President Trump Purges NSC Following Meeting with Loomer

President Trump fires multiple National Security Council (NSC) staffers following a controversial meeting with activist Laura Loomer, raising questions about loyalty, vetting processes, and the future direction of America’s security apparatus.

Quick Takes

Loyalty Concerns Trigger NSC Shake-Up

President Donald Trump has dismissed several staffers from his National Security Council following a meeting with far-right activist Laura Loomer. While Trump maintains these were routine personnel changes, the timing has drawn attention to questions about loyalty within his administration. Reports indicate that at least three officials were fired: Brian Walsh, Thomas Boodry, and David Feith. However, some sources suggest the number could be as high as ten, including junior staffers. The dismissals occurred after Loomer visited the Oval Office and reportedly presented Trump with research on staffers she deemed insufficiently loyal to his agenda.

Trump addressed the situation directly, explaining his perspective on the personnel changes. “We’re always going to let go of people – people we don’t like or people that take advantage of or people that may have loyalties to someone else,” Trump stated. The meeting where these decisions were discussed reportedly included Vice President JD Vance, Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, and Sergio Gor, Director of the Presidential Personnel Office. These changes represent a significant reshaping of the national security apparatus just months into Trump’s administration.

Loomer’s Expanding Role and Influence

Laura Loomer has emerged as an influential figure in discussions about national security staffing. Following the firings, she posted on social media about her concerns regarding leaks from confidential White House meetings, writing, “I woke up this morning to learn that there are still people in and around the West Wing who are LEAKING to the hostile, left-wing media about President Trump’s confidential and private meetings in the Oval Office. I want to reiterate how important it is that people who gain access to the White House or the administration respect the privacy of their conversations with President Trump and his senior staff.”

Loomer has specifically criticized Principal Deputy National Security Adviser Alex Wong, who remains in his position though his status appears uncertain. She has expressed concerns about what she termed “neocons” bypassing the vetting process for administration positions. Trump has publicly praised Loomer, referring to her as a “great patriot” and acknowledging that he considers her recommendations. The expanding role of outside advisors in national security staffing decisions represents a departure from traditional processes that typically emphasize professional experience in defense and intelligence matters.

Broader National Security Implications

The staffing changes at the NSC come amid other national security controversies. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz is under scrutiny for using the Signal app for planning a sensitive military operation targeting Houthi militants in Yemen. This issue surfaced when journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was mistakenly added to a message chain containing classified operational details. The Pentagon’s acting inspector general is now reviewing the use of Signal by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other officials for potential security protocol violations.

Perhaps most significantly, the White House has dismissed General Timothy Haugh, head of the NSA and US Cyber Command, as part of what appears to be a broader reorganization of security leadership. Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD) expressed that these changes “raises eyebrows,” while Democratic Representative Jim Himes (D-CT) praised Haugh as an honest leader.

The scale of the changes is substantial – Waltz has already sent approximately 160 nonpolitical detailees back to their home agencies with the stated goal of ensuring commitment to Trump’s agenda. This has effectively sidelined numerous subject matter experts during a period of complex foreign policy challenges.