This week, three prominent figures from the Trump administration have made headlines: Russell Vought, who is dismantling the federal bureaucracy; Stephen Miller, whose rhetoric has intensified while law enforcement tactics escalate; and Eric Trump, who appears to be navigating lucrative opportunities in Indonesia. Additionally, an intriguing incident at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) merits attention.
Before diving deeper into these individuals, let me provide some political context through Seymour Hersh’s alarming forecast:
What’s happening now may be a trial run for the use of forces to interfere on behalf of the president and the Republican Party in states where the Democratic Party has a chance to win crucial seats in next fall’s Congressional elections. I’ve been told by someone with inside knowledge that planning for such action is now underway in the White House.
I have previously analyzed the troubling combination of bad intentions, effective strategies, outright corruption, and notable incompetence within the Trump administration here and here.
While there has been a fair share of absurdity this week, the situation demands we prioritize more significant actions over petty antics.
Among the key figures Hersh alludes to is Russell Vought, who seems to be leading the charge in the Trump administration’s control over the federal government.
The Washington Post elaborated on this rapidly unfolding situation:
The White House was aggressively infringing on Congress’s power of budgeting even before it began using the ongoing government shutdown as a pretext for further reducing expenditures.
Democratic and several Republican appropriators are angered at the Trump White House for unilaterally canceling contracts, abruptly freezing billions of dollars in congressionally authorized funding, and testing a “pocket rescission” approach to permanently withhold $5 billion in foreign aid without congressional input.
“It is an absolute threat to Congress’s power of the purse,” stated Robert Shea, a Republican with experience in senior roles at the White House budget office. “I come from a time when the administration feared the repercussions of crossing the appropriators. That time has passed.”
The Trump administration, under budget chief Russell Vought, is deliberately testing the limits of executive power regarding government spending. Vought seeks Supreme Court consideration of challenges to the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, which imposes strict limits on the executive’s ability to withhold money approved by Congress. He argues that this law is unconstitutional.
“If Congress relinquishes its authority over its fundamental powers, I cannot imagine what basis they will have moving forward,” remarked Brendan Buck, a former aide to GOP House speakers Paul D. Ryan and John A. Boehner. “Presidents will exploit this opportunity, recognizing that Congress has diminished its own authority and the administration can simply override them.”
Initially, Vought collaborated with Elon Musk on the DOGE initiative and engaged with the Heritage Foundation on its Project 25 efforts.
However, he now appears to be acting independently, as reported by Politico in June:
While Musk bulldozed through bureaucracy and largely ignored Capitol Hill, Vought employs a different strategy: driving change through established institutional pathways, private discussions, and contingency planning. His meticulous approach and nuanced understanding of government have instilled fear among federal employees as he seeks to bolster presidential authority and dismantle significant portions of the federal bureaucracy, demonstrating that, unlike Musk, Vought knows how to achieve results.
His ultimate ambition is to align bureaucratic functions with the presidential agenda, redirecting power from Washington back to families, churches, local governments, and states, as outlined in Project 2025.
“It wasn’t actually Musk holding a chainsaw. Musk was a chainsaw in Russ Vought’s hands,” explained a senior government figure with insight into Trump’s governmental redesign, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The contrast between the two figures is stark and increasingly significant. Musk operated with an almost reckless urgency, while Vought has shown he can be methodical before taking decisive action. While Musk staffed DOGE with young tech loyalists, Vought’s team at OMB is comprised of seasoned professionals with extensive governmental backgrounds.
Sy Hersh previously cautioned about Vought’s ambitions prior to his assertive maneuvers during the current government shutdown:
The administration’s ambitions for unilateral power upon winning last year’s election were no secret. Although some issues now lie with the Supreme Court, the GOP’s plan has always aimed at significantly diminishing the federal workforce in Washington and other areas. A major revelation occurred last fall during an interview Russell Vought had with Tucker Carlson before his Senate confirmation as head of the Office of Management and Budget: “We have to tackle the woke and weaponized bureaucracy and empower the president to take control of the Executive Branch,” he asserted. “The president must act as swiftly and decisively as possible from a radical Constitutional standpoint to dismantle the bureaucracies in their strongholds.
“There are no independent agencies,” Vought reiterated. “Massive layoffs and firings are forthcoming, particularly in agencies that we can do without.”
Vought framed this initiative as a divine mission: “We’re here for a reason . . . because God has granted us a specific purpose for a specific time, and it’s crucial we manage these moments wisely.” (I discussed this interview last fall.) Vought has seized upon the current shutdown as an opportunity to further dismiss federal workers, many believed to lean Democratic.
Hersh had previously commented on Vought back in May, referencing a Fall 2024 Vought interview with Carlson:
“The left has spent over a century creating this unaccountable fourth branch of the administrative state. You and I might refer to it as the regime—this administrative entity that operates free of presidential oversight. It allows the system to evolve as it has been. . . . They have, in essence, seized authority. . . . They possess no legitimate authority in the Constitution. . . . The president declares: ‘I understand the tools available to me, and I will utilize them in service of the American people . . . I will accomplish what I promised to do . . .’ It may certainly appear chaotic in the media. That’s acceptable.
“Yes, it’s essential to disrupt entrenched interests. You must challenge people’s established beliefs and disrupt their long-held territories. . . . This will inevitably cause upheaval within these bureaucracies, and you must endure that. . . . I openly advocate for upheaval within these bureaucracies.
“The bureaucracies do not have the American people’s best interests at heart. . . . I do wish to create instability for that bureaucracy in a manner that liberates the citizens from those who have amassed power without constitutional or legislative endorsement. Does that mean we harbor ill will toward all federal workers? No, certainly not. . . . We want to reform the bureaucracies that are harming American citizens. . . . I firmly believe [Trump is] an unparalleled historical figure capable of rescuing the nation. . . . We exist for a purpose. We exist because God has granted us a mission for a timely goal, and it is our duty to honor the circumstances we face.”
Now, assuming Vought is diligently laying the groundwork to eliminate internal opposition ahead of the 2026 elections, it seems Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller is managing the enforcement on the ground.
ICE has been dominating the news landscape, diverting attention from Vought’s administrative actions and the ongoing government shutdown. Consider these sensational headlines:
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) October 15, 2025
Miller also caught attention during a recent CNN interview, suggesting that ICE might disregard court orders in Oregon.
Boris Sanchez, CNN: You described the district judge’s ruling blocking National Guard deployment in Oregon as illegal insurrection. Will the administration comply with that ruling?
Stephen Miller: The administration filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit today. I should note, we recently won a similar case in the Ninth Circuit concerning the federal housing of the California National Guard.
After a technical glitch, Sanchez posed the same question again, prompting a slightly altered response from Miller:
Sanchez: You referred to the district judge’s ruling blocking the National Guard in Oregon as illegal insurrection. Is the administration plan to comply with that ruling?
Miller: The administration will respect the ruling as it pertains to the involved parties.
Yet, there are other avenues. The president has the option to deploy federal resources sourced from the Military to Portland, effectively asserting that under federal law, specifically title ten of the U.S. code, the president can call upon the National Guard whenever he believes federal resources are inadequate for public safety tasks.
It’s vital to understand that ICE officers in Portland have endured over 100 nights of assaults, including doxing, death threats, and violent attacks aimed at overturning the recent election results through intimidation.
The core message I wish to convey is that addressing the border crisis and implementing the most extensive deportation initiative in U.S. history are key priorities in the GOP’s 2024 platform. There’s been an orchestrated campaign of violence against ICE employees – recent sniper attacks have targeted them, their families’ images circulating online, with threats against their lives, while local authorities in Portland have turned a blind eye, leaving ICE officers to fend for themselves against these threats night after night.
As Vought and Miller tackle an unsettling and seemingly well-coordinated attempt at consolidating authoritarian power, the third member of the Trump Trio, Eric Trump, closer to former President Trump, appears to be focused on personal and profitable ventures.
This refers to the hot mic conversation between Donald Trump and Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto:
During this live-streamed exchange that occurred shortly after Trump spoke to leaders in Egypt about the Gaza ceasefire, Subianto inquired about meeting with “Eric,” presumably referring to Eric Trump, executive vice president of the Trump Organization.
“Would you do that?” Trump responded. “He’s such a good boy. I’ll have Eric call you.”
Neither appeared aware that their dialogue was being captured by a microphone, as the audio was occasionally muffled and difficult to decipher. The specific details of their discussion remain unclear.
Political expert Tom Pepinsky offered some insights, though he didn’t delve deeply into Eric’s role:
President Prabowo Subianto’s hot-mic exchange with President Trump shed light on foreign leaders eager to exploit the transactional foreign policy of the Trump administration. While the specifics of their discussion are unclear, it’s evident that Prabowo requested a meeting with Eric and Donald, possibly in exchange for access to Hary Tanoesoedibjo, an Indonesian billionaire with ties to Trump.
“Trump secured millions from Indonesia during his initial term, and the exact extent of his personal investments in Indonesian real estate and hospitality remains uncertain. Their hot mic discussion highlights the intertwining of corruption and lawbreaking within the Trump administration, which has manipulated U.S. foreign policy for personal gain rather than prioritizing national interests.”
I believe that Eric and his brother Don Jr. have sidelined their sister Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner from the Trump real estate business. Am I mistaken, or did that change during the first term?
The Center for American Progress outlined some of these ties during Trump’s first term and anticipated the 2019 election of Subianto:
In the summer of 2015, Donald Trump entered into an agreement with Hary Tanoesoedibjo—an Indonesian billionaire and head of MNC Group—setting the stage for the Trump Organization to manage two resorts developed by MNC costing between $500 million and $1 billion. One resort will be located in Bali, providing views of a significant Hindu temple and becoming the island’s largest resort. The second resort will be near Lido, south of Jakarta, adjacent to a theme park.
Tanoesoedibjo has a tumultuous financial history; he was implicated in a tax evasion scandal linked to a telecom company he once owned, although he maintains his innocence. As stated by Foreign Policy, “Hary Tanoesoedibjo is a billionaire reality TV mogul with a wealthy lineage, over a million Twitter followers, an admiration for Vladimir Putin, a history of tax evasion allegations, and significant political ambitions.”
Trump’s financial conflicts may also ripple into Indonesian politics. Tanoesoedibjo, who pursued the vice presidency in 2014, launched his political party in 2016, and has expressed intentions to run for president in 2019. Although his candidacy may not succeed, he is likely to play a critical role in supporting Prabowo Subianto, a defeated presidential candidate in 2014 who is expected to contest Indonesia’s current president, Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, in 2019. If Subianto succeeds, Tanoesoedibjo could wield significant influence.
Although it may not perfectly align with my Trump Trio theme (required by Google’s guidelines, my apologies), this corruption case is emblematic of the current iteration of Trump.
The Department of Homeland Security awarded a large aviation contract, valued at nearly $1 billion, to a relatively new firm with zero federal contracting experience, in what appeared to be a swift and nontransparent process. This three-year agreement covers the transportation of migrants back to their home countries and was awarded to Salus Worldwide Solutions, a company founded by a former State Department official named William Walters. Notably, up until early September, the DHS division managing this contract was under the leadership of Christopher Pratt, a former State Department colleague of Walters. Although the White House initially backed Pratt for a senior position meant to serve as the State Department’s main interface with the Pentagon, his nomination was withdrawn on September 29.
Internal DHS documents acquired by Mother Jones indicate Pratt played a role in the contract award to Salus. In April, prior to the contract being finalized, Pratt organized offsite meetings at Salus’s location and congratulated Walters personally after he secured the contract.
This contract is valued at up to $915 million, and is intended to facilitate the administration’s strategy of incentivizing millions of undocumented immigrants to “self-deport,” which remains a crucial aspect of the Trump administration’s immigration agenda. Dubbed “Project Homecoming” by the White House, the program offers a $1,000 “exit bonus” and free travel for immigrants who opt to self-deport via a Customs and Border Protection app. Notably, this initiative is partially funded by money Congress allocated to support refugees, which the Trump administration has redirected for “self-deportations.”
An image can often convey more than words, especially regarding this caper—Trump Trio or not:
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) October 15, 2025
Salus CEO William Walters’ LinkedIn profile holds intriguing information:
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) October 15, 2025
His experience at the State Department is emphasized more than anything else (for a clearer view, feel free to check LinkedIn for an enlarged version):
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) October 15, 2025
Let’s also acknowledge his modest origins, including four months served in Iraq, where none of the Trump trio ever enlisted:
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) October 15, 2025
We should also consider Christopher C. Pratt’s biography on the DHS site as we explore this situation in depth:
Christopher C. Pratt
Under Secretary for Strategy, Policy, and PlansChristopher C. Pratt currently serves as the Under Secretary for Strategy, Policy, and Plans in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (performing the duties in a senior official capacity).
Leveraging extensive experience in national security and international cooperation, he drives policy and implementation strategies across all DHS missions, including counterterrorism; cybersecurity; infrastructure security and resilience; border security; immigration; international affairs; and trade and economic security. Previously, he had been DHS’s Assistant Secretary for International Affairs, propelling U.S. national security objectives in partnership with global allies.
Mr. Pratt served as Principal Deputy Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs at the Department of State, where he led delicate negotiations and engaged in high-stakes diplomacy to secure American hostages’ release and enhance governmental responses to hostage situations. In prior roles, he facilitated interagency collaboration to support intricate recovery operations as Chief of Hostage Recovery/Personnel Recovery/NAR in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
Before entering the public sector, Mr. Pratt spent a decade in private industry, designing and managing initiatives for U.S. Government entities, including pioneering interagency programs in Afghanistan to meet critical mission goals. He advised the Commander of all forces in Afghanistan and the Commanding General of all special operations.
A former intellectual property law practitioner, he holds a Juris Doctor from The George Washington University Law School and a Bachelor of Science in Biochemistry from Virginia Tech. Proficient in Pashto and Swedish, Mr. Pratt’s diverse background in diplomacy, negotiations, and cross-cultural engagement equips him to navigate complex international terrains effectively and achieve results that enhance national and global security.
The official photo serves as a compelling visual, complementing portraits of any of the Trump trio:
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) October 15, 2025
What could be more quintessentially American than old colleagues executing a deal that might secure financial futures, potentially rivaling those of the Trump Trio?
Curiously, what might Under Secretary Pratt stand to gain? While he may never be part of the Trump trio, it’s indicative of a larger system where decades of GOP involvement open doors to lucrative deals, whether insiders or not.
Does he have an ally in the DHS keeping tabs on him, possibly reporting up to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem? Is one of the Trump Trio in the know (unlikely)?
Is Noem aware of these dynamics, or is the DHS operating without clear direction? An effective authoritative government should ideally implement oversight, ensuring that all critical players are included. A chaotic atmosphere would surely hinder efficiency.
Clearly, the Trump trio need not manage every aspect themselves.
This illustrates the open nature of Trump 2.0: years of GOP allegiance and nearly anyone can find a place for a potential career-defining opportunity, whether a part of the Trump trio or not.
