPM's request, and then Isaac's take.

[Isaac Saul]

We'll be right back after this quick break.

[Boost Mobile Representative]

To make switching to the new Boost Mobile risk free, we're offering a 30 day money back guarantee.

So why wouldn't you switch from Verizon or T Mobile?

Because you have nothing to lose. Boost Mobile is offering a 30 day money back guarantee.

No, I asked why wouldn't you switch from Verizon or T Mobile?

Oh, wouldn't because you love wasting money as a way to punish yourself because your mother never showed you enough love as a child.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Whoa, easy there.

[Isaac Saul]

Yeah.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

Applies to online activations. Requires port in and autopay. Customers activating in stores may be charged non refundable activation fees.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile with a message for everyone paying Big Wireless way too much.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

Please, for the love of everything good.

[Ryan Reynolds]

In this world, stop with Mint. You can get premium wireless for just $15 a month. Of course, if you enjoy overpaying. No judgments. But that's weird.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

Okay, one judgment anyway. Give it a [e-mail] Switch upfront payment.

[John Law]

Of $45 for 3 month plan equivalent to $15 per month required intro rate first 3 months only, then full price.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

Plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See full [e-mail].

[John Law]

All right, first up, let's start with what the left is saying. The left argues the move is the latest misguided attempt by Musk to slash the federal workforce. Some highlight the contradiction that Musk is acting while the White House claims he has no authority. Others say firing workers based on their response to the email would be illegal. In Just Security, Nicholas Bednar wrote about what just happened with the Musk OPM email. The OPM email does not specify how the agency intends to use the information it collects from employees. More broadly, the email raises concerns about the efficacy of the Trump administration's efforts to cut the federal workforce, Bednar said. Five bullet points, describing one workweek a week that included a federal holiday, cannot capture the importance of the work performed by most federal employees. And it certainly cannot capture the functions of those federal employees already placed on administrative leave who were explicitly prohibited from performing their job duties during the week in question. In essence, it appears that the Trump administration is demanding that employees justify their positions. But but to date, the administration has done a consistently poor job of determining which positions are in fact important, bednar wrote. Its poor track record is evidenced by agencies efforts to recall fired probationary employees after realizing they perform crucial functions such as managing the nuclear stockpile and the power grid, or those working on responses to bird flu. Meaningful reorganization of the federal workforce requires more than five bullet points. It requires a holistic evaluation of how federal programs operate. In the Washington Post, Aaron Blake said Elon Musk's threat to federal employees is the latest episode to call into question the White House's downplaying of his authority. The email, which even some Republicans have criticized as ham handed or cruel, gave the workers a deadline of Monday night to respond. But what has happened since has been somewhat remarkable. Leaders at Several agencies, including Trump's own political appointees, have instructed employees not to respond to the email or to hold off on responding, blake wrote. It's perhaps the first big example of would be allies publicly resisting Musk's influence. Musk's tactics have been rubbing some Trump advisors the wrong way, as the Post reported Friday, but the tensions hadn't really broken out into the open. Beyond that is how it all squares with the White House's claims about Musk's role. Just five days before the fiasco, after all, the White House had claimed Musk had no formal or actual authority then he basically threatened to end the employment of large numbers of federal workers if those employees didn't do what he told them, blake said. In other words, it's an unclear mess, and it's one the White House and the Trump administration surely aren't done being made to account for, both in courts of law and in the court of public opinion, where Musk is increasingly a problem for them. In Slate, Scott Politic explored the true purpose of Elon Musk's weekend email ultimatum. It's unclear why Musk's non response resignation threat doesn't also appear in the email, but one might plausibly speculate that an attorney intervened, given the Merit Systems Protection Board's unequivocal finding that a federal worker's resignation must be affirmative and voluntary as a matter of fundamental fairness and due process, palutek wrote. Federal agencies are already required, per 5 USC Section 4302, to establish appraisal systems to rate employees performance. The agencies are constrained to use objective standards and criteria appropriate to the particular employee being evaluated. The email from hropm.gov exists entirely outside of this framework, starting with the fact that the OPM isn't an agency. A minor irony to Musk's dead workers collecting paychecks claim is that Musk himself is apparently a legal ghost heading, but not really heading Doge, a quasi legal entity that is presently enjoying all the authority of a congressionally created federal agency without any of the reporting and transparency obligations, Politics said For Russell Vaught, the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the architect of Project 2025, the primary motivating factor behind his proposal to make it easier to fire federal workers is clearly malice. For Musk, a relative newcomer to far right politics, it seems to be more about domination and the lulz. Alright, that is it for what the left is saying. Which brings us to what the the right is say the right is mixed on the directive, though some say the episode could benefit Doge in the long run by clarifying the limits of Musk's authority. Many defend Musk and say the reaction from federal workers has been overblown. Others suggest the request creates its own inefficiencies. In national review, Andrew C. McCarthy called it a farcical episode but said the pushback to Musk could help Doge in court. I'm not sure Doge is much more than a public relations stunt. It is titillating the Trump base by sending all the right Democrats and government employee unions into a tizzy, mccarthy wrote. Still, a sudden court ruling that Musk is wielding power unconstitutionally would stop the Murky operation in its tracks. It probably helps Doge, then, that the officials with unquestioned executive authority are treating Musk as though he's just making suggestions, even if that may irk the president. Obviously, it's not a bad idea for the Trump administration to scrutinize the federal workforce, but that's why federal agencies have layers of supervision, McCarthy said. I suspect this is mostly theater. By the time you read this in the dog years that are the new days of the Trump era, the episode will no doubt have been overrun by five or ten new constitutional crises. But by countermanding Musk, Trump officials have probably helped him show that he's mainly a consultant, not a major government officer for appointments clause purposes. In Town hall, Jeff Charles said federal workers freakout over Elon Musk's email reaches new heights. I don't really see a problem with this request, but I can understand those arguing that it's a bit hamfisted. As Representative John Curtis, the Republican from Utah, said during an interview, if I could say one thing to Elon Musk, it's like, please put a dose of compassion in this and that. It's a false narrative to say that we have to cut and you have to be cruel to do it as well, charles wrote. Threatening someone's job over an email might not be the most efficient leadership strategy if Musk and his team want to get people on board with his initiative. Moreover, this should probably be left to the heads of federal agencies to determine how best to ascertain what their workers are accomplishing. It is also worth noting that there is no way Doge will be able to comb over the tens of thousands of emails sent by federal employees. However, the notion that such a move would require a lawsuit also seems silly. Yes, the approach was harsh, but how difficult is it to send a quick email listing five things one accomplished over the past seven days? This is one of several lawsuits folks on the left have filed to stymie the Doge agenda. So it seems likely that this is motivated more by politics than fairness. In the Atlantic, Colin Friedersdorf wrote about the obvious inefficiency of Elon Musk's New Order on Saturday. Elon Musk, the billionaire charged by President Donald Trump with cutting government wasted, alerted the public to massive inefficiency in the federal bureaucracy. Government employees would soon be distracted from their actual work by a request from on high, friedersdorf said. As someone who hates government waste, I sympathize with any Americans who are cheering this initiative because they believe it will expose workers who accomplish nothing. But those Americans are cheering, albeit unwittingly, for massive inefficiency. Just the latest example of the chaos Doge has created across the federal government, undercutting its own aims. Consider America's roughly 14,000 Federal Aviation Administration air traffic controllers. If each one of them spends just 10 minutes opening their work email, finding this request, drafting a response, proofreading it and sending it off, that adds up to 2,333 hours of work. Can you think of a more cartoonish example of government waste than using 292 workdays worth of man hours to clarify that? Last week air traffic controllers monitored planes, friedersdorff wrote. Watching Musk, a man recently focused on electric cars and getting humanity to mars direct his inventiveness toward the public sector equivalent of TPS reports is vexing. Improving federal efficiency is a worthy project. Trump will have no incentive to deliver on it if his base credulously cheers gambits as wasteful and poorly defended as this one. All right, let's head over to Isaac for his take.

[Isaac Saul]

Alright, that is it for what the left and the right are saying. Which brings us to my take. So most days I can see the merit in arguments from across the political spectrum. After all, the issues we cover are usually divisive and rife with nuance and historical debate and ideological differences. But every once in a while I'm left surprised by how silly our politics are. Like when an idea as unhelpful and counterproductive as this email becomes at all controversial. Let me start here. No self respecting person would take an email preceded by an explicit threat of losing their job, demanding they list five things they did in the last week as a fair way to be treated. Every single person listening to this podcast would be somewhere between annoyed and enraged and rightfully so. Imagine your reaction to getting this on a Saturday night with a 48 hour deadline to answer and at the behest of a person you never met, don't work for, and who is gleefully mocking you on social media while issuing it. Of course, nothing illustrates the self defeating and inefficient nature of this directive more than Trump's own agency heads instructing their employees to ignore the email. Kash Patel, the newly appointed head of the FBI, told employees not to respond to it, saying, the FBI, through the Office of the Director, is in charge of all our review processes and will conduct reviews in accordance with FBI procedures. Which, you know. Obviously it should not be surprising that agency heads are drawing a line with Musk here. Employee evaluations and firing decisions should not be made by a group of government neophytes doge scouring 2 to 3 million emails and then using artificial intelligence try to understand an agency they've never worked for or stepped foot inside. Musk's supporters responded to the indignation from employees by saying that this happens in the private industry and government workers should get fired if they can't play ball. This too is preposterous. I've never heard of a single boss aside from Elon Musk giving all their employees a shot clock to detail five things they'd done in the last week, regardless of whether they are on assignment or leave under the threat of termination. At minimum, they would torch their reputation in whatever industry they worked and at worst be staring down a lawsuit and the end of their own career. More personally, I'm the founder and CEO of a media business. I would never treat my employees like this because on top of being an inefficient waste of their time, it's also incredibly disrespectful and cruel. It would make me a crappy boss, it would make tangle a crappy organization to work for, and our product would suffer for it. Some pundits on the left have tried to attack Musk by valorizing federal workers like just securities. Nicholas Bednar, under what the Left Is Saying, who argued five bullet points describing one workweek a week that included a federal holiday cannot capture the importance of the work performed by most federal employees. This is an unnecessary claim, and probably untrue of many federal employees. The point isn't that most federal workers jobs are so important and complex they can't summarize their week in five bullet points. The point is that it's ridiculous to demand millions of people to respond to an email account they've never heard from before to keep their jobs while the person behind the plan bangs on across social media about what horrible, lazy, inefficient people they are. Interestingly, liberals and anti Trumpers aren't the only ones making these arguments. Now some conservatives have started standing up for the federal workforce. Chuck Ross, a pro Trump columnist and writer, made the same points I did about how no self respecting person would respond to this request. Conservative pundit Rick Moran argued neither Musk nor Trump has the authority to request such a list or make continued employment in the federal government contingent on replying. And David Marcus, one of the most reliably pro Trump voices at Fox News, wrote the federal workers aren't billionaires or grifters, adding that the federal government's problem is not allegedly lazy middle class government employees, it's corrupt wealthy politicians and their donors. Now those are some good arguments. Musk naturally has begun to change his explanation for this exercise. It's no longer about keeping the most important employees or figuring out what the federal employees are actually up to, but now purportedly a plot to discover federal workers who don't exist. Non existent people or the identities of dead people are being used to collect paychecks, musk posted. In other words, there is outright fraud. Even if this underlying premise were true, why send an email to 2 million people to figure it out? Why not just run their names and emails through the Doge algorithm we've been hearing so much about and try to contact those people directly? More importantly, I don't think the premise is true. Some examples exist of the government wasting millions of dollars on ghost employees like police and military in Afghanistan, but we already have an oversight mechanism that catches that sort of thing. I suspect Musk's assertion will go down the same way. The claim that billions of dollars are being sent to 150 year old people on Social Security went, which Trump's own Social Security administrator recently clarified was wrong, though Trump continues to repeat it. All of this leaves me dumbfounded. Musk is not an idiot. He's not incompetent. Anyone pretending so is deluding themselves. So what's he up to? My best guess is he is trying to force more people out or look for an excuse for mass layoffs since fewer employees took the fork in the road buyout than he apparently expected. As I said last week, Musk stands to benefit personally in a dozen different ways from a beleaguered downsized federal workforce, which has always been what Doge is really about. He is too competent to truly believe he's making the government more efficient or more cost friendly. Right now, the Wall Street Journal officially estimated that Doge will save the government roughly $2.6 billion over the next year. What are the odds that after all the future settlements, the rehiring of workers, the increased costs of hiring workers who feel these jobs are not secure, and the eight months of severance we're paying the 75,000 people who took the buyout offer that this all ends up costing us money? I honestly don't know how long any of this will go on. Republicans in Congress are privately starting to worry, and who can blame them? ABC estimates these layoffs are impacting some 200,000 people. I suspect that means tens of millions of Americans now know someone who has lost their job due to these cuts. Some of them will have their lives ruined. They'll lose homes or get divorced or have to scramble to find health insurance for their sick spouse. I know of one woman who is five months pregnant working in the national parks and had to leave her temporary housing provided by her job to go apartment hunting. Now unemployed in a rural area with limited opportunities and sparse housing, she was fired without cause or explanation as part of the Doge cuts. People are going to be pissed. Social media is replete with Trump voters asking why they or their family members lost their jobs, and those people are going to start demanding more responsibility from Congress. Eventually, Republicans and Democrats will have to do their jobs and control how these agencies are being run, how this money is being spent, and who gets to keep their jobs. We'll be right back after this quick break.

[Boost Mobile Representative]

To make switching to the new Boost Mobile risk free, we're offering a 30 day money back guarantee.

So why wouldn't you switch from Verizon or T Mobile?

Because you have nothing to lose. Boost Mobile is offering a 30 day money back guarantee.

No, I asked why wouldn't you switch from Verizon or T Mobile?

Wouldn't because you love wasting money as a way to punish yourself because your mother never showed you enough love as a child.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Whoa, easy there.

[Isaac Saul]

Yeah.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

Applies to online activations. Requires port in and auto pay. Customers activating in stores may be charged non refundable activation fees.

[Progressive Insurance Representative]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states.

[Isaac Saul]

All right, that is it for my take. Which brings us to today's reader question. This reader question was actually directed to Ari Weitzman, our managing editor. So I'm going to pass the mic over to him and he's going to respond directly to it.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Thanks, Isaac. Nice to hear your voice again. And I'm sure we're going to have plenty to talk about for our Sunday podcast this weekend. So reader question this week comes from Trent from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, who asked, was what Steve Bannon did at CPAC a Nazi salute, or will you explain that one away too? So straight away, yes, it was a Nazi salute. So for context, in January I wrote that I didn't think what Elon Musk did was an intentional Nazi salute. For that, I got a lot of pushback for my interpretation, and I don't want to relitigate all that here, but if you're curious to hear more, you can listen to my thought process in more detail on a podcast that I did with Magdalena, our Social Media and Much Other Things manager, last January. So instead, let's talk about Bannon's gesture that was different from what Musk did, and I can't reasonably explain that away by any other motive than an intentional salute. He wasn't throwing his heart out to the audience. He wasn't waving to someone. He can't claim to be socially awkward. Bannon yelled fight. Fight. Fight. Then he paused, turned, raised his right arm. He then paused again and said, amen. I don't see anything else Bannon could have been doing. I think his Sieg hail was meant to troll people who were bothered by what Elon Musk did. But even if that's the case, that means Bannon was taunting people who thought Musk gave an intentional Nazi salute by giving an intentional Nazi salute. People can say or do something bad or hurtful accidentally, and I'm pretty tolerant about that, especially if they respond with humility. Musk's response was notably poor, which rightfully eroded a lot of grace he might otherwise have been granted. Bannon made a Nazi salute in a way that didn't seem accidental, and I don't expect his response to be any better. And so far it hasn't been. Perhaps worst of all is that no Republicans or CPAC attendees publicly condemned the moment. The only pushback has come from a far right French politician. This mainstreaming of Nazi salutes, even sarcastically, is just an enormous problem for the right right now. It is not a leftist hallucination. And still, images of Democrats mid wave don't cancel out this problem for the health of the gop. This is a rot that they have to address. Now that's all I gotta say about that. So I'm gonna send it back to John to ease us out of the rest of this podcast. Good luck with the tone shift, John.

[John Law]

Thanks, Isaac. Here's your under the radar story for today folks. Home prices in the United States increased on an annual basis for the 19th consecutive month in January, while sales of previously occupied homes fell 4.9% from December. Economists point mortgage rates as a primary driver of the trend as 30 year mortgage rates have risen to roughly 7% in 2025 after falling to a two year low last September. Mortgage rates have refused to budge for several months despite multiple rounds of short term interest rate cuts by the federal res. Lawrence Yoon, chief economist at the national association of Realtors, said when combined with the elevated home prices, housing affordability remains a major challenge. The Associated Press has this story and there's a link in today's episode Description all right, next up is our numbers section. The approximate number of federal workers who are in the competitive service, meaning they cannot be fired, suspended, demoted or subject to other adverse actions without cause after they pass a probationary period, is 1.5 million, according to Pew Research. The approximate number of federal workers who are in the excepted service, meaning their jobs are exempted from the regular hiring rules examples include lawyers, teachers and chaplains is 735,000. The approximate number of federal workers who are in a special classification called the Senior Executive Service as managers of major programs and projects is 8,700. The approximate number of SES employees who can typically be fired or removed from the SES at the discretion of the head of their agency is 850. The percentage of Americans who think there should be a US government agency focused on efficiency initiatives is 72%, according to a February 2025 Harvard CAHPS poll. The percentage of Americans who think DOGE is helping to make major cuts in government expenditures is 60%. The percentage of U.S. adults who approve and disapprove, respectively, of Elon Musk's job performance in the federal government is 34% and 49%, according to a February 2025 Washington Post Ipsos poll. And the percentage of Democrats and Republicans, respectively, who approve of Elon Musk's job performance in the Federal government is 6% and 70%. And last but not least, our have a nice day story. Finding accessible and affordable dental care can be a struggle for many families, but a community college in Massachusetts is tackling this problem. In a symbiotic clinic, dental students are given the opportunity to provide care to real patients, offering free teeth cleaning to children and discounted rates to adults. The February Clinic for Children's Dental Health Week focuses on all things oral care, teaching patients how nutrition impacts dental health, as well as teaching them about dental procedures. CBS News has this story and there's a link in today's episode description. All right, everybody, that is it for today's episode. As always, if you'd like to support our work, Please go to retangle.com where you can sign up for a newsletter membership, podcast membership, or a bundled subscription that gets you the best discount we offer. We'll be right back here tomorrow. For Isaac and the rest of the crew, this is John Law signing off. Have a great day, y'all. Peace.

[Isaac Saul]

Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by Duke Thomas. Our script is edited by Ari Weitzman, Will K back daily, Saul and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was made by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager. The music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. And if you are looking for more from Tango, please go check out our [e-mail] that's readtangle.com.

[Boost Mobile Representative]

To make switching to the new Boost Mobile risk free, we're offering a 30 day money back guarantee.

So why wouldn't you switch from Verizon or T Mobile?

Because you have nothing to lose. Boost Mobile is offering a 30 day money back guarantee.

No, I asked why wouldn't. Wouldn't you switch from Verizon or T Mobile?

Wouldn't because you love wasting money as a way to punish yourself because your mother never showed you enough love as a child.

[Ryan Reynolds]

Whoa, easy there.

[Isaac Saul]

Yeah.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

Applies to online activations, requires port in and auto pay. Customers activating in stores may be charged non refundable activation fees.

[Progressive Insurance Representative]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states.

[Mayo Clinic Representative]

Ever wonder just how good or bad your diet really is? The Mayo Clinic Diet has just launched its new Diet Score, a game changer in tracking your health. Your diet Score is personalized based on tracking key activities that deliver healthy habits, support weight loss and deliver long term sustainable success. The Mayo Clinic Diet was developed by doctors and dietitians from the world renowned Mayo Clinic. It's real foods. No gimmicks or fad diets. Just life changing, healthy nutrition. Join today for access to customizable meal plans, tracking tools, group coaching, and at home. Workoutseverything you need for long term success. Get your free diet score [e-mail] go. No sign up needed now. The Mayo Clinic Diet accepts the CareCredit credit card. The Mayo Clinic Diet Healthy Weight Loss for life.