Nobody would argue that government is not corpulent and needs a diet, which the President is doing. While scholars are focused on whether much of President Donald Trump’s purge of programs and freezing of funds violates the separation of powers between the Executive branch and the Legislative branch, and the access to information and funds (how would you know that they are not being funneled for personal gain to untraceable private accounts or siphoning off information for Musk’s businesses?) by unknown “Muskovites,” there is another serious problem — his demand for pledges of loyalty and the firing of and persecution of anyone who has not pledged their allegiance to him.

Prior to August 1934, public officials  swearing an oath in Germany pledged to uphold its Constitution and the German Nation from its enemies. With the start of the Nazi party, that coalition pledged loyalty to the Fuhrer. With Hitler’s ascendancy to the chancellor position and presidency of Germany, he changed the oath to loyalty to him personally as leader, rather than to the nation.

The oath functioned as intended, allowing a moral obstacle to any consideration of disobeying Hitler’s orders or offering resistance to his regime. Folks who refused the oath were fired and prosecuted. In Germany, starting with soldiers was the start in shifting loyalty.

Mr. Trump, under the guise of firing “woke” generals, has a commission researching and interviewing generals and firing and/or demoting any who do not bend the knee to kiss his ring.

Other law enforcement people, like those in top intelligence positions, faced questions about whether they embraced the President’s false claims about the outcome of the election and the Jan. 6 assault.

Sources (New York Times, Feb. 8) reported having to answer in an interview by Trump personnel, “yes” or “no” to the following questions: “Was Jan. 6 an inside job?” and “Was the 2020 presidential election stolen?”

Anyone answering “no” is no more!

Certainly, a modicum of loyalty to a leader who is trying to implement changes promised in a campaign is a criterion, but jobs like  national security officers and lawyers in the justice department or the FBI must be able  first and foremost to give accurate information to a President, even if it is not what he wants to hear. Country must come first.

Regrettably, the turning over of the list of FBI agents involved in the Jan. 6 investigation sends a clear message that law enforcement folks will be punished, if not by actual firing then by demotion or non-promotion, and must be loyal. The law enforcement community must interpret intelligence and enforce the laws in a neutral way without fear of losing their jobs.

Fear has been reinforced by the firings of FBI veterans who investigated alleged wrongdoing by the president, the withdrawal of protection of former ranking officials who were inundated with threats, the formulation of a committee to investigate New York Attorney General Letitia James, who secured a 34-felony-count conviction against Mr. Trump, the petty firing of the Archivist whose position required her to ask for the return of the classified documents housed at Mar-a-Largo, and the appointment of unqualified cabinet members whose sole asset is drinking the Trump cool aid.

A full dictatorship could happen here.

Arlene Violet is an attorney and former Rhode Island Attorney General.