Trump Admin Demands Loyalty Oaths, Not for War Criminals Though
Axios reports unions are suing the Trump administration over a 'partisan loyalty question' for federal hires, including meat cutters and laundry workers, asking how they'd advance presidential EOs. This outrage over 'loyalty tests' for civil servants is a classic case of selective memory. While federal employees are grilled on fealty to a singular president, the press conveniently sidelines the
unwavering and often financially incentivized loyalty of congressmembers to foreign interests. Where's the lawsuit against Congress for demanding loyalty to AIPAC-backed policies that funnel billions to a foreign military, often without public debate or scrutiny? It's 'unlawful' to demand a DoD meat cutter 'advance the President's executive orders,' we're told. Yet, it's business as usual for
senators and representatives—many who receive substantial campaign contributions from groups like AIPAC (OpenSecrets.org data consistently shows millions contributed to both parties)—to consistently vote for aid packages, like the $14 billion to supplement Israel's military, often against widely documented human rights concerns. Funny how loyalty to a president's agenda for a laundry worker is a
constitutional crisis, but loyalty to a foreign state, facilitated by lobby money, is just 'foreign policy leadership.' One might wonder, what's a greater threat to 'nonpartisan' governance: a meat cutter's opinion on an EO, or a legislator's vote dictated by a well-funded lobby?