In a striking new twist in the battle over the direction of American diplomacy, a group of ousted employees from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the State Department is reportedly now organizing covert resistance efforts to counter President Donald Trump’s presidency.
According to sources, the faction — composed of mid- and senior-level staffers displaced by Trump’s directive to effectively shutter USAID — has launched a series of “noncooperation” workshops across Washington and select state capitals.
Their strategy: to cultivate a network of federal and civil service workers prepared to quietly oppose policies deemed antithetical to democratic norms.
The efforts, described by a former State Department conflict advisor now affiliated with the group, draw inspiration from unconventional tactics rooted in creative dissent.
“Fascism is not creative,” the adviser said, referencing pop culture allegories like “Star Wars” to underscore the belief that authoritarian patterns are recognizable and resistible.
The sentiment underpins their approach: deploying low-level, decentralized pushback in hopes of forestalling more overt threats.
This emergent movement arises from deep frustration with the abrupt dissolution of USAID, which previously managed U.S. foreign-aid initiatives in over 100 countries.
Trump’s move to fold most of the agency into the State Department—a decision supported by a truncated budget and profile—resulted in mass layoffs and ignited fierce opposition from career diplomats.
Officials involved in the resistance suggest the looming return of Trump to national prominence has galvanized their efforts.
They describe themselves as guardians of a fragile democratic infrastructure—vigilantly prepared for what they see as an impending “test” of the American state’s democratic resilience.
Detailing their preparations, one former USAID staffer recounted plans to teach allies to subtly disrupt administrative directives that might compromise diplomatic process or mission integrity, including through selective internal dissent or paperwork delays.
The existence of what participants call a “deep-state” opposition has stirred debate in Washington, with critics framing it as covert sabotage and proponents characterizing it as a form of responsible citizenship.
The broader conservative sphere, including Trump’s allies, has seized on the terminology—denouncing these actors as part of an entrenched bureaucratic elite seeking to thwart elected powers.
In response, Trump officials have defended the agency reforms, calling them necessary for efficiency and budget discipline. They dismiss allegations of malicious intent, framing resistance efforts as bureaucratic resistance to authority, not opposition to democratic norms.
As the country gears up for political contests in 2026 and beyond, the emergence of this organized internal resistance signals a deepening chasm.
With significant votes and policies on the horizon, observers will be watching closely to see whether these extreme liberal dissidents can truly influence governance in spite of the transparent will of the people being opposed to their radical agenda.
[READ MORE: Trump Reveals One Major Difference Between his First and Second Term]
