Former Trump administration adviser Calley Means alleged that senior White House officials obstructed health reforms and protected powerful corporate interests, warning that Republicans could face further political losses unless President Donald Trump confronts internal resistance and delivers the institutional changes he promised voters.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Former White House adviser Calley Means accused senior administration officials and career federal employees of obstructing President Donald Trump’s reform agenda, alleging that internal resistance derailed pesticide oversight efforts and allowed powerful corporate interests to influence government decisions. He also warned that Republicans risk driving frustrated voters toward socialist candidates unless they confront institutional corruption and deliver substantive policy changes.
Means, a former adviser to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., made the allegations during an appearance on episode 2578 of “The Joe Rogan Experience,” released Friday, Nov. 6. His remarks followed the Democratic Party’s victories in the Nov. 3 midterm elections, which ended Republican control of both chambers of Congress.
The former adviser, who resigned from the White House on Oct. 22, described what he characterized as an entrenched network of political appointees, career bureaucrats and corporate interests working to undermine policies supported by Trump and Kennedy. The allegations, reported in three separate articles by the Daily Caller News Foundation on Nov. 7, have not been independently substantiated.
According to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s reporting on alleged internal resistance, Means argued that Kennedy faced opposition from within the Department of Health and Human Services, an agency with approximately 90,000 employees, while Trump confronted similar challenges across a federal workforce numbering roughly 2 million.
Means alleged that career officials had circulated a historical intelligence manual outlining methods for undermining organizational efficiency. He identified the document as the “Simple Sabotage Field Manual,” originally distributed during World War II by the Office of Strategic Services, the predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency.
The manual described techniques for disrupting organizations from within, including unnecessarily referring decisions to large committees, rewarding ineffective employees and creating administrative obstacles that delayed routine operations.
Means claimed federal employees had circulated the document as an example of how to obstruct agency leadership. However, the existence of the historical manual does not establish that government employees were implementing its methods, and the report did not identify specific officials responsible for distributing it.
During the interview, Rogan asked whether Trump’s staff had been compromised. Means responded that he believed much of the administration’s institutional infrastructure was working against the president’s priorities.
He argued that some political appointees had consolidated decision-making authority while using the president’s demanding schedule to delay or weaken reforms. Means said Trump could still reverse the situation by replacing officials he believed were not committed to carrying out his policies.
The allegations extended to specific disputes over agricultural chemicals and the administration’s relationship with pesticide manufacturers.
In a separate Daily Caller News Foundation report examining the pesticide controversy, Means described an encounter involving Walker Barrett, an assistant to the president for policy who worked under then-White House chief of staff Susie Wiles.
Means alleged that Barrett presented him with an executive order concerning glyphosate, the widely used herbicide found in products including Roundup, and informed him that the administration had already settled its position.
The Feb. 18 executive order designated the availability of glyphosate-based herbicides as a national security concern, emphasizing their role in American agricultural production. It directed the agriculture secretary to take steps to maintain an adequate domestic supply of the chemicals.
Means disputed the administration’s national security justification, arguing that senior military officials did not consider a potential shortage of glyphosate on American farms a defense emergency.
According to Means, Barrett instructed him to inform Kennedy that the executive order was final and would not be reconsidered. He further alleged that Wiles subsequently contacted Kennedy’s office to reinforce that directive.
The former adviser suggested that the decision interfered with efforts to investigate glyphosate and potential health concerns associated with the chemical.
Glyphosate has been the subject of longstanding scientific and regulatory disputes concerning possible cancer risks. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as probably carcinogenic to humans in 2015, while the Environmental Protection Agency has reached different conclusions in its assessments of the chemical’s risks under approved conditions of use.
Means also described alleged pressure from pharmaceutical industry lobbyists after he encouraged HHS officials to examine glyphosate-related concerns. The report did not establish that pharmaceutical companies directed the executive order or independently verify the lobbying allegations.
The dispute expanded into the administration’s handling of litigation involving Bayer, the multinational company that acquired Monsanto, the original manufacturer of Roundup.
Means alleged that Heidi Overton, subsequently nominated by Trump to serve as commissioner of food and drugs, coordinated with the Justice Department to support Supreme Court consideration of litigation that could protect Bayer from certain pesticide-related lawsuits.
He claimed that the effort proceeded without consulting Kennedy, despite the health secretary’s interest in glyphosate regulation and related public health questions.
According to the Daily Caller News Foundation, the Supreme Court issued a June 25 ruling granting Bayer immunity from thousands of lawsuits alleging that the company’s product labeling failed to adequately warn consumers about potential cancer risks.
Means portrayed the administration’s legal position as another example of decisions benefiting major corporations without the knowledge or approval of senior officials responsible for advancing Trump’s health agenda.
When Rogan questioned whether Trump knew about the developments, Means recounted a subsequent meeting involving the president, Kennedy and other participants, including a regenerative farmer who raised the Bayer decision.
Means said Trump’s reaction suggested that the president had not been fully informed about the litigation. The account was based on Means’ description of the meeting, and the Daily Caller News Foundation did not report independent confirmation of the president’s alleged remarks.
The former adviser also raised concerns about the broader influence of corporations over federal policies governing health care, agriculture and housing.
In the third Daily Caller News Foundation report, examining Means’ warning about socialism, Means argued that voters increasingly distrust institutions they believe are structured to favor powerful interests over ordinary Americans.
He contended that Republicans risk losing support for free-market policies if they defend existing arrangements without addressing barriers to competition, institutional corruption and corporate influence.
Means argued that health care, agriculture and housing do not operate as genuinely competitive markets because of longstanding structural problems. He maintained that Republicans must address those conditions before presenting free-market principles as an alternative to greater government intervention.
His warning came after Republicans lost their House and Senate majorities in the midterm elections. An NBC News exit poll cited in the Daily Caller News Foundation’s coverage found that 43% of respondents identified opposition to Trump’s performance as one reason for their votes.
Means interpreted the election results as evidence of frustration with the administration’s progress on reforms that Trump promoted during his campaigns.
He also pointed to similarities between Trump’s anti-establishment messaging and arguments advanced by prominent progressive politicians, including independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and newly elected Democratic Sen. Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan.
Means argued that the politicians’ emphasis on challenging concentrated corporate power, improving economic conditions for middle-class Americans and reforming government institutions echoed themes that helped Trump build his political coalition.
Rather than rejecting those arguments exclusively on ideological grounds, Means suggested that Trump should consider working with lawmakers willing to challenge corporate influence, including Sanders and El-Sayed.
He advocated a more confrontational approach toward Congress and Senate leadership, arguing that the president should pursue institutional reform even when doing so requires cooperation across party lines.
Means, who reportedly played a role in bringing Kennedy and Trump together during the 2024 presidential campaign, said he believed the president could still recover politically by changing personnel and returning to the reform priorities that initially attracted supporters of the Make America Healthy Again movement.
The White House disputed the broader suggestion that the administration had abandoned its health agenda.
White House spokeswoman Allison Schuster told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the MAHA coalition had gained a powerful advocate in Trump after years outside the political mainstream.
She cited changes to federal dietary guidelines, efforts to eliminate artificial ingredients from the food supply and investments in regenerative agriculture as accomplishments of the administration.
Schuster also maintained that Trump and Kennedy remained committed to delivering additional reforms addressing Americans’ health.
In response to allegations concerning Wiles, another White House official defended the former chief of staff’s contribution to the administration’s health initiatives, describing her leadership as essential to advancing MAHA priorities.
Means’ interview coincided with a significant leadership change at the White House. On Nov. 6, Trump announced that Stephen Miller, then serving as national homeland security adviser, would replace Wiles as White House chief of staff effective Nov. 9.
The timing placed Means’ criticism of administration personnel alongside an announced change in the president’s senior leadership team. The Daily Caller News Foundation did not establish that the personnel decision resulted from Means’ allegations.
The former adviser’s public criticism also generated a dispute with White House official James Blair, who rejected allegations made by Means and publicly challenged their accuracy.
In a Nov. 7 post on X, Blair said he had attempted to contact Means directly and later exchanged messages with him. Blair accused the former adviser of misrepresenting events and said he had warned Means that defamatory accusations could lead to legal action.
Blair maintained that he was responding to what he considered false claims rather than participating in an effort to silence criticism.
The Daily Caller News Foundation sought additional comment from Means, HHS and other parties named in the reports. Means and HHS did not immediately respond to the requests cited in the coverage, while Bayer also did not provide an immediate response to questions about the pesticide litigation.
El-Sayed’s campaign likewise did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding Means’ comparison of his political messaging with Trump’s campaign themes.
The allegations highlight an internal dispute over the direction of the administration’s health and regulatory agenda, particularly the relationship between federal decision-making, agricultural interests and corporate influence.
Although Means presented the disputes as evidence of deliberate obstruction, his account does not establish that individual officials acted improperly or that a coordinated effort existed to undermine the president.
His broader warning centered on the political consequences of failing to carry out promised reforms. Means argued that voters dissatisfied with existing economic and government institutions could increasingly support candidates advocating more extensive government intervention if Republicans do not demonstrate that market-oriented reforms can address their concerns.
With Democrats preparing to take control of Congress and Trump making changes to his senior White House staff, Means maintained that the administration still has an opportunity to pursue its original reform agenda, but that doing so would require confronting resistance within federal institutions and reconsidering the influence of powerful interests on government policy.
Original article
Comments