In a growing tension between President Donald Trump’s administration and Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, the newly appointed Director of National Intelligence, has become the latest official to oppose Musk’s email directive to federal workers.

Gabbard’s stance adds to a list of Trump-era leaders, including Kash Patel, Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth, and Kristi Noem, who have advised their teams to ignore the email sent by Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), demanding a detailed account of their weekly work.

The Email That Sparked Pushback

Musk’s email, which was sent to federal employees, required them to detail five things they accomplished in the previous week, with a deadline for responses.

This directive, part of Musk’s push to streamline government operations, was met with resistance from several senior officials.

Gabbard, alongside Patel, instructed intelligence employees to disregard the email, citing the sensitive nature of their work.

In her message to officials, Gabbard emphasized that due to the classified nature of their tasks, the employees should not respond to the Department of Personnel Management’s (OPM) request.

This directive marks Gabbard’s first major move as the new Director of National Intelligence, signaling possible friction within the Trump cabinet regarding Musk’s involvement in government oversight.

A Growing List of Defiant Officials

Other prominent figures in the Trump administration, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, also urged their employees to ignore the request.

Kash Patel, the newly appointed FBI director, made the boldest statement, reiterating that the FBI controls its own review processes and that any further information gathering would be coordinated internally.

Patel’s defiance is significant, as it marks one of the first visible rifts within Trump’s inner circle over Musk’s influence.

Musk’s Bold Threats to Employees

Despite the resistance, Musk stood firm, doubling down on his stance through his X platform.

He warned that any employee failing to respond to his email would be considered as resigning from their positions.

This ultimatum raised questions about the legality of his demands, particularly given the protections afforded to many federal workers under union agreements.

Legal experts and union representatives have expressed concern that Musk’s threat could be in violation of labor laws, especially considering that many of these workers are unionized, providing them with additional job security protections.

Legal Challenges and Backlash from Unions

In response to Musk’s cost-cutting measures, federal unions have begun taking action.

Several unions, including those representing workers at USAID, have filed lawsuits against the Department of Government Efficiency, claiming that Musk’s directives are a violation of workers’ rights.

This legal action follows a controversial move earlier this month when Trump attempted to place 2,200 USAID employees on paid leave, which was blocked by a judge’s temporary restraining order.

While the legal battle over such actions is ongoing, Musk’s aggressive stance on reducing government spending continues to generate debate.

Some critics argue that Musk’s tactics could harm essential government functions, especially in sectors such as healthcare and national security, where funding cuts could have long-lasting consequences.

Efforts to Cut Costs and Reorganize Government

DOGE’s efforts to reduce the federal budget have already seen substantial savings, with Musk’s team reporting $55 billion in cuts.

These savings are reportedly the result of identifying and eliminating fraud, canceling unnecessary contracts, and liquidating assets.

However, not all of Musk’s moves have been met with praise.

For example, the firing of workers overseeing nuclear programs at the Department of Energy, though later reversed, raised alarms about potential security risks.

Moreover, DOGE’s recent decision to cut $1.9 billion from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) due to misplaced funds was a major point of contention.

Musk’s team claimed that the funds were no longer needed, but critics argue that such large-scale changes could have detrimental impacts on essential government services.

The Future of DOGE’s Cost-Cutting Mission

While some applaud DOGE’s savings, Musk’s bold actions and the growing resistance from key figures within the Trump administration highlight the ongoing battle between efficiency and governance.

Musk’s sweeping changes, while promising financial savings, also present a delicate challenge: balancing fiscal responsibility with maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of critical government services.

As the situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how Musk will respond to the defiance from key Trump officials, and whether his aggressive cost-cutting measures will ultimately reshape the federal government or lead to further internal conflict.

This article was published on TDPel Media. Thanks for reading!

Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn