Janine Jackson interviewed Public Citizen’s Lisa Gilbert about lame duck Donald Trump for the December 25, 2020, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.
Janine Jackson: Whatever he or his minions fantasize, Donald Trump will no longer be president on January 20. Whether the Trump administration tested US institutions and aspects of governance or revealed existing weaknesses, it’s clear that the tsunami of corruption and callousness has left wreckage.
As eager as we may be now to look ahead, or just away, the truth is Trump as a lame duck continues to wreak important havoc. We talked a couple of weeks ago about the zealous return to federal executions, unheard of for decades, but many other actions are less visible. Public Citizen is keeping their eyes on the administration’s last-minute maneuvers; they have a new web tool to track them.
We’re joined now by Lisa Gilbert, Public Citizen’s executive vice president and also founder of the Not Above the Law coalition. She joins us by phone. Welcome to CounterSpin, Lisa Gilbert.
Lisa Gilbert: Thanks so much for having me.
JJ: Well, some of it, as I say, we can see. The attempt to hobble the transition, for instance, initially barring staff from having any contact with Biden’s incoming team. That’s the type of thing that is, yes, graceless and norm-breaking, but also materially harmful. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg of what Public Citizen’s new web tool calls “Trump’s Lame Duck Tantrum.”
LG: That’s right. So we are looking across the board at the ways that we expect Trump to do dirty deals or try to pardon cronies or roll back regulations that are critical to public health and safety in these last critical weeks. We wanted this tool to come into effect at a moment where we think it’s critical that we not lose the thread of what Trump is able to do in this moment, and pay deep attention to it, in the hopes that we can either stop what he’s doing, or at least alert the Biden administration of these last-minute actions, so they can roll them back in turn.
JJ: Just to take one, that Trump was going to roll back regulations on corporations was clear. I spoke with Amit Narang from Public Citizen early in the administration, when Trump issued that goofy executive order that for any new rule, federal agencies had to repeal two existing rules. You know, it’s just the kind of ham-fisted…. I thought Public Citizen maybe even brought a suit around that. But that order fairly represents the corporate capture of the regulatory process under Trump, would you say?
LG: Absolutely. I mean, that order was so inane, the idea that you would promulgate one safety rule and arbitrarily remove two others that are not connected to it in any way, off the books. It just shows such a lack of regard for human life, and for health and safety, and a devotion to the idea that regulations are somehow by their very nature bad, or “red tape” or harmful. And we know that the opposite is true: All they are is the end stage of a law, when we actually get to protect people.
JJ: Right, right. What are some of the regulations in that sphere? What are some of the things that Trump is up to now that you think it’s worth keeping an eye on?
LG: Since we are at the end of an administration, we do usually see presidents try to accomplish their goals in a flurry of activity. And since one of Trump’s goals is to roll back health, safety, environmental and financial regulations, we are certainly seeing a flurry of those kinds of last-minute activities. So in our tracker, we take a look at some of the rules that have been rolled back since November 3, since the beginning of the lame duck.
So there are environmental rules, like approving coal ash in the environment; the EPA finalized a rule that outlines a process for approving existing unlined coal ash pits. They’ve, for example, removed the protected status of the gray wolf. Or allowing air polluters to avoid oversight; the EPA recently changed its interpretation of the Clean Air Act to benefit polluters. It’s just all of the same cloth, this idea that we better rush these rules out the door to hurt our environment.
That’s not the only area, but just a really tangible one that people clearly understand. Public protections are needed, and the Trump administration is walking us in the wrong direction.
JJ: There’s a section in this web tool—it’s a live database; people can add to it—called “Dirty Dealing,” and, you know, we think of favor trading, and it’s crummy, but as you’re saying on environmental things, it’s not just somebody getting richer, it’s actual material harm that might not be as easy to undo as we think. So some of the deals that Trump has made have had impacts that are beyond just thinking, “That’s not how business should be done.”
Lisa Gilbert: “He’s rushing through controversial hirings, filling commissions, changing the structure of the federal government to make it easier to move political appointees to become long-term career appointees.”
LG: That’s completely right. We look at a couple of different categories of so-called “dirty dealing.” And, of course, there are many that we could have highlighted, but we looked in part at where his legal defense donations have been going. He’s raised hundreds of millions of dollars from his supporters for legal defense in his ill-thought quest to overturn the election results, but there’s a real question as to where that money is going to go. You know, is it intended to further either Trump or his family or his cronies’ political ambitions? Is it going to cover his campaign debts? We really don’t know, and it is very unsavory to see him raising money for something we know is a fool’s errand, but then using it for political ambitions. So we highlight that.
We look at how he’s thinking about rewarding allies as another sort of dirty deal. We think that it’s a little bit scary to think about how people are burrowing into the administration at this moment. He’s rushing through controversial hirings, filling commissions, changing the structure of the federal government to make it easier to move political appointees to become long-term career appointees, all with this idea of undercutting the Biden administration and leaving his loyalists behind him. We talk about punishing enemies, as well, in the dirty dealing space. So I think there are numerous categories—unfortunately, he is the king of dirty deals, but this tracker tries to take a slice of how he’s been spending his time on this front during the lame duck.
JJ: If I could just ask you a kind of process question, because I’m from the DC area, and my parents worked for the federal government, and I remember, it’s almost a joke, “The appointees come in…and then they go,” you know, and the career civil servants are like, “Yeah, here we still are, doing the work.” So when you say “burrowing” Trump folks within agencies, can you explain that a little bit, he’s actually changing rules to allow folks who are appointees to become career?
LG: Yes. So he passed an executive order, which we are also tracking, his lame duck executive orders, to create a new type of federal employee, a Schedule F federal employee. It has two problems: These federal employees are easier to fire and let go. So if he turns career employees into Schedule Fs, it means that they have less protection, so we’re worried about that. But also, there is flexibility to move people in and out, between political and career, within this new Schedule F determination. And so he has begun to do that, moving a set of politicals into these career posts, so that means they will stay. And it is definitely, as you say, unusual; politicals tend to come and go with the new administration.
JJ: Absolutely.
LG: And it’s a political direction. And that might not happen as much as it has in other transitions.
JJ: I find that actually deeply concerning—all of this is, certainly, but that’s a real structural change that I think, maybe if you’re not familiar with the culture, or just the way things work in DC, might not stand out to you, but it certainly is dramatic.
Well, we’ve mentioned that this is a database, a web tool. I think there’s a lot of information that reporters would find useful for starting stories, but also that just the general public might want to keep up on. How are you hoping that this tool will be used?
LG: Both of those ways. So our hope is that in this moment, where some of these actions by President Trump are not being taken notice of by reporters, by the general public, that they will find this tool and use it, and also help us by flagging things they’re seeing, so we can add it to the database. It’s pretty egregious, the level of activity that the Trump administration is undertaking in this moment, and we don’t want to miss anything. So I think the hope is that as Trump does things like move to politicize the civil service, under the noses of all of us, tools like this will help us stay on top of it and push back in the media.
JJ: We’ve been speaking with Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen. Find their work online at Citizen.org. Lisa Gilbert, thank you so much for joining us this week on CounterSpin,
LG: Thank you.
Surely what he is doing can easily be undone. I know that Executive orders are not as strong s legislative ones. Biden’s team needs to find out every executive order he has enacted and dissolve it, just like he did with Obama’s orders.
Janine, why didn’t you correct Josh Cho when he purported that Donald Trump would remain in office even if he lost. Your only way of disagreeing with Cho is to be snarky with those of us that liked him? Cho bashes Trump by stating Trump won’t leave the office. You bash Trump supporters by stating that Trump will not be in the office on the 20th. You both contradict each other but only by attacking the right – not by attacking each other.
Shameless.
Hey fuckface: Trump and his cronies are trying to pull off a coup as I type this and his dipshit supporters are trying to storm past the police to break into the Capitol Building.
This is not some “oh well, Trump will leave on Jan. 20th; no harm-no foul” situation.
One of us will apologize to the other come January 20th. You kiss you mother with that mouth?
Fuck off, asshole! There’s a woman dead, law enforcement officers injured, and public property being invaded.
I wouldn’t apologize to you if the Pope begged me to. You are flat-out fucking wrong: whether he leaves office or not, the coup has been attempted and the damage has been done and it’s not gonna magically reset on Jan. 21st even if Trump drags his fat ass outta the White House.
Cultists, the fucking lot of ya!
FWIW, I agree that the protesters should not have stormed the Capitol. I hope they are prosecuted. I also believe that all of the democrats who looted and burned buildings should be prosecuted. I also believe that if the Democrats try to add a 51st state or expand the Supreme Court, there will be a significant backlash. One which I will support as will millions of others.
FWIW? It’s worth jack-shit, fuckface. You dipshit cultists enabled this shit. You people stoked these fires with lies and excuses and now the rest of the country has to burn because of it? Fuck the fuck off.
If there was any justice in the world, you– and everyone of your Trumpist cult members’– opinions and votes would be ignored by the GOP from now on.
Just like you democrats fanned the flames of the deaths during the “peaceful” protests? That is on you if this is on me. You’re such a charming person.
With 16,000 pages of new law, what is wrong with removing some? You and I unknowingly break laws every day. This is how the government can coerce people into guilty pleas if they are targeting somebody. Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime. Yes, make it mandatory to remove laws. Many are out of date. Many are overly burdensome. Many are punitive. What happened to Liberty? It’s on every coin in your pocket. We should all want liberty. It is what our founding fathers died for. It is what most of our fallen soldiers have died for. The least we can do is strive for more liberty in our government.
I’ve been watching Fox News. Not one person has justified the violence. NOBODY. Contrast that with left wing media during the riots. They ALL justified the violence. Of course, nobody here on FAIR will write about those differences.
Hannity just said it the Liberals fault this happened.
Sorry. It was Carlson on Fox News saying that. Not Hannity.
Quote him. I watched it. I have it recorded.
Carlson: “Actually, we do know what could happen, because it’s happening right now. It’s happened in countless other countries over countless centuries. And the cycle is always the same because human nature never changes.
“Listen to us!” scream the population.
“Shut up and do what you’re told,” say their leaders.
In the face of dissent, the first instinct of illegitimate leadership is to crack down on the population, but crackdowns never make it better. They always make the country more volatile and more dangerous. The people in charge rarely understand that. They don’t care to learn or listen, because all of this conversation is a referendum on them and their leadership. So they clamp down harder.
This is the Romanov program, and it ends badly every single time. But that doesn’t mean they won’t try it again. Of course they will, because it’s their nature. It’s how we got here in the first place.”
So, in other words: It’s the Dem’s fault for not listening to the Trumpists’ completely delusional claims of election fraud and it’s the GOP’s fault for not somehow overturning the election results are re-installing Trump. And to have the nerve to say this after his network and him personally perpetuated the “election was stolen” lie for weeks and whipped a bunch of morons into a frenzy?
Just as I suspected, the quote was taken out of context. I rewatched Tucker’s segment. He clearly stated that there is no excuse for what was done. That it is never acceptable. He then went on to talk about how we got here and that is the point you quoted.
I’m not certain if you were purposely being deceitful or if you just weren’t thorough. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt (which you would never give me).
Yeah… That’s not what taken outta context means.
You can condemn the violence all you want, but if you do that and then say, “but here’s what really caused the violence and it’s not the violent peoples’ fault!; violence is only natural to happen in situations like this”, then you’re stuck with that.
I never alleged he failed to condemn the violence. I said, and demonstrated, that he’s blaming liberals for it.
Do you not want to know why we on the right are upset? I’m very upset with the left for many reasons. BOTH sides ratchet it up. Trying to impeach Trump when he has nine days left in office infuriates me. MANY companies blocking right wing speech and a company’s ability to operate infuriates me even more. I’ve had left wingers threaten to shut down my business because I view men and women as being different. I’ve had them attempt to dox me. I’ve never done that to anyone.
We all know why some on the left looted, killed, and committed arson. We heard the reasons every single night on every channel and in every article.
No intellectual curiosity? No limit too far? No push back that maybe enough is enough? No want for balanced coverage (violence wrong from either side)? Watch right wing news for an entire night. See how often the violence is condemned. Then go back six months and do the same on CNN. Violence will have been justified and its existence denied. “Peaceful protest” (while a fire is in the background).
Liberty uber alles.
Oh, I know why people on the right are upset. It’s just that after 4 years of “fuck your feelings”, “no more bullshit,” “he tells it like it is,” and elections have consequences”, I’m outta any semblance of patience with all your bullshit. You all gripe about snowflakes and safe spaces and now that the shoe’s on the other foot, you can’t take it? Cry me a river.
Yeah, we know some on the left did engage in violence. You know what else we know: None of them tried to overthrow the government and none of them did anything they did while being enabled by a whiny dipshit President. There’s a quantum difference in that.
Oh, it infuriates you that they’re impeaching Trump with 9 days left in his term? Well, I’m mushroom-cloud-layin’ motherfucker, motherfucker!
Every day he remains in office after trying to illegally and unconstitutionally overturn the results of the election– not to even mention his role in fomenting his dipshit followers to violence– is an affront to everything the country stood for up until 2016. Which is apparently when about 40% of us decided to follow a fat ass narcissist conman into some sorta cult.
You mean like the fake dossier and the impeachment? That type of government overthrow?
I have been decent to you. You may not like what I say, but I haven’t called you an MFer. This is precisely why none of us can agree: people like you make discourse impossible.
I have been decent to you. You may not like what I say, but I haven’t called you an MFer. This is precisely why none of us can agree: people like you make discourse impossible.
______________________________________________
It’s a quote from Pulp Fiction, dumbass.
You mean like the fake dossier and the impeachment? That type of government overthrow?
_________________________________________________
And no. No, not that type of government overthrow. And characterizing them as overthrows is like calling a shaving cut a near-fatal sword wound.
The Steele Dossier was your typical political shenanigan that went next-to-nowhere; and by the way: if Trump doesn’t like being the subject of political shenanigans, then maybe he shouldn’t have forced his way into the political game.
And the impeachment is the constitutionally-provided mechanism to address when a President commits a high crime or misdemeanor, and, I submit to you, is entirely appropriate when a President threatens to sell out the national security interests of his country in order to leverage a foreign government into announcing the investigation of the relative of a political rival. That’s treason-adjacent in my book: he’s telling a foreign ally that their aid is in jeopardy unless they dig up political dirt for him. When the British came looking for help in WW2, did FDR say, “Sure we could help ya, and it would really be in the US’s interests if German expansion was stopped. But I just need you to dig up dirt on the Supreme Court justices who keep blocking my recovery agenda.”? You think it’s OK to just give a pass on something like that? I sure don’t.
FFS, the Dem’s do something you don’t like and you think the appropriate retort is to nullify an election, even using violence to do so? That’s like if I get sick of my neighbor’s leaves blowing into my yard and instead of talking to him about it or something, I burn down his trees and his house and I murder his entire extended family.
So don’t sit back and try and play victim with me, pal.