21 D.O.G.E Staff’s Mass Resignation Exodus

In a striking and symbolic move, 21 civil service employees staged a mass walkout at the Department of Government Efficiency (D.O.G.E.) on Tuesday, citing political interference, mass firings, and threats to federal integrity.

The group—comprising engineers, product managers, and designers—submitted a joint resignation letter on WetheBuilders.org, refusing to be complicit in what they described as the dismantling of essential public services.

Addressed to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, the letter accused D.O.G.E. of undermining critical government systems, abruptly dismissing technical experts, and fostering a hostile work environment under Elon Musk’s leadership.

The letter reads:

“We swore to serve the American people and uphold our oath to the Constitution across presidential administrations, it has become clear that we can no longer honor those commitments at the United States D.O.G.E. Service.”

A source familiar with the letter confirmed its authenticity, though the authors remained anonymous, signing only with their job titles—an unmistakable sign that D.O.G.E.’s core tech and operations team had just walked out.

For now, those who resigned insist they had no choice but to leave.

Their letter states:

“We signed up to make the government more effective. Instead, we are watching it be dismantled.”

Federal Workforce Pushes Back Against Musk's Changes

The resignations come amidst growing turmoil following Musk’s takeover of the US Digital Service (USDS), a government agency originally established by Barack Obama to modernise federal technology.

Under Donald Trump’s executive order, USDS was rebranded as the Department of Government Efficiency (D.O.G.E.), with Musk given sweeping authority to streamline operations.

Signs of internal discord emerged almost immediately.

On 21 January—just a day after Trump’s inauguration—D.O.G.E. employees were subjected to abrupt 15-minute interviews by unidentified White House officials wearing visitor badges.

According to the resignation letter, these officials refused to disclose their identities, interrogated staff about their political beliefs, and attempted to sow division among them.

Less than a month later, an anonymous email abruptly terminated one-third of the agency overnight, removing key experts responsible for critical systems, including Social Security, disaster relief, and tax processing—jeopardising essential services for millions of Americans.

A former employee, who had served under both Obama and Trump, described the shift under Musk as “scorched earth,” arguing that the purge was targeting those with the expertise to improve government efficiency:

“DOGE seems to think ‘efficiency’ just means doing less, no matter how good the return is.”

In response to the resignations, Musk dismissed the departing workers on X (formerly known as Twitter) as “Dem political holdovers,” claiming they had resisted returning to the office and would have been fired regardless.

Meanwhile, D.O.G.E. employee Katie Miller appeared to mock the resigning staff in her own X post, underscoring the deep divisions within the agency.

White House Skirts Queries as Republican Resistance Grows

Despite Musk’s assurances, the Trump administration has remained conspicuously silent on who is actually leading D.O.G.E.

During a Tuesday press briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt repeatedly dodged questions about the agency’s leadership.

After days of speculation, a White House official confirmed that Amy Gleason—a former US Digital Service official from Trump’s first term—had been appointed as acting head.

Even within Republican ranks, concerns are mounting over the pace and execution of Musk’s federal workforce purge.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis voiced support for government efficiency but cautioned that D.O.G.E.’s approach seemed overly aggressive:

“We need to do this with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune echoed these concerns, emphasizing that any downsizing should be conducted “respectfully” to avoid disrupting critical services.

At a town hall, frustrated constituents pressed Rep. Rich McCormick over the mass firings, who expressed:

“I’m all for trimming the government. But we need to allow people to adjust their lifestyle.”

Despite the backlash, Trump’s campaign signalled its full support for Musk’s agenda.

A fundraising email sent Tuesday celebrated his new employee policy, which requires all federal workers to submit five accomplishments each week—a move framed as a push for accountability but seen by critics as a further effort to weed out dissent.

A poll was posed in the email to supporters, asking:

“Should Elon Musk and I FIRE anybody that doesn’t respond? YES or NO?”

White House Backpedals on Musk's Threats

Despite Musk’s insistence that non-compliant employees would be dismissed, White House officials clarified that hiring and firing decisions remain under agency jurisdiction.

Leavitt explained:

“For some of the agencies that you’ve seen who have said, ‘please don’t send these emails,’ it’s in their best interest for that specific agency, and the president supports that.”

Undeterred, Musk reiterated Monday night that workers would have one final opportunity to justify their roles before termination.

Leavitt maintained that agency leaders would determine how to implement his directive.

Musk's all-stick-but-no carrot approach might backfire spectacularly.

As the shake-up unfolds, a critical question remains: Could Musk’s aggressive purge ultimately weaken the very institutions it seeks to streamline?