Subject: Re: Oklahoma and Massachusetts
Keep in mind, the resistance operating covertly with the Executive branch to oppose, resist and undermine Trump policies were not elected by anybody.

What "resistance"? They don't work for Trump. They work for the U.S. government.

It's hard, because the U.S. government - like many governments - doesn't have a single person in charge. They have lots of bosses. The government is run by both Congress and the President. Congress itself has two chambers, each of which has tons of committees, and comprises 535 different individuals. So many people who have a role in deciding what the policy of government is.

Moreover, the entire structure of government is deliberately unclear about who's in charge. Congress makes all the substantive laws and rules, and the President's role is to "Execute" what Congress has done - which might make you think that it's Congress who gets to set the government's policies, and that all the executive branch should be trying to figure out what their preferred policies are. But in practice, the President is the titular head of the Executive branch, so arguably he gets to set whatever policy choices can fit within the constraints of actual statutes and laws. But then again, the President doesn't even get to solely pick his own cabinet heads or any of the other 1,200 or so top officials that actually run the government - Congress has deliberately set up all of these agencies to be outside of the White House, run by "officers of the United States" who can't fill that position unless the Senate confirms them. Congress - specifically the House - gets to control all the budget and resources that all these agencies have as well.

To say nothing of the fact that Congress has also adopted a Civil Service Act for the express purpose of ensuring that government employees are allowed to do their jobs without being subject to the political preferences of upper level appointees. And that it adopted the Administrative Procedure Act so that the Executive can't just change the policies of the agencies based solely on their preferences or election outcomes. And it has regular oversight processes - standing oversight committees - so that it's constantly up in the faces of all the administrators making sure that they follow the policies set out by Congress in implementing these laws.

It's intentionally structured so that there's tension between the Legislative and Executive branches in exercising power over the government. Checks and balances, and all that. Congress exercises control over the Executive branch in lots of ways, and has passed laws to make sure that the employees of the agencies are not merely automatons constrained to carry out the policies of the President.

It's not like a closely-held private company, where the CEO is in absolute charge of everything and any employee has an obligation to do whatever the CEO wants.

It might help to know what, specifically, you're talking about here. Let's pick an agency - say, EPA. What do you think is the biggest example of EPA staff opposing, resisting, or undermining Trump's policies during his first term?