The Trump administration quickly got in line Thursday to denounce, threaten, and investigate former FBI Director James Comey, whose firing by President Trump in his first term triggered the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel. The rest, as they say, is history.
Here’s what happened.
Comey became a target of opportunity after he posted on social media an image of shells arrayed on sand to read “86 47.” I associate “86” with restaurant kitchens from my days waiting tables: items missing from the menu or the pantry. Also used as a verb, meaning “to strike,” as in “86 the chateaubriand.”
Trump is the 47th president. So it’s shorthand for getting rid of the guy. But “getting rid of” in the mob sense? That’s the high dudgeon Trump administration officials from the White House on down immediately mustered yesterday to try turn Comey’s post into a right-wing firestorm.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich posted that it “can clearly be interpreted as ‘a hit’ on the sitting President of the United States.” Current FBI Director Kash Patel weighed in. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, who oversees the Secret Service, which typically is responsible for investigating real threats against the president, announced that DHS and the Secret Service are investigating Comey’s “threat.”
But no Trump official would outdo Tulsi Gabbard, who called for Comey to be jailed:
Jesse Watters: Do you believe Comey should be in jail?
Tulsi Gabbard: I do. […] I'm very concerned for the president's life. We've already seen assassination attempts. I'm very concerned for his life, and James Comey, in my view, should be held accountable and put behind bars for this.
Comey eventually took down his post, not that it mattered much.
Covering this kind of right-wing indignation eruption in a “straight” way misses wide of the mark. The NYT headline – “Ex-F.B.I. Chief Being Investigated Over Social Media Post About Trump” – is literally true, but it misses all of the levels of intimidation, cultish displays of loyalty, and pure absurdism. And straight reporting has to pretend to believe that Trump world is truly horrified, which no one in their right mind really thinks is true.
In Trump DOJ News …
If You Don’t Look For Public Corruption, You Won’t Find It: The FBI has dismantled an elite public corruption unit run out of its Washington Field Office. NBC News was first to report the move.
Sword Faller: Danielle Sassoon, the acting U.S. Attorney in Manhattan who resigned when the Trump DOJ corruptly abandoned the prosecution of NYC Mayor Eric Adams, made a muted first public appearance this week.
Ed Martin lolz: When Trump DOJ official Ed Martin oddly used a farewell email to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in DC to reveal that he was under an ethics investigation, he complained loudly that the DC ethics investigator had sent notice of the probe to his home and office in order to embarrass him. Now the WaPo reports that sources say the kind of notification Martin received typically happens after a lawyer had failed to respond to an ethics complaint as required.
The Destruction: Truth-Tellers Edition
VOA purge: The Trump Administration fired hundreds of Voice of America employees – and put the VOA building up for sale – despite a court order blocking the dismantling of the government broadcaster.
Misinformation: “The Trump administration has sharply expanded its campaign against experts who track misinformation and other harmful content online, abruptly canceling scores of scientific research grants at universities across the country,” the NYT reports.
Quote Of The Day: “Firing the leadership of the National Intelligence Council because its analysis does not support policy is a serious error in judgment. The message to the workforce is one of intimidation. In the future, the president will not get the quality of intelligence every president deserves.”–former NIC chairman Christopher Kojm, on DNI Tulsi Gabbard firing top intel officials over an assessment that contradicted President Trump’s rationale for invoking the Alien Enemies Act
Wisconsin Judge Dugan Pleads Not Guilty
MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN – MAY 15: Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan leaves the Milwaukee Federal Courthouse on May 15, 2025 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Judge Dugan appeared in federal court to answer charges that she helped Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented immigrant, elude federal arrest while he was making an appearance in her courtroom on April 18. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)
A quick update on the criminal prosecution of Wisconsin state Judge Hannah Dugan for allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant briefly evade capture by federal agents:
The conservative majority on the Roberts Court showed few qualms about seizing on President Trump’s blatantly unconstitutional executive order on birthright citizenship to advance its own pre-existing agenda on limiting nationwide injunctions.
The only question remaining after oral arguments was what kind of new rules the majority would fashion for injunctions. The one leveling influence among the conservative majority seemed to be Justice Amy Coney Barrett, but they have a decisive five votes without her.
TPM’s coverage:
Live Blog: SCOTUS Hears Oral Arguments In Birthright Citizenship Nationwide Injunction Case
Kate Riga: Birthright Citizenship Is Safe For Now. Nationwide Injunctions Are Not.
Josh Kovensky: Trump Administration Admits It Could Game Court System Without Nationwide Injunctions
Sharp analysis:
Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern: “[T]he growing gender divide emerged once again: The four women seemed concerned that the president is trying to undo the final restraints on his exercise of unconstitutional power, and doing so in ways that include breaking norms and defying courts. The five men, in contrast, sounded irked at allegedly monarchical district court judges who dare issue broad orders blocking the White House’s policies, even when they’re blatantly unconstitutional.”
Chris Geidner: “[T]he court seemed more aligned on the unconstitutionality of Trump’s order — and in agreement with all of the lower courts to consider the question — than on any solution about how to deal with nationwide injunctions.”
IMPORTANT
For the second time, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has held that minority voters do not have the authority to sue to enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Rick Hasen explains “why this latest ruling is not just a devastating blow to the law, but also an entirely ahistorical judicial power grab.”
The Corruption: Elon Musk’s Starlink Edition
Elon Musk, the Chief Engineer of SpaceX, speaking about the Starlink project at MWC hybrid Keynote during the second day of Mobile World Congress (MWC) Barcelona, on June 29, 2021 in Barcelona, Spain. (Photo by Joan Cros/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Since Trump’s inauguration, the State Department has intervened on behalf of Starlink in Gambia and at least four other developing nations, previously unreported records and interviews show.
As the Trump administration has gutted foreign aid, U.S. diplomats have pressed governments to fast-track licenses for Starlink and arranged conversations between company employees and foreign leaders. In cables, U.S. officials have said that for their foreign counterparts, helping Starlink is a chance to prove their commitment to good relations with the U.S.
“This Isn’t ‘The Hunger Games’ For Immigrants”
NEW YORK CITY – JANUARY 28: In this handout photo provided by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the New York City Fugitive Operations Team, joined by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, conducted targeted enforcement operations resulting in the arrest of an illegal Dominican national on January 28, 2025 in New York City. (Photo by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement via Getty Images)
Kristi Noem’s Department of Homeland Security is considering being part of a television show in which immigrants would compete for potential U.S. citizenship, the WSJ confirms.
First it was reported that the Trump White House was considering sending a rescissions package to Congress, a way of letting the legislature rubber stamp some of the spending cuts DOGE has already implemented. Then it was reported that Trump might delay that package, at least a few weeks, while House and Senate Republicans focus on slashing Medicaid and passing the rest of Trump’s fiscal priorities in the massive reconciliation bill.
You’ve seen our liveblog, which provides a detailed and technical look at today’s birthright citizenship oral arguments before the Supreme Court. I want to focus on a broad and critical issue. The Trump administration brought this to the Supreme Court. While the underlying or substantive issue is birthright citizenship, they were not seeking to have that issue resolved. They wanted the Court to address whether federal trial courts can issue national injunctions binding the hands of the incumbent administration.
Here’s an interesting hypothetical: the White House wins its nationwide injunction case before the Supreme Court. Judges can no longer issue these national holds on various forms of federal government action, or face an exceedingly high bar to do so.
At the same time, the high court has not ruled on the core issue of birthright citizenship. The result: lone people affected by President Trump’s executive order have to sue — each individually — to say that the order is illegal. One of them, a New Yorker, makes it up to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and wins.
The right-wing justices on Thursday were amenable to the Trump administration’s bid to pare back universal injunctions, a type of relief where lower-court judges block government policies for the whole country and not just the parties who brought the case.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments this morning on what’s outwardly a case about President Donald Trump’s attempt to restrict birthright citizenship. But on the substance, the arguments will delve into a different topic: the power of district courts to issue orders that take effect nationally, halting federal policy.
I want to thank everyone who came out to see Kate Riga and me at our live podcast event last night in Chicago. You made us feel very welcome and we had a great time. And it was great meeting so many of you at the happy hour after the event. This was our first TPM event outside our home stomping grounds in New York City and Washington, DC. We were so happy with how it went.
Morning Memo comes to you today from Chicago, where Josh Marshall and Kate Riga did their podcast in front of a live audience last night. Thanks to everyone who came out for the first TPM event outside of NYC and DC. Sign up for the email version of Morning Memo.
The Retribution: Jack Smith Edition
Two seemingly disparate developments came together yesterday to show that, despite court setbacks, President Trump and his MAGA supporters in Congress remain hellbent on exacting retribution against the prosecutors involved in investigating him.
Jay Bratt, a member of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team who led the prosecution of Trump in the Mar-a-Lago case, invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination rather than be deposed by House Judiciary Committee Republicans as part of their investigate the investigators vendetta.
To be clear, there are no credible allegations of wrongdoing against Bratt. Rather, his invocation of the Fifth Amendment shows that even a longtime DOJ prosecutor has no confidence that the Trump DOJ will conduct itself in a lawful manner, putting him at risk of baseless and vindictive prosecution.
“This administration and its proxies have made no effort to hide their willingness to weaponize the machinery of government against those they perceive as political enemies” said Bratt spokesperson Peter Carr, a former DOJ spokesperson fired by the new administration. “That should alarm every American who believes in the rule of law. In light of these undeniable and deeply troubling circumstances, Mr. Bratt had no choice but to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights.”
Faced with the specter of Trump retribution, Bratt left DOJ in January before the inauguration, anticipating things like getting called up to the Hill for show trials and other forms of harassment and intimidation. I sometimes wonder if I need to spell it out more clearly to drive the point home: career derailed, forced to retain counsel, made a public pariah … it starts to add up, financially, emotionally, and otherwise.
It also serves as a threat to civil servants everywhere.
The Retribution: Robert Mueller Edition
A lawyer at the firm Jenner and Block has had his security clearance suspended in another prong of President Trump’s attack on major law firms – but, more importantly for our purposes, retribution against his prosecutors. The unnamed lawyer apparently learned he had lost his security clearance when the Justice Department alerted the judge in a criminal case the lawyer was defending.
A few observations:
This is the second time this week that lawyers at Trump-targeted law firms have lost security clearances even as law firms have been mostly successful at winning their cases against the Trump executive orders.
The Jenner and Block lawyer appears crippled from representing his client in what is apparently a case that involves classified information.
The defendant’s own defense is crippled by the loss or at least the impairment of his lawyer’s ability to represent him.
This all adds up to insidious retaliatory behavior that strikes at the heart of the legal system and the right to counsel.
But perhaps most significantly, this is part of the larger retaliation against former Trump prosecutors like Jay Bratt above. The Jenner and Block executive order explicitly targeted the firm for having hired Andrew Weissmann when he left Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team.
One Trump Retribution Thwarted
The Trump DOJ unconstitutionally retaliated against the American Bar Association when it terminated a grants program for victims of domestic violence, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled. Cooper concluded that the Justice Department failed to show that it had a basis for terminating the grants other than retaliation against the ABA for being involved in suing the Trump administration.
Tulsi Gabbard Fires Intel Officials Over TdA Report
NBC News: “Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has fired two top intelligence officials who oversaw a recent intelligence assessment which contradicted President Donald Trump’s assertions that the gang Tren de Aragua is operating under the direction of the Venezuelan regime, two officials said Wednesday.”
Latest On Trump’s Lawless Immigration Policies
In a new filing in the case seeking to retrieve the Venezuelan nationals incarcerated in El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, the Trump administration is fighting hard to prevent any discovery into whether they are effectively in constructive custody of the United States.
Georgetown law professor Steve Vladeck takes a close look at the state of play of the Alien Enemies Act cases across the country:
While Kilmar Abrego Garcia marks three two months in prison in El Salvador as of today, the Trumpian absurdism plays out in DC:
This is absolutely incredible — Kristi Noem repeatedly refuses to acknowledge that Trump brandished an doctored image of Abrego Garcia's tattoos, prompting Eric Swalwell to have a staffer of his brandish an image of them right in her face.
Totally dystopian.
U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles of the Eastern District of Virginia ordered the release of Indian-born Badar Khan Suri, a Georgetown University researcher whose legal status was unilaterally revoked by Secretary of State Marco Rubio as part of a crackdown on pro-Palestinian academics. His deportation proceedings will still proceed in immigration court.
Thread Of The Day
We have a govt that’s engaged in human trafficking, that’s openly allowing a gulf petrostate to bribe its leadership, that’s reshaping the refugee program in overtly racist terms, that’s almost ended American foreign aid entirely, that’s doing its level best to crash the economy from the rose garden
Ed Martin Under Disciplinary Investigation In D.C.
Trump DOJ official Ed Martin revealed that he is under investigation by D.C.’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel. While he didn’t make the details of the investigation public, Martin is presumably the subject of a bar complaint from his just concluded tenure as acting U.S. attorney in D.C.
The Library Of Congress Was A Bridge Too Far?
I don’t want to overplay the significance of this sign of resistance from Republicans on the Hill, but after nearly four months of being run over roughshod by the President, they seem to have stiffened every so slightly in the face of this intrusion on legislative branch entities.
A White House push to seize control of the Library of Congress over the past week has run temporarily aground due to quiet but firm resistance from Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the sensitive situation.
While they have not challenged Trump’s abrupt firing last week of Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, they have questioned his power to name an acting successor and other library officials, including the nation’s top copyright official. That opposition has left Trump’s intended leader for the library, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, in at least temporary limbo.
The interplay of executive and legislative powers plus the overlapping and confusing vacancy laws make this is a thorny legal issue.
DOGE Watch
DOGE must resume responding to a FOIA request from the government watchdog CREW, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled.
The Trump White House plan to have Congress retroactively bless the DOGE cuts is running into stiff headwinds on the Hill.
DOGE has stopped claiming credit for killing dozens of federal contracts after the NYT reported that they had already been reinstated.
Join Us
TPM will liveblog the Supreme Court oral arguments today in the birthright citizenship/nationwide injunctions case beginning at 10 a.m. ET.
Quote Of The Day
“I will not yield to disrespectful men.”–Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, in a late night exchange with Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX) during a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee
This story first appeared at ProPublica. ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
In early February, Sharon Cromer, U.S. ambassador to Gambia, went to visit one of the country’s Cabinet ministers at his agency’s headquarters, above a partially abandoned strip mall off a dirt road. It had been two weeks since President Donald Trump took office, and Cromer had pressing business to discuss. She needed the minister to fall in line to help Elon Musk.
Starlink, Musk’s satellite internet company, had spent months trying to secure regulatory approval to sell internet access in the impoverished West African country. As head of Gambia’s communications ministry, Lamin Jabbi oversees the government’s review of Starlink’s license application. Jabbi had been slow to sign off and the company had grown impatient. Now the top U.S. government official in Gambia was in Jabbi’s office to intervene.
Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency loomed over the conversation. The administration had already begun freezing foreign aid projects, and early in the meeting, Cromer, a Biden appointee, said something that rattled Gambian officials in the room. She listed the ways that the U.S. was supporting the country, according to two people present and contemporaneous notes, noting that key initiatives — like one that funds a $25 million project to improve the electrical system — were currently under review.
Jabbi’s top deputy, Hassan Jallow, told ProPublica he saw Cromer’s message as a veiled threat: If Starlink doesn’t get its license, the U.S. could cut off the desperately needed funds. “The implication was that they were connected,” Jallow said.
In recent months, senior State Department officials in both Washington and Gambia have coordinated with Starlink executives to coax, lobby and browbeat at least seven Gambian government ministers to help Musk, records and interviews show. One of those Cabinet officials told ProPublica his government is under “maximum pressure” to yield.
In mid-March, Cromer escalated the campaign by writing to Gambia’s president with an “important request.” That day, a contentious D.C. meeting between Musk employees and Jabbi had ended in an impasse. She urged the president to circumvent Jabbi and “facilitate the necessary approvals for Starlink to commence operations,” according to a copy of the letter obtained by ProPublica. Jabbi told confidantes he felt the ambassador was trying to get him fired.
The saga in Gambia is the starkest known example of the Trump administration wielding the U.S. government’s foreign policy apparatus to advance the business interests of Musk, a top Trump adviser and the world’s richest man.
Since Trump’s inauguration, the State Department has intervened on behalf of Starlink in Gambia and at least four other developing nations, previously unreported records and interviews show.
As the Trump administration has gutted foreign aid, U.S. diplomats have pressed governments to fast-track licenses for Starlink and arranged conversations between company employees and foreign leaders. In cables, U.S. officials have said that for their foreign counterparts, helping Starlink is a chance to prove their commitment to good relations with the U.S.
In one country last month, the U.S. embassy bragged that Starlink’s license was approved despite concerns it wasn’t abiding by rules that its competitors had to follow.
“If this was done by another country, we absolutely would call this corruption,” said Kristofer Harrison, who served as a high-level State Department official in the George W. Bush administration. “Because it is corruption.”
Helping U.S. businesses has long been part of the State Department’s mission, but former ambassadors said they sought to do this by making the positive case for the benefits of U.S. investment. When seeking deals for U.S. companies, they said they took care to avoid the appearance of conflicts or leaving the impression that punitive measures were on the table.
Ten current and former State Department officials said the recent drive was an alarming departure from standard diplomatic practice — because of both the tactics used and the person who would benefit most from them. “I honestly didn’t think we were capable of doing this,” one official told ProPublica. “That is bad on every level.” Kenneth Fairfax, a retired career diplomat who served as U.S. ambassador to Kazakhstan, said the global push for Musk “could lead to the impression that the U.S. is engaging in a form of crony capitalism.”
The Washington Post previously reported that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has instructed U.S. diplomats to help Starlink so it can beat its Chinese and Russian competitors. Multiple countries, including India, have sped up license approvals for Starlink to try to build goodwill in tariff negotiations with the Trump administration, the Post reported.
ProPublica’s reporting provides a detailed picture of what that push has looked like in practice. After Gambia’s ambassador to the U.S. declined an interview about Starlink — a topic seen as highly sensitive given Musk’s position — ProPublica reporters traveled to the capital, Banjul, to piece together the events. This account is based on internal State Department documents and interviews with dozens of current and former officials from both countries, most of whom requested anonymity for fear of retaliation.
In response to detailed questions, the State Department issued a statement celebrating Starlink. “Starlink is an America-made product that has been a game changer in helping remote areas around the world gain internet connectivity,” a spokesperson wrote. “Any patriotic American should want to see an American company’s success on the global stage, especially over compromised Chinese competitors.” Cromer and Starlink did not respond to requests for comment, nor did the office of the president of Gambia. Jabbi made Jallow available to discuss the situation.
During the Biden administration, State Department officials worked with Starlink to help the company navigate bureaucracies abroad. But the agency’s approach appears to have become significantly more aggressive and expansive since Trump’s return to power, according to internal records and current and former government officials.
Foreign leaders are acutely aware of Musk’s unprecedented position in the government, which he has used to help rewrite U.S. foreign policy. After Musk spent at least $288 million on the 2024 election, Trump gave the billionaire a powerful post in the White House. In mere months, Musk’s team has directed the firing of thousands of federal workers, canceled billions of dollars in programs and dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development, which supported humanitarian projects around the world. African nations have been particularly hard-hit by the cuts.
At the same time, Musk continues to run Starlink and the rest of his corporate empire. In past administrations, government ethics lawyers carefully vetted potential conflicts of interest. Though Trump once said that “we won’t let him get near” conflicts, the White House has also suggested Musk is responsible for policing himself. The billionaire has waved away criticisms of the arrangement, saying “I’ll recuse myself” if conflicts arise. “My companies are suffering because I’m in the government,” Musk said.
In a statement, the White House said Musk has nothing to do with deals involving Starlink and that every administration official follows ethical guidelines. “For the umpteenth time, President Trump will not tolerate any conflicts of interest,” spokesperson Harrison Fields said in an email.
Executives at Starlink have seized the moment to expand. An April State Department cable to D.C. obtained by ProPublica quoted a Starlink employee describing the company’s approach to securing a license in Djibouti, a key U.S. ally in Africa that hosts an American military base: “We’re pushing from the top and the bottom to ram this through.”
Musk entered the White House at a pivotal moment for Starlink. When the service launched in 2020, it had a novel approach to internet access. Rather than relying on underground cables or cell towers like traditional telecom companies, Starlink uses low-orbiting satellites that let it provide fast internet in places its competitors had struggled to reach. Expectations for the startup were sky high. Bullish Morgan Stanley analysts predicted that by 2040, Starlink would have up to 364 million subscribers worldwide — more than the current population of the U.S.
Starlink quickly became a central pillar of Musk’s fortune. His stake in Starlink’s parent company, SpaceX, is estimated to be worth about $150 billion of his roughly $400 billion net worth.
Although the company says its user base has grown to over 5 million people, it remains a bit player compared to the largest internet providers. And the satellite internet market is set to become more competitive as well-funded companies launch services modeled on Starlink. Jeff Bezos’ Project Kuiper, a unit of Amazon, has said it expects to start serving customers later this year. Satellite upstarts headquartered in Europe and China aren’t far behind either.
“They want to get as far and as fast as they can before Amazon Kuiper gets online,” said Chris Quilty, a veteran space industry analyst.
In internal cables, State Department officials have said they are eager to help Musk get ahead of foreign satellite companies. Securing licenses in the next 18 months is critical for Starlink due to the growing competition, one cable said last month. Senior diplomats have written that they hope to give Musk’s company a “first-mover advantage.”
Africa represents a lucrative prize. Much of the continent lacks reliable internet. Success in Africa could mean dominating a market with the fastest-growing population on earth.
As of last November, Starlink had reportedly launched in 15 of Africa’s 54 countries, but it was beginning to spark a backlash. Last year, Cameroon and Namibia cracked down on Musk’s company for allegedly operating in their countries illegally. In South Africa — where Starlink has so far failed to get a license — Musk exacerbated tensions by publicly accusing the government of anti-white racism. Since Trump won the election, at least five African countries have granted licenses to Starlink: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Guinea-Bissau, Lesotho and Chad.
Now Musk’s campaign of cuts has given him leverage inside the State Department. A Trump administration memo that leaked to the press last month proposed closing six embassies in Africa.
The Gambian embassy was on the list of proposed cuts.
An 8-year-old democracy, Gambia’s 2.7 million residents live on a sliver of land once used as a hub in the transatlantic slave trade. For two decades until 2017, the nation was ruled by a despot who had his opponents assassinated and plundered public funds to buy himself luxuries like a Rolls-Royce collection and a private zoo. When the dictator was ousted, the economy was in tatters. Today Gambia is one of the poorest countries in the world, with about half the country living on less than $4 a day.
In this fragile environment, the telecom industry that Jabbi oversees is vitally important to Gambian authorities. According to the government, the sector provides at least 20% of the country’s tax revenue. Ads for the country’s multiple internet providers are ubiquitous, painted onto dozens of public works — parks, police booths, schools.
It’s unclear why Starlink’s efforts in Gambia, a tiny market, have been so intense.
Cromer’s efforts on behalf of the company started under the Biden administration, as she documented last December in a cable sent back to Washington. Last spring, Starlink began the process of securing necessary approvals from a local utilities regulator and the Gambian communications agency. The utilities regulator wanted Starlink to pay an $85,000 license fee, which the company felt was too expensive. Cromer spoke to local officials, who then “pressured” the regulator to remove “this unnecessary barrier to entry,” the ambassador wrote.
Gambian supporters of Starlink felt that its product would be a boon for consumers and for economic growth in the country, where internet service remains unreliable and slow. “The ripple effects could be extraordinary,” Cromer said in the December cable, contending it could enable telehealth and improve education.
Opponents argued that local internet providers were one of Gambia’s few stable sources of jobs and infrastructure investments. If Starlink killed off its competition and then jacked up its prices — in Nigeria, the company announced last year it would suddenly double its fees — authorities could have little leverage to manage the fallout. When Musk refused to turn on Starlink in part of Ukraine during the war there, it heightened concerns about handing control of internet access to the mercurial billionaire, industry analysts said. One Musk tweet about foreign regulators’ ability to police his company caught the attention of Gambian critics: “They can shake their fist at the sky,” Musk said in 2021.
The ultimate authority for granting Starlink a license lies with Jabbi, an attorney who spent years in the local telecom sector. Gambian telecom companies that don’t want competition from Musk see Jabbi as an ally.
Jallow, Jabbi’s top deputy, told ProPublica that the ministry is not opposed to Starlink operating in Gambia. But he said Jabbi is doing due diligence to ensure laws and regulations are being followed before opening up the country to a consequential change.
After Trump’s inauguration, Jabbi’s position pitted him against not only Starlink but also the U.S. government. In the weeks after the February meeting where Cromer reminded Jabbi about the tenuous state of American funding to his country, the ambassador told other diplomats that getting Starlink approved was a high priority, according to a Western official familiar with her comments.
The stance surprised some of Cromer’s peers. Cromer had spent her career at USAID before President Joe Biden appointed her as ambassador. Her tenure in Gambia often focused on human rights and democracy building.
In March, when Jabbi and Jallow traveled to D.C. to attend a World Bank summit, the State Department helped arrange a series of meetings for them. The first, on March 19, was with Starlink representatives including Ben MacWilliams, a former U.S. diplomat who leads the company’s expansion efforts in Africa. The second was with U.S. government officials at the State Department’s headquarters.
The meeting with the company quickly became contentious. Huddled in a conference room at the World Bank, MacWilliams accused Jabbi of standing in the way of his nation’s progress and harming ordinary Gambians, according to Jallow, who was in the meeting, and four others briefed on the event. “We want our license now,” Jallow recalled MacWilliams saying. “Why are you delaying it?”
The conversation ended in a stalemate. In the hours that followed, Starlink and the U.S. government’s campaign intensified in a way that underscored the degree of coordination between the two parties. The company told Jabbi it would cancel his scheduled D.C. meeting with State Department officials because “there was no more need,” Jallow said.
The State Department meeting never happened. Instead, 4,000 miles away in Gambia’s capital, Cromer would try an even more aggressive approach.
That same day, Cromer had already met with Gambia’s equivalent of a commerce secretary to lobby him to help pave the way for Starlink. Then she was informed about the disappointing meeting Starlink had had in D.C., according to State Department records. By day’s end, Cromer had sent a letter to the nation’s president.
“I am writing to seek your support to allow Starlink to operate in The Gambia,” the letter opened. Over three pages, the ambassador described her concerns about Jabbi’s agency and listed the ways that Gambians could benefit from Starlink. She also said the company had satisfied conditions set by Jabbi’s predecessor.
“I respectfully urge you to facilitate the necessary approvals for Starlink to commence operations in The Gambia,” Cromer concluded. “I look forward to your favorable response.”
In the weeks since, Jabbi has refused to budge. The U.S. government’s efforts have continued. In late April, Gambia’s attorney general met in D.C. with senior State Department officials, according to a person familiar with the matter, where they again discussed the Starlink issue.
Diplomats were troubled by how the pressure campaign could hurt America’s image overseas. “This is not Iran or a rogue African state run by a dictator — this is a democracy, a natural ally,” said another senior Western diplomat in the region, noting that Gambia is “a prime partner of the West” in United Nations votes. “You beat up the smallest and the best boy in the class.”
Gambia is not the only country being leaned on. Since Trump took office, embassies around the world have sent a flurry of cables to D.C. documenting their meetings with Starlink executives and their efforts to cajole developing countries into helping Musk’s business. The cables all describe a problem similar to what happened in Gambia: The company has struggled to win a license from local regulators. In some countries, ambassadors reported, their work appears to be yielding results. (The embassies and their host countries did not respond to requests for comment.)
The U.S. embassy in Cameroon wrote that the country could prove its commitment to Trump’s agenda by letting Starlink expand its presence there. In the same missive, embassy officials discussed the impact of U.S. aid cuts and deportations and cited a humanitarian official who was reckoning with America’s shifting foreign policy: “They may not be happy with what they see, but they are trying to adapt as best they can.”
In Lesotho, where embassy officials had spent weeks trying to help Starlink get a license, the company finalized a deal after Trump imposed 50% tariffs on the tiny landlocked country. Lesotho officials told embassy staff they hoped the license would help in their urgent push to reduce the levies, according to Mother Jones. A major multinational company complained that Starlink was getting preferential treatment, embassy documents obtained by ProPublica show, since Musk’s firm had been exempted from requirements its competitors still had to follow.
In cables sent from the U.S. embassy in Djibouti this spring, State Department officials recounted their meetings with the company and pledged to continue working with “Starlink in identifying government officials and facilitating discussions.”
In Bangladesh, U.S. diplomats pressed Starlink’s case “early and often” with local officials, partnered with Starlink to “build an educational strategy” for their counterparts and helped arrange a conversation between Musk and the nation’s head of state, according to a recent cable. The embassy’s work started under Biden but bore fruit only after Trump took office.
Their efforts resulted in Bangladesh approving Starlink’s request to do business in the country, the top U.S. diplomat there said last month, a sign-off that Musk’s company had sought for years.
Do you have information about Elon Musk’s businesses or the Trump administration? Josh Kaplan can be reached by email at joshua.kaplan@propublica.org and by Signal or WhatsApp at 734-834-9383. Brett Murphy can be reached at 508-523-5195 or by email at brett.murphy@propublica.org.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee finished their budget markup hearing Wednesday afternoon, advancing the health care portion of the legislation — which includes massive cuts to Medicaid — in a party line 30-24 vote after more than a day of debate.