Marco Pollo

Is the U.S. government reorganizing or unraveling? Last week, the U.S. Department of State experienced mass layoffs, and now, the U.S. Supreme Court has cleared a path for further layoffs at the U.S. Department of Education. What will be the result? Are American voters aware of the impacts? And: how do MAGA voters and politicians feel about Trump's NATO weapons deal? Does it break the Trump campaign's promise to stop U.S. involvement in foreign wars? We cover all of this in under 15 minutes!

Be sure to follow us on Instagram and TikTok @thefridaybrief and sign up for The Friday Brief newsletter on thefridaybrief.com.

Chapters

• 0:00 Welcome
• 0:21 Why are there MAGA rifts?
• 2:34 Trump announces tariffs for Canda
• 2:56 Will the U.S. waltz into another SignalGate?
• 5:29 Why are mass layoffs happening in government?
• 7:51 Marco Pollo
• 11:08 Until next time!

Transcript

Welcome to The Friday Brief, a news podcast by Girl Friday. I’m Phoenix Ricks, the CEO of Girl Friday and your host. This is your brief for July 15, 2025.  

Are MAGA voters happy with the direction they voted for? Not exactly. The BBC reported on the rifts within MAGA political circles. One of the MAGA campaign promises was ending foreign aid and foreign wars. So, Trump’s plan to sell weapons to NATO for Ukraine has upset members of Congress like Marjorie Taylor Greene. She told The New York Times, "It's not just Ukraine; it's all foreign wars in general and a lot of foreign aid. This is what we campaigned on. This is what I promised also to my district. This is what everybody voted for. And I believe we have to maintain the course." Now, if you do not follow far-right influencers in the U.S., just know that many of them echo Greene’s sentiments. The war between Ukraine and Russia has been a longstanding topic of conversation because many MAGA supporters and influencers believe in the America First doctrine and are pro-isolation. There are some differences in opinion, though, for instance, some MAGA supporters and influencers completely support giving aid and military resources to Israel, but not to other allied nations. 

In trying to appease his base, Trump has emphasized that the U.S. weapons will be purchased, not donated as aid. He said, "We're not buying it, but we will manufacture it, and they're going to be paying for it." Greene disagreed and posted to social media about “backdoor deals through NATO.” She also told The New York Times, "Without a shadow of a doubt, our tax dollars are being used," referring to indirect costs such as training missions. She added, "I said it on every rally stage: no more money to Ukraine. We want peace. We just want peace for those people." Has she, or anyone with an America First agenda, detailed a plan for achieving peace in Ukraine without U.S., EU, and NATO support? I haven’t seen one, but I’ll continue to watch this space. 

In more concerning news about U.S. relations with longstanding allies, the BBC reported that Prime Minister Mark Carney indicated that Canada will likely have to accept tariffs in any U.S. trade deals right now. Last week, Trump announced that he would impose a 35% duty on Canadian goods, effective August 1st. Our diplomatic relations with the United Nations may be changing soon, as Mike Waltz is likely to become the next U.S. ambassador to the UN. A lot has happened since Signal Gate, so just to recap: U.S. top officials across intelligence and defense shared confidential information about military plans on Signal in a group chat, breaking established standards in the U.S. government for this type of sensitive communication. NPR reported that former National Security Adviser Mike Waltz faced a predictable uphill battle in his Senate confirmation hearing to become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. 

Now, remember, Waltz was terminated from the role because he was the one who accidentally added a journalist to that infamous Signal chat about attacking Yemen. Senate Democrats pressed for accountability in the hearing. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia described his actions as "amateurish," and Senator Coons of Delaware inquired about potential disciplinary actions. Waltz said, "No disciplinary action was taken from the White House investigation." 

Waltz stumbled and deflected, noting that Biden’s team even recommended Signal. Senator Booker of New Jersey wasn’t pleased with those explanations and deflections. He noted that Waltz had displayed “profound cowardice.” Senator Jacky Rosen of Nevada raised a very interesting point. Waltz apparently remained on the government payroll after being removed from his role. When Senator Rosen questioned this, Waltz replied, "I was not fired. The president never said that, nor did the vice president. I was kept on as an adviser." At a time when the government is talking about funding cuts, it seems unusual, to me at least, that an employee who was effectively terminated from a top position still received a salary. Despite Democrats' concerns, Waltz's nomination to the United Nations is likely to move forward, as he appears to have the full support of Senate Republicans, who are suddenly and specifically unconcerned about the potential for more sensitive leaks. 

CNN says that the Supreme Court has cleared a path for the Trump administration to continue dismantling the Department of Education through mass layoffs. A lower court ruling had blocked those plans. This is Trump trying to fulfill his campaign promise. But, like the dismantling and defunding of other agencies, his base may not be as thrilled with the result as they are with the promise. For instance, not long ago, we saw that American farmers who voted for Trump were completely unaware that defunding USAID would impact their bottom line, because the U.S. government was paying them to ship their crops abroad. As NPR reported back in February, those food aid programs also helped states build relationships with other countries for trade. The relationship might start with aid, but then end with paid exports when the other nation no longer needs aid support. Those farmers voted for this administration, without actually reading the implications of the policy promises. 

I fear we’re about to see the same thing unfold across school districts with teachers and administrators who did not fully realize what dismantling the Department of Education would do to their schools and their salaries. As CNN noted, “most public-school policies are a function of state government.” So, the people who insist that the power should reside within the state already have that authority. Where the federal government comes in is with funding for programs to support low-income families, rural underfunded schools, and children with disabilities. Can the Trump administration move all of those critical programs to other agencies? They said they will, but the question is whether those agencies have the capacity and institutional knowledge to smoothly run those programs from day one at scale. If not, millions of children could be negatively affected by lapses or inadequate funding. 

In other U.S. agency news, on Friday, more than 1,300 employees of the U.S. Department of State were laid off as part of the Trump administration’s government reorganization plan. The Washington Post says these plans were underway as Marco Rubio made his first visit to Asia last week. Just imagine, the staffers who coordinated that trip - everything from talking points to engagements - did not know that they were about to be fired. A State Department spokesperson said. “Many of the offices that we plan to eliminate originally were created to address specific needs,” adding, “We saw that many of these offices had served an outdated purpose, had strayed from their original purpose, or were simply duplicative.” 

The U.S. government is not averse to reorganizations, but typically, agencies, such as the State Department, retain their employees as they relocate them to new offices with new responsibilities. I know, because I was part of a reorganization at the State Department during the first Trump administration. They looked at our portfolios and assigned us to new offices that were designed to meet the administration’s goals. This time around, though, 1,300 people, often experts in their fields, were laid off instead of being posted to new offices. I have no doubt that my former colleagues will find incredible roles in the private sector, with nonprofits, and in intergovernmental organizations, but I’m disheartened for them — and selfishly, for all of us. 

I think about former colleagues who worked in diplomatic security operations, ensuring that Americans abroad were safe during times of conflict. I think about the policy experts, who understood the nuances of geopolitical crises and could develop talking points on the spot for the Secretary. I think about the human rights and climate specialists, who were able to accurately predict emerging trends. All of these things happen behind the scenes and with little fanfare, but you see the result on the world stage. Marco Rubio had a unique and historic opportunity to defend his agency’s worth and reorganize with existing talent. Most Americans will not immediately feel the impact of these layoffs. It won’t have the same immediate impact as the USAID and USDA cuts that hurt American farmers, or the Education cuts that could impact schoolchildren and teachers. The State Department does many things, but I’ve often thought of it like a flood siren. You won’t know that you needed those experts until the siren doesn’t go off to warn you of the impending flood. 

Thank you for listening to The Friday Brief. We are now on daily, so make sure you and your friends don’t miss an episode! Check out thefridaybrief.com, and follow The Friday Brief on Instagram and TikTok. Until next time, I’m Phoenix Ricks signing off from Washington, DC. Let’s work together for a world of good.