Tuesday, June 30, 2026

Omarosa’s exit raises questions about African-American officials, diversity in Trump administration

December 17, 2017 by  
Filed under Choosing Lingerie

Comments Off

Omarosa Manigault Newman’s dramatic exit from the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to allegations of a lack of diversity within the Trump Administration, specifically those politically appointed to positions by President Donald Trump.

In her “Good Morning America” appearance on Thursday, Manigault referred to herself multiple times as “the only African-American woman in this White House” and later said “there is a lack of diversity that I will acknowledge” among Trump’s senior staff.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders was asked in Thursday’s daily briefing if she knew how many senior staffers currently in the White House are African-American.

“I don’t have a number directly in front of me, specifically African-American,” Sanders said. “But I can say, again, we have a very diverse team at the White House, certainly a very diverse team in the press office and something we strive for every day is to add and grow to be more diverse and be more representative of the country at large.”

PHOTO: Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Omarosa Manigault attend a church service, in Detroit, Sept. 3 2016. Carlo Allegri/Reuters FILE
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Omarosa Manigault attend a church service, in Detroit, Sept. 3 2016.

Sanders added that “a number of people” will be involved in the process of replacing Manigault Newman in her role as director of outreach to the African American community.

The White House has not responded to follow up questions from ABC News asking for clarity on the number of African-American senior staffers in the White House.

According to Robert C. Smith, author and professor of political science at San Francisco State University, that lack of diversity in the White House could have a broader trickle-down effect on the makeup of the rest of the administration. Smith provided ABC News with research he published in 2016 showing the percentage of African-American political appointees dating back to the Kennedy-Johnson administrations.

  • Kennedy-Johnson*- 2 percent
  • Nixon-Ford*- 4 percent
  • Carter – 12 percent
  • Reagan – 5 percent
  • Bush – 6 percent
  • Clinton – 13 percent
  • George W. Bush – 10 percent
  • Obama – 14 percent

(*treated as one administration for purposes of data collection)

Smith said he planned to begin compiling similar data for the Trump administration later next year, which he expects to be “akin to the Nixon record.”

“Both symbolically and in terms of public policy this is a significant departure from the recent past,” Smith said. “This disadvantages the administration in policy making.”

Max Stier, the chairman of the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service which advocates for greater government accountability, pointed to public data from the Office of Personnel Management’s “FedScope” showing the divide between the number of minorities and non-minorities appointed to the administration thus far.

PHOTO: Omarosa Manigault walks to an event for veterans in Struthers, Ohio with Corey Lewandowski, Sebastian Gorka and Anthony Scaramucci, July 25, 2017.Jonathan Ernst/Reuters, FILE
Omarosa Manigault walks to an event for veterans in Struthers, Ohio with Corey Lewandowski, Sebastian Gorka and Anthony Scaramucci, July 25, 2017.

“It’s predominantly white and it’s predominantly male,” Stier said. “There are no requirements, so it’s not in terms of if this is a legal issue of the choices that are being made, but I think there are legitimate questions that can be asked about whether the makeup of the leadership of any administration reflects the people that it’s representing, the broader country.”

But Stier also noted that the shortfall is not entirely unique to the Trump team.

“Obama had a much more diverse workforce in the political ranks than President Bush did,” Stier said. “President Trump so far looks more similar to President Bush’s.”

In the Thursday briefing, Sanders cited President Trump’s close personal relationship with Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Dr. Ben Carson and Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, both of whom are African0Americans, as examples of his personal outreach to African-Americans.

Manigault Newman did not serve in the type of leadership role that former top African-American staffers in recent administrations flourished in, including Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and Valerie Jarrett.

“I don’t think she was given much latitude to go out and try and build relationships with the African American community,” Smith said. “It’s caused great skepticism about the administration from African Americans and about her as well.”

Trump’s highly controversial handling of the Charlottesville protests and his repeated attacks against his predecessor Barack Obama and his legacy could additionally contribute to hesitation among prominent African Americans to want to join the administration, Smith said.

PHOTO: Omarosa Manigault speaks to attendees at President Trumps press conference with members of the GOP on the passage of legislation to roll back the Affordable Care Act in the Rose Garden of the White House, May 4, 2017.Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images
Omarosa Manigault speaks to attendees at President Trump’s press conference with members of the GOP on the passage of legislation to roll back the Affordable Care Act in the Rose Garden of the White House, May 4, 2017.

“Not just a black face, but recruiting a black person of substantive knowledge and responsibility,” Smith said. “Even among some black conservatives you’ve probably got some reluctance to serve in a Trump administration.”

Reflecting on her own personal experience, Manigault told GMA she was “very unhappy” with some of what she observed in Trump’s White House during his first year regarding race issues.

“I have seen things that have made me uncomfortable, that have upset me, that have affected me deeply and emotionally, that has affected my community and my people,” Manigault said.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

President Trump claims the FBI is tainted and its reputation in tatters. This graph shows he’s wrong.

December 17, 2017 by  
Filed under Choosing Lingerie

Comments Off

“It’s a shame what’s happened with the FBI,” President Trump told reporters yesterday, calling the bureau’s conduct “really, really disgraceful.” He was building on criticisms he’d levied earlier this month, when he labeled the Federal Bureau of Investigation “tainted” and said its reputation was “in tatters.” The president claimed that ideological bias was behind the FBI’s decisions about criminal investigations involving Hillary Clinton and Robert S. Mueller III’s ongoing special counsel investigation.

The president’s charges have been amplified by conservative pundits such as Hugh Hewitt and Republicans in Congress.

Is the FBI biased?

The legitimacy of our legal system depends upon apolitical law enforcement. Justice demands that all citizens be treated equally before the law. Calling the FBI biased is a very serious charge.

The president charges FBI bias because some attorneys and investigators on special counsel Mueller’s team gave campaign contributions to Democrats, including donations to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Further, some top officials on Mueller’s team exchanged a series of anti-Trump texts.

However, Mueller and Rod J. Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller, are both longtime Republicans. The former FBI director James B. Comey and current FBI Director Christopher A. Wray have both previously donated to Republicans.

All agencies this size include employees who donate to Democrats and others who donate to Republicans — donations that are protected as part of their free-speech rights. That does not tell us enough to judge bias.

Here’s how we did our research

To look more deeply into this question of ideological leanings within federal agencies, at the end of 2014, Mark Richardson of James Madison University and I surveyed 3,500 top federal executives with the help of Charles Cameron at Princeton and nonprofit and government partners. Specifically, we asked federal executives to name the agencies they worked with the most, and then asked: “In your opinion, do the policy views of the following agencies tend to slant liberal, slant conservative, or neither consistently in both Democratic and Republican administrations?”

In a forthcoming paper with Joshua Clinton, we aggregate these ratings with a statistical measurement model to generate estimates of agency ideology. On our scale, -2 would indicate the most liberal, and 2 the most conservative. The figure below shows the agency ideology estimates we received for the 20 most conservative and liberal agencies out of the 165 agencies measured. The FBI ranks as one of the most conservative. This confirms the evidence suggested by the party registration and campaign donations of top agency officials such as Mueller, Rosenstein, Comey and Wray.

These numbers also correlate very highly with what the executives reported about their own ideology and partisanship. We found no evidence (at all) of widespread liberal politicization among high level executives within the FBI.

Of course, this data is current as of the start of 2015. Could the Obama administration, including Eric H. Holder Jr. at the head of the Justice Department, have politicized the FBI and shifted it to the left between 2015 and the inauguration in 2017?

It’s hard to see how. The director is the only politically appointed employee among 37,000 people who work in the FBI. Promoting individuals because of their political views is prohibited by civil service law and regulation; presumably, had a massive politically motivated change occurred in just two years, outraged employees would have let news about it leak out.

As you can also see in the figure above, the defense, intelligence and law enforcement agencies are all among the most conservative bureaucracies in the executive branch. And yet the president has attacked the intelligence agencies as well.

This suggests that Trump’s attacks when he runs into bureaucratic resistance do not seem to be related to ideology. The president’s public repudiation of the intelligence services’ findings about Russian attempts to influence the 2016 U.S. election and his attempts to influence law enforcement’s efforts by urging that Hillary Clinton be investigated and arrested may have put him at odds with civil service employees’ belief in their own professionalism.

Is Trump correct that the FBI’s reputation is in tatters?

In the same research, we also asked federal executives, “In your view, how skilled are the workforces of the following agencies?” In this case, answers ranged from “not at all skilled” to “very skilled.” (They could also have reported “don’t know.”) We asked each respondent about agencies they knew something about in the course of their work.

When we aggregated these ratings across the executive establishment — again using modern scaling techniques — the FBI ranked as among the most skilled, in the top quarter of all agencies.

Again, this was in 2015. However, leadership and morale appear to have improved since then. According to the magazine Government Executive:

In the Partnership for Public Service’s 2016 Best Places to Work rankings, based on data from the annual Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, the FBI was rated in the top third out of 305 components across government and fourth out of 15 law enforcement agencies. On an index score out of 100, FBI employees gave their agency a score of 68.7. That was up from 65.5 in 2013, the year Comey took over as director.

The civil service professionals who work in government are obligated to serve not only elected officials like the president, but also the Constitution and the law. As a result, officials who expect these agencies to respond to their wishes may find their actions puzzling and unresponsive.

David E. Lewis is the William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor at Vanderbilt University and author of The Politics of Presidential Appointments (Princeton, 2008). He can be reached at david.e.lewis@vanderbilt.edu.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS