> agencies where they aren't even active yet

Deferred resignation offers ("fork in the road" emails) and terminating all probationary employees (those without civil service protections) are cross-agency recommendations by DOGE since the beginning. It doesn't make sense to say they "aren't even active yet" when 8 days after inauguration the entire civil service was sent the same email that Twitter employees got.

Additionally, the EO establishing DOGE required all agency heads to assign a team from DOGE within 30 days, which has passed. They're everywhere.

So by your logic, after musk donated $288 million to his campaign and then trump fires five inspector generals that are investigating his companies, that's not a conflict of interest?

Secondly, Trump has clearly stated that Musk is not permitted to act where he has a conflict, and the agency directors will be aware of this.

Trump is honest and can be trusted in your experience?

If these aren't conflicts of interest, what would an actual conflict of interest look like?