Politics
Commentary: Trump is cheering Elon Musk now, but if anything goes wrong it will be the president's problem
WASHINGTON — For the last six weeks, President Trump’s demolition man Elon Musk has rampaged across the federal bureaucracy — freezing payments, firing workers and disabling entire agencies.
“We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper,” Musk bragged, referring to the foreign aid agency.
And Trump cheered him on. “Elon is doing a great job, but I would like to see him get more aggressive,” the president posted on social media in capital letters.
But Trump and Musk are planting political landmines across the government that could end up damaging them both.
Many federal programs are intended to respond to disasters — or prevent them. Cut those programs and you increase the risk that small problems will turn into big ones.
I asked officials and management experts to help compile a list of possible side effects from Musk’s blitzkrieg. Here’s a sample:
Cutting the Food and Drug Administration could cripple the agency’s ability to trace foodborne illnesses back to the source, an important step in stopping their spread.
Slashing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could slow the agency’s ability to react to epidemics, like the measles outbreak in Texas that has infected at least 146 people and killed one child, the first U.S. measles death since 2015.
Firing Federal Aviation Administration technicians, as the Trump administration did in January, could make air transportation less safe or merely less reliable. Musk tweeted last week that the FAA’s air control communications system “is breaking down very rapidly [and] putting air traveler safety at serious risk.” (But take that with a grain of salt; he’s promoting his Starlink system as a replacement.)
Purging the FBI and CIA could weaken efforts to prevent terrorist attacks. FBI Director Kash Patel has said he wants to send every agent in his Washington headquarters to field offices to “be cops.” If he follows through, that would include many of the bureau’s top counterterrorism specialists.
Other possible effects from the government-wide chaos are less terrifying, but would still disrupt Americans’ lives.
If Musk’s technicians inadvertently insert errors in the government’s financial payment systems, Social Security checks could be interrupted, Medicare benefits disrupted, IRS tax refunds delayed.
Officials also worry that confidential information could leak — not only taxpayers’ personal details, but classified data about intelligence or defense programs.
Musk’s layoffs are also likely to produce a massive brain drain, driving talented managers out of the civil service and discouraging young people from joining. That will make federal agencies less efficient, not more.
Thankfully, none of the worst-case scenarios has occurred. But any one of them could cause a political explosion that would damage Trump’s presidency.
The president may not recognize it, but he’s taking major risks — not only for the country, but for his standing with the public.
“We all love the idea of slashing the size of government,” said Donald F. Kettl, a public administration scholar at the University of Maryland. “But the more you cut back on government capacities, the more likely something will go wrong. And the instant it affects peoples’ lives — trouble with Social Security checks, problems with Medicare, having to worry about getting on an airplane — it becomes a political problem.”
“Trump is playing with unexploded bombs here,” said Elaine Kamarck of the Brookings Institution. “By doing this in so many places across the government — and by cutting with an axe instead of a scalpel — you increase the possibility of a major f— up.”
Kamarck says just one highly visible management failure can sink a presidency. Think Hurricane Katrina under President George W. Bush, the Obamacare rollout under President Obama, the Afghanistan withdrawal under President Biden — or Trump’s chaotic initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Kamarck wrote a book about such disasters: “Why Presidents Fail.”
Trump has taken high-risk behavior in the Oval Office to a new level, she said.
“Other presidents took hits because they missed the signals when problems were developing,” she said. “This is the first president who actually created the problems himself.”
The public is already worried. A Reuters/IPSOS poll released Feb. 20 found that 58% of Americans said they were concerned that Social Security payments and other federal benefits could be delayed by Musk’s actions. A slightly larger number, 62%, said they do not support the freeze on federal grants and services that Musk’s team imposed.
As Kamarck found, presidents often get blamed for disasters they didn’t cause directly. “Obama didn’t design the Obamacare website that crashed, but he set up the system that produced it,” she noted.
Whether or not a president deserves it, politicians in the other party can be relied on to blame him. When a bungled FDA inspection led to a shortage of baby formula in 2022, Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York said the root cause was “Joe Biden’s failed leadership.”
Trump critics have already warned that they will hold the president accountable if a disaster occurs on his watch.
“If there’s a terrorist attack in this country over the next four years, and he’s put someone who is judged to not be qualified in as the director of the FBI, then that blood is going to be on his hands,” former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, said last year.
If any of the problems on that list do occur, it will only be natural for the public to ask whether Trump and Musk were responsible. It will also be natural for reporters to investigate whether Musk’s actions played a part.
Trump might be tempted to pin responsibility on Musk and his young cyberwarriors, but it’s too late for that. He’s spent the last six weeks publicly cheering Musk’s actions and urging him to do more.
“It’s his mess now,” Kamarck said.
Let’s hope no disasters materialize. But if any of them do, Trump will learn the meaning of what then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell called the Pottery Barn rule: You break it, you own it.
A personal note: This will be my last weekly column for The Times. I’m grateful to the many readers who have given me part of their time over the last 16 years of columnizing — even, and sometimes especially, the ones who told me politely when I was wrong.
Politics
Iran fires missiles at US bases across Middle East after American strikes on nuclear, IRGC sites
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Iran launched missile and drone strikes targeting U.S. military facilities in multiple Middle Eastern countries Friday, retaliating after coordinated U.S.–Israeli strikes on Iranian military and nuclear-linked sites.
Explosions were reported in or near areas hosting American forces in Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Jordan, according to regional officials and state media accounts. Several of those governments said their air defense systems intercepted incoming projectiles.
It remains unclear whether any U.S. service members were killed or injured, and the extent of potential damage to American facilities has not yet been confirmed. U.S. officials have not publicly released casualty figures or formal damage assessments.
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) described the operation as a direct response to what Tehran called “aggression” against Iranian territory earlier in the day. Iranian officials claimed they targeted U.S. military infrastructure and command facilities.
Explosions were reported in or near areas hosting American forces in Bahrain, pictured above. (Photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Adelola Tinubu/U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/U.S. 5th Fleet )
The United States military earlier carried out strikes against what officials described as high-value Iranian targets, including IRGC facilities, naval assets and underground sites believed to be associated with Iran’s nuclear program. One U.S. official told Fox News that American forces had “suppressed” Iranian air defenses in the initial wave of strikes.
Tomahawk cruise missiles were used in the opening phase of the U.S. operation, according to a U.S. official. The campaign was described as a multi-geographic operation designed to overwhelm Iran’s defensive capabilities and could continue for multiple days. Officials also indicated the U.S. employed one-way attack drones in combat for the first time.
IF KHAMENEI FALLS, WHO TAKES IRAN? STRIKES WILL EXPOSE POWER VACUUM — AND THE IRGC’S GRIP
Smoke rises after reported Iranian missile attacks, following strikes by the United States and Israel against Iran, in Manama, Bahrain, Feb. 28, 2026. (Reuters)
Iran’s retaliatory barrage targeted countries that host American forces, including Bahrain — home to the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet — as well as Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base and the UAE’s Al Dhafra Air Base. Authorities in those nations reported intercepting many of the incoming missiles. At least one civilian was killed in the UAE by falling debris, according to local authorities.
Iranian officials characterized their response as proportionate and warned of additional action if strikes continue. A senior U.S. official described the Iranian retaliation as “ineffective,” though independent assessments of the overall impact are still developing.
Smoke rises over the city after the Israeli army launched a second wave of airstrikes on Iran in Tehran on Feb. 28, 2026. (Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Regional governments condemned the strikes on their territory as violations of sovereignty, raising the risk that additional countries could become directly involved if escalation continues.
The situation remains fluid, with military and diplomatic channels active across the region. Pentagon officials are expected to provide further updates as damage assessments and casualty reviews are completed.
Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report.
Politics
Why Iran resists giving up its nuclear program, even as Trump threatens strikes
Embassy staffers and dependents evacuating, airlines suspending service, eyes in Iran warily turning skyward for signs of an attack.
The prospects of a showdown between the U.S. and Iran loom ever higher, as massive American naval and air power lies in wait off Iran’s shores and land borders.
Yet little of that urgency is felt in Iran’s government. Rather than quickly acquiescing to President Trump’s demands, Iranian diplomats persist in the kind of torturously slow diplomatic dance that marked previous discussions with the U.S., a pace that prompted Trump to declare on Friday that the Iranians were not negotiating in “good faith.”
But For Iran’s leadership, Iranian experts say, concessions of the sort Trump are asking for about nuclear power and the country’s role in the Middle East undermine the very ethos of the Islamic Republic and the decades-old project it has created.
“As an Islamic theocracy, Iran serves as a role model for the Islamic world. And as a role model, we cannot capitulate,” said Hamid Reza Taraghi, who heads international affairs for Iran’s Islamic Coalition Party, or Hezb-e Motalefeh Eslami.
Besides, he added, “militarily we are strong enough to fight back and make any enemy regret attacking us.”
Even as another round of negotiations ended with no resolution this week, the U.S. has completed a buildup involving more than 150 aircraft into the region, along with roughly a third of all active U.S. ships.
Observers say those forces remain insufficient for anything beyond a short campaign of a few weeks or a high-intensity kinetic strike.
Iran would be sure to retaliate, perhaps against an aircraft carrier or the many U.S. military bases arrayed in the region. Though such an attack is unlikely to destroy its target, it could damage or at least disrupt operations, demonstrating that “American power is not untouchable,” said Hooshang Talé, a former Iranian parliamentarian.
Tehran could also mobilize paramilitary groups it cultivated in the region, including Iraqi militias and Yemen’s Houthis, Talé added. Other U.S. rivals, such as Russia and China, may seize the opportunity to launch their own campaigns elsewhere in the world while the U.S. remains preoccupied in the Middle East, he said.
“From this perspective, Iran would not be acting entirely alone,” Tale said. “Indirect alignment among U.S. adversaries — even without a formal alliance — would create a cascading effect.”
We’re not exactly happy with the way they’re negotiating and, again, they cannot have nuclear weapons
— President Trump
The U.S. demands Iran give up all nuclear enrichment and relinquish existing stockpiles of enriched uranium so as to stop any path to developing a bomb. Iran has repeatedly stated it does not want to build a nuclear weapon and that nuclear enrichment would be for exclusively peaceful purposes.
The Trump administration has also talked about curtailing Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support to proxy groups, such as Hezbollah, in the region, though those have not been consistent demands. Tehran insists the talks should be limited to the nuclear issue.
After indirect negotiations on Thursday, Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi — the mediator for the talks in Geneva — lauded what he said was “significant progress.” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said there had been “constructive proposals.”
Trump, however, struck a frustrated tone when speaking to reporters on Friday.
“We’re not exactly happy with the way they’re negotiating and, again, they cannot have nuclear weapons,” he said.
Trump also downplayed concerns that an attack could escalate into a longer conflict.
This frame grab from footage circulating on social media shows protesters dancing and cheering around a bonfire during an anti-government protest in Tehran, Iran, on Jan. 9.
(Uncredited / Associated Press)
“I guess you could say there’s always a risk. You know, when there’s war, there’s a risk in anything, both good and bad,” Trump said.
Three days earlier, in his State of the Union address Tuesday, said, “My preference is to solve this problem through diplomacy. But one thing is certain, I will never allow the world’s number one sponsor of terror, which they are by far, to have a nuclear weapon — can’t let that happen.”
There are other signs an attack could be imminent.
On Friday, the U.S. Embassy in Israel allowed staff to leave the country if they wished. That followed an earlier move this week to evacuate dependents in the embassy in Lebanon. Other countries have followed suit, including the U.K, which pulled its embassy staff in Tehran. Meanwhile, several airlines have suspended service to Israel and Iran.
A U.S. military campaign would come at a sensitive time for Iran’s leadership.
The country’s armed forces are still recovering from the June war with Israel and the U.S, which left more than 1,200 people dead and more than 6,000 injured in Iran. In Israel, 28 people were killed and dozens injured.
Unrest in January — when security forces killed anywhere from 3,000 to 30,000 protesters (estimates range wildly) — means the government has no shortage of domestic enemies. Meanwhile, long-term sanctions have hobbled Iran’s economy and left most Iranians desperately poor.
Despite those vulnerabilities, observers say the U.S. buildup is likely to make Iran dig in its heels, especially because it would not want to set the precedent of giving up positions at the barrel of a U.S. gun.
Other U.S. demands would constitute red lines. Its missile arsenal, for example, counts as its main counter to the U.S. and Israel, said Rose Kelanic, Director of the Middle East Program at the Defense Priorities think tank.
“Iran’s deterrence policy is defense by attrition. They act like a porcupine so the bear will drop them… The missiles are the quills,” she said, adding that the strategy means Iran cannot fully defend against the U.S., but could inflict pain.
At the same time, although mechanisms to monitor nuclear enrichment exist, reining in Tehran’s support for proxy groups would be a much harder matter to verify.
But the larger issue is that Iran doesn’t trust Trump to follow through on whatever the negotiations reach.
After all, it was Trump who withdrew from an Obama-era deal designed to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions, despite widespread consensus Iran was in compliance.
Trump and numerous other critics complained Iran was not constrained in its other “malign activities,” such as support for militant groups in the Middle East and development of ballistic missiles. The Trump administration embarked on a policy of “maximum pressure” hoping to bring Iran to its knees, but it was met with what Iran watchers called maximum resistance.
In June, he joined Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, a move that didn’t result in the Islamic Republic returning to negotiations and accepting Trump’s terms. And he has waxed wistfully about regime change.
“Trump has worked very hard to make U.S. threats credible by amassing this huge military force offshore, and they’re extremely credible at this point,” Kelanic said.
“But he also has to make his assurances credible that if Iran agrees to U.S. demands, that the U.S. won’t attack Iran anyway.”
Talé, the former parliamentarian, put it differently.
“If Iranian diplomats demonstrate flexibility, Trump will be more emboldened,” he said. “That’s why Iran, as a sovereign nation, must not capitulate to any foreign power, including America.”
Politics
Video: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry
new video loaded: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry
transcript
transcript
Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry
Former President Bill Clinton told members of the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door deposition that he “saw nothing” and had done nothing wrong when he associated with Jeffrey Epstein decades ago.
-
“Cause we don’t know when the video will be out. I don’t know when the transcript will be out. We’ve asked that they be out as quickly as possible.” “I don’t like seeing him deposed, but they certainly went after me a lot more than that.” “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify. So we’re once again going to make that call that we did yesterday. We are now asking and demanding that President Trump officially come in and testify in front of the Oversight Committee.” “Ranking Member Garcia asked President Clinton, quote, ‘Should President Trump be called to answer questions from this committee?’ And President Clinton said, that’s for you to decide. And the president went on to say that the President Trump has never said anything to me to make me think he was involved. “The way Chairman Comer described it, I don’t think is a complete, accurate description of what actually was said. So let’s release the full transcript.”
By Jackeline Luna
February 27, 2026
-
World3 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts3 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO3 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT