White House: Shutdown Layoffs Will Be ‘North Of 10,000’
White House budget director Russ Vought is projecting that over 10,000 federal employees will be terminated due to the current government shutdown.
Vought pledged to “continue the RIFs,” alluding to the reduction-in-force notifications issued by agencies to terminate government employees on Friday.
Shortly after Vought’s statement, a federal judge in California introduced ambiguity into Vought’s commitment by prohibiting the layoffs associated with the closure. The Trump administration will contest that verdict.
Approximately 4,000 government employees have been terminated, as shown by court documents; however, the budget director anticipates that the total will likely exceed 10,000, as noted by Politico.
“We want to be very aggressive where we can be in shuttering the bureaucracy—not just the funding, but the bureaucracy—and we now have an opportunity to do that,” Vought added on The Charlie Kirk Show, speaking in his first live interview since the shutdown began.
Vought anticipated that the layoffs would affect agencies misaligned with the Trump administration’s priorities, including environmental justice initiatives at the Department of Energy and EPA, the Minority Business Development Agency, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.
The remarks were made a day after President Donald Trump pledged to provide a new list of programs for elimination on Friday, should the shutdown persist until the week’s conclusion.
“We’re closing up programs that are Democrat programs that we were opposed to,” Trump said Tuesday. “And they’re never going to come back in many cases.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson warned Wednesday that the Trump administration’s effort to keep military families paid during the ongoing government shutdown is only a temporary fix that could soon expire.
During a press conference at the Capitol, Johnson said the administration’s move to reroute Pentagon funds to cover military paychecks is a short-term measure that cannot continue indefinitely, Politico reported.
“The problem we have right now is that, in spite of President Trump’s heroic efforts to make sure they get paid, that is a temporary fix,” Johnson told reporters.
“The executive branch, his help, is not permanent. It can’t be,” he added. “And if the Democrats continue to vote to keep the government closed as they have done so many times, then we know U.S. troops are going to risk missing a full paycheck at the end of this month.”
The Trump administration authorized the Department of Defense to use unspent research and development funds to pay active-duty service members during the shutdown, which began earlier this month after the Senate failed to pass a funding measure.
The move provided temporary relief for military families who were preparing to miss their paychecks.
Johnson credited the president for taking action, but said the measure does not address the larger problem.
“The reason that the way they were able to get the troops paid for this paycheck — and as I said, this is not an enduring solution, because we will run out of the funds — but there was some unspent funds in, effectively, R&D accounts in defense,” Johnson said.
“They moved that over to prioritize payment of those who are putting their lives on the line today and who have families in serious situations,” he added.
The government shutdown has resulted in thousands of federal employees being furloughed or temporarily laid off.
Those deemed “essential,” including active-duty military and federal law enforcement, continue to work but often without pay until the shutdown ends.
The House passed a short-term funding measure known as a continuing resolution on September 19 to keep the government operating through November 21.
The measure would give lawmakers more time to negotiate a comprehensive spending agreement for fiscal year 2026.
To advance in the Senate, the resolution requires 60 votes.
So far, only three Democrats have joined Republicans in voting to end the shutdown.
In one of the most talked-about political moments of the year, Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana responded to a provocative tweet from Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) with a move that stunned the nation — not with insults or outrage, but with receipts.
During a live, nationally televised forum, Kennedy read aloud every tweet AOC had posted in a recent thread, line by line, without commentary, spin, or interruption. What followed wasn’t a debate. It was, as many observers called it, a reckoning.
The moment was sparked by a fiery exchange on social media earlier in the week. In a now-viral tweet, Ocasio-Cortez referred to Kennedy as “dangerous” and claimed that his rhetoric “needs to be silenced before it spreads further disinformation.” Though the tweet has since been deleted, screenshots circulated widely, igniting fierce commentary on both sides of the aisle.
Rather than respond online or through a standard press release, Kennedy chose a bold stage for his rebuttal: a prime-time appearance on America Tonight, a bipartisan forum on policy, media, and public discourse. Sitting beneath the studio lights, Kennedy opened a folder, pulled out a printed copy of AOC’s full Twitter thread, and addressed the audience.
“I’m not here to insult anyone,” he began, calmly. “I’m here to let the Congresswoman speak for herself — in her own words.”
He then read the entire thread out loud, including the tweet stating he “needs to be silenced,” as well as several others accusing him of perpetuating “right-wing extremism” and “toxic Southern populism.” Kennedy didn’t react. He didn’t mock. He didn’t even raise his voice. He simply read each tweet, pausing between them to let the words settle.
The silence in the studio was heavy.
After reading the thread, Kennedy closed the folder and spoke plainly to the camera.
“You may not like me. You may disagree with me. But in this country, we don’t silence each other. We argue. We debate. We persuade. That’s the American way,” he said, referencing the First Amendment.
Without raising a finger in retaliation, Kennedy flipped the discussion to a higher plane: “Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez is free to call me anything she wants. That’s her right. But when you say someone needs to be silenced, you’re not just disagreeing with them — you’re threatening the foundation of this republic.”
The moment quickly gained traction on social media, where clips from the broadcast were shared across platforms with hashtags like #SilenceIsNotDemocracy and #KennedyVsAOC trending within the hour.
As expected, the political world erupted. Conservatives praised Kennedy for his restraint and clarity, calling the segment a “textbook lesson in free speech and constitutional values.”
“He didn’t attack her. He exposed her — with her own words,” Fox News host Jesse Watters said.
On the other side, progressives rallied around AOC, with some suggesting the Senator had taken the tweets out of context, even though he had read them in full. “Kennedy’s dramatics don’t change the fact that disinformation is real and dangerous,” tweeted one prominent AOC supporter.
Still, even some liberal commentators admitted that Kennedy’s move was effective.
“You may not agree with Kennedy, but you have to admit — that was a power move,” said CNN contributor Van Jones. “He didn’t yell. He didn’t deflect. He made people listen to what was actually said.”
Interestingly, AOC has yet to comment directly on Kennedy’s televised rebuttal. Her official Twitter and Instagram accounts have remained focused on legislative updates and community events, without reference to the incident. Whether she is regrouping, planning a formal response, or choosing to move on remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, Kennedy has seen a surge in public support, especially from moderates who view his actions as a defense of civil discourse at a time when it often seems under siege.
Beyond the partisan reactions, the moment struck a chord with everyday Americans weary of the toxicity in political debate. Kennedy’s decision to let AOC’s own words speak for themselves — and to then pivot to a principled defense of the First Amendment — gave many viewers something they hadn’t expected from politics: a sense of clarity.
In an age of soundbites and spin, the most powerful move may have been the simplest one — telling the truth, without commentary, and letting the public decide.
Whether this moment will shift the narrative or become just another viral flash in the endless culture war remains to be seen. But for one night, a U.S. Senator reminded the nation what democracy sounds like — unfiltered and unapologetic.