Former Acting Director of National Intelligence and Special Presidential Envoy Ric Grenell did not hold back on Friday when he criticized Democratic Representative Sara Jacobs (D-CA) for her efforts to dismantle Elon Musk’s DOGE initiative. He accused the congresswoman of prioritizing her own financial interests while defending excessive government spending.
Jacobs, the granddaughter of Qualcomm founder Irwin Jacobs and an heiress to a multibillion-dollar fortune, introduced the Delete DOGE Act this week. During her 2020 congressional campaign, she received substantial financial support from her family, including $1.5 million from her grandparents directed to a super PAC that backed her candidacy. Her proposed legislation, H.R. 2601, aims to defund DOGE (Decentralized Operations for Government Efficiency), Musk’s initiative that is currently transforming the operations of federal agencies. Grenell criticized her on X, stating, “The billionaire granddaughter of @Qualcomm wants to keep spending billions of other people’s money.”
He further questioned, “Did Qualcomm lose any contracts in the @DOGE house cleaning? Is the billionaire congresswoman upset she’s losing some of her inheritance?”
Grenell’s remarks prompted a wave of responses, with many conservatives agreeing that Jacobs’ opposition to DOGE is more about her potential financial losses related to lucrative federal contracts than genuine concern for public services.
Representing California’s 51st District, Jacobs took to Twitter on Thursday to condemn Musk’s DOGE for allegedly cutting “billions of dollars” in federal research funding and terminating “tens of thousands” of government jobs. She specifically claimed that DOGE had “accidentally” laid off staff involved in critical areas such as nuclear defense, Ebola prevention, and crisis hotline operations at the VA. “Elon Musk’s ‘move fast, break things’ approach doesn’t work when you’re talking about programs that keep people alive,” she asserted. “DOGE needs to be stopped.”The Delete DOGE Act aims to eliminate all federal funding for DOGE, recover unutilized resources, and prohibit any future taxpayer contributions to the initiative. Jacobs has characterized this initiative as a fight against Musk’s alleged attempt to “steal from the American public to finance tax breaks for billionaires like himself.”
However, some critics question the sincerity of her intentions.
“You want to prevent DOGE from halting the funds you misappropriate,” one commenter stated. “I’m curious, could you explain to the American public how much you have taken from them?” another inquired. “Only a corrupt politician would act this way if they had something to conceal. So, please disclose how much you profited.” Others raised concerns about whether Qualcomm—whose federal contracts have surpassed $500 million in the last ten years—could be affected by DOGE’s efforts to streamline government expenditures.
This conflict arises as President Trump’s recently announced tariff measures have already unsettled global markets and heightened discussions regarding the roles of the public and private sectors in national infrastructure and security. While Wall Street grapples with the implications of extensive import taxes, the larger dialogue surrounding economic nationalism has begun to encompass the technology and defense industries, where Musk and firms like Qualcomm operate. Grenell’s comments act as a cautionary note regarding what some on the right perceive as hypocrisy from affluent progressives who resist private-sector changes—unless such changes serve their financial interests.
