Two bits: Trump family brilliance; DOGE's cruelty

People magazine writes: 

Donald Trump Asked Son Barron 'How'd You Do That?' 

When He Turned on a Laptop: “Unbelievable Aptitude in Technology”

“If you look at my kids, all of my kids, they’ve been very good, they've been very smart,” Donald marveled, noting that they have each attended prestigious schools and worked hard. “They love our country and they’re proud of their father.”

When asked which natural talent of Barron's stands out, the president praised his son's technological know-how.

“I turn off his laptop, I said, 'Oh good,' and I go back five minutes later, he's got his laptop. I said, 'How'd you do that?' " he recalled. “None of your business, Dad.”

“He’s got an unbelievable aptitude in technology,” the president added.

Is this for real??? Probably. After all, djt really does have an unbelievable aptitude for a stunning degree of ignorance. Or if he just made this drivel up, it reveals his unbelievable aptitude for a stunning degree of mendacity.  

🤪

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

ProPublica reports: 

On Feb. 20, nearly 7,000 probationary employees at the Internal Revenue Service began receiving an unsigned letter telling them that they had been fired for poor performance.

But according to previously unreported emails obtained by ProPublica, a top lawyer at the IRS warned administration officials that the performance-related language in his agency’s termination letter was “a false statement” that amounted to “fraud” if the agency kept the language in the letter.

Joseph Rillotta, a senior IRS lawyer, wrote [in an email] that “no one” at the IRS had taken into account the performance of the probationary workers set to be fired. Rillotta urged that the language be struck from the draft termination letter.

No one appeared to respond to Rillotta’s first email. In a follow-up email, he said he was “pleading with you to remove the clause,” adding: “It is not an immaterial false statement, because it is designed to improve the government’s posture in litigation (to the detriment of the employees that we are terminating today).”

Because it was not true, he wrote, “That renders it, as I see it, an anticipatory fraud on tribunals of jurisdiction over these employment actions.”

How fracking cruel is that? Telling thousands of people they are fired for poor performance when there was no performance review at all. That is malicious cruelty by callous elite MAGA thugs.

The order to fire the IRS employees came from the Office of Personnel Management, which was staffed by djt appointees and members of DOGE, which is run by Elon Musk. Now Muck is whining about people not liking him and complaining he has never done anything wrong to anyone. “Tesla is a peaceful company. We’ve never done anything harmful. I’ve never done anything harmful. I’ve only done productive things.” 

I guess firing thousands of people and telling them for no reason they were poor performers does not amount to anything harmful. But much worse than that, (i) Musk is smearing all of the left and the entire Democratic Party, calling them a bunch of criminals with mental illness operating a giant conspiracy to kill him, and (ii) the people he fired were criminals fraudulently being paid: 

“It’s really come as quite a shock to me that there is this level of, really, hatred and violence from the Left. I always thought that the left, that Democrats were supposed to be the party of empathy, the party of caring, and yet they’re burning down cars, they’re firebombing dealerships, they’re firing bullets into dealerships, they’re just, you know, smashing up Teslas. [There is a] mental illness thing going on here, because this doesn’t make any sense. .... I think there are larger forces at work as well. Because, I mean, who’s funding and who’s coordinating it? Because this is crazy. I’ve never seen anything like this. .... It turns out when you take away people’s, you know, the money that they’re receiving fraudulently, they get very upset. And they basically wanna kill me because I’m stopping their fraud and they wanna hurt Tesla, because we’re stopping the terrible waste and corruption in the government. And, well, I guess they’re bad people. Bad people do bad things.” 

I do not recall this shocking degree of arrogant malice, viciousness and cruelty so obviously asserted by someone with so much power. To top off this amazingly ghastly story, Musk is enraged and planning to file a lawsuit because a former former U.S. Representative Jamaal Bowman called him a Nazi and a thief in a recent CNN appearance. 

Q: Should all of those thousands of illegally fired employees (and every Democrat) sue Musk because he called all of them corrupt frauds or accused them of a criminal conspiracy to harm or kill him?

Bring on the lawyers!

MAGA bits: Resegregation & killing DEI; Weaponizing the IRS; Teaching the world's dictators

The NYT writes about resegregating America again: The Trump administration has removed a longstanding directive from the civil rights era that explicitly prohibited federal contractors from allowing segregated facilities, the latest move to eradicate diversity, equity and inclusion policies from government operations that has drawn fierce rebuke. The removal of the segregated-facilities policy was included in a memo last month from the General Services Administration, which manages federal property and oversees procurement for the federal government.

Crushing the life out of DEI: djt and MAGA elites call DEI “harmful” and “wasteful” diversity policies, and “gender ideology extremism.” Well, that source of harm, waste and gender extremism will soon be fully eradicated from the federal govt. MAGA is also attacking DEI and woke just about everywhere outside of the federal government, including public schools and universities (Columbia U, U Penn, etc.), law firms, woke tech firms (Google, Cisco, Meta, etc.), woke retail firms (Target, Walmart, etc.), beer companies, woke churches, woke M&Ms candy, the LGBQT community, women, racial minorities, ethnic minorities, Democrats, liberals, the mainstream media (NYT, NBC, MSNBC, etc.), woke law enforcement agencies, non-profit groups that promote DEI initiatives, entertainment companies (Disney, ViacomCBS, etc.), health care organizations, the American Medical Association, financial institutions (JP Morgan, Citigroup), pharmaceutical companies (Merck), airplane companies (Delta), sports conglomerates (NFL, MLB, NBA), Human Rights Watch, NAACP, large philanthropic organizations with assets over $500 million, . . . . . . you get the point. MAGA attacks use various tactics including boycotts, regulatory threats, federal investigations, public condemnation, demagoguery, lies, slanders, etc. So far, a lot organizations have responded by scaling back or completely dismantling their diversity initiatives. So killing DEI and obliterating its existence is well underway.

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

The NYT reports: IRS Prepares to Help Find Immigrants Targeted for Deportation -- The tax agency is nearing an agreement to verify whether ICE officials have the right address for people they are trying to deport. Many undocumented immigrants file tax returns with the I.R.S., giving the agency information about where they live, their families, their employers and their earnings. The I.R.S. has long encouraged undocumented immigrants to pay their taxes, giving people without Social Security numbers a separate nine-digit code called an individual taxpayer identification number to file their returns.

Well, at least MAGA is trying to deport the people it targets as opposed to randomly grabbing people off the streets. But once the IRS has been coerced into working with djt and other MAGA elites in power, all of us are potential targets for IRS harassment. 

Places that djt has deported people to

Flights are not a perfect measure of deportations. Many immigrants are deported by land to Mexico, and others on regular commercial airline travel. But because the federal government has not released data on whom it is deporting, tracking deportation flights is a way to assess which people and countries are affected by djt’s immigration policy

Safety tip: Either (1) do not make any mistakes on you tax filings and get ready for an audit by Dr. Proctoscope, or (2) don't publicly criticize djt or MAGA generally. 

____________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

A WaPo article reports (not paywalled) about the spread of racist, bigoted, authoritarian MAGA demagoguery and tactics to other authoritarians: Autocrats roll back rights and rule of law — and cite Trump’s example -- Trump’s statements, policies and actions are providing cover for attacks on LGBTQ+ rights, freedom of expression and the rule of law around the world. Under Hungary’s antigay “propaganda” law, bookstores were fined for selling LGBTQ+ themed tomes without sealed plastic wrappers and a museum director was fired for allowing minors into an exhibit with images of same-sex couples. But the autocratic government of Prime Minister Viktor Orban stopped short of targeting the community’s premier event: the annual Pride parade. Until now. Parliament voted overwhelmingly this month to ban the event — and threatened to use facial recognition technology to identify violators. What changed? According to Orban, it was the return to the White House of President Donald Trump.

So, MAGA-style racism, bigotry, sexism, and hate of the LGBQT community and the rule of law is popular with dictators, authoritarian politicians and maybe lots of average people too. Once can only wonder how much of the ocean of hate and malicious ill-will has been fomented and amplified by decades of far right authoritarian demagoguery, lies and slanders. Most of it, I suspect. Maybe ~80%? 

Will the GAO actually investigate DOGE?

Very official-looking

The bird with the pointed stick represents

accountants and their reports to congress

The GAO (Government Accountability Office) is a congressional agency. It is not an executive branch agency under djt's or Musk's control. The GAO is an investigative agency that finds and reports annually on fraud, waste and abuse in government spending and operations. Being under the control of congress, it is not subject to direct attack by DOGE and MAGA thugs. Will the GAO investigate DOGE for waste, fraud and abuse committed by DOGE? That is an interesting question. Wall Street On Parade reports:

There’s One Federal Investigative Agency that Neither Trump nor 

Elon Musk Can Touch: It Just Opened an Investigation into DOGE

For more than a century [the GAO] has been doing the work that Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been pretending to do, that is, competently root out fraud, waste and abuse in federal government programs without leaving a dangerous trail of chaos that threatens national security, personal privacy and the U.S. Constitution.

If Elon Musk is sincerely interested in efficiency and government savings, why is he duplicating the work of the non-partisan GAO – while doing it in a grossly subpar and deeply conflicted manner?** 

**Grossly subpar? That’s an understatement. Deeply conflicted? That’s a statement! 

On February 12, the GAO confirmed by written letter that it will pursue the request for an investigation made by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, into how and why DOGE accessed the Treasury’s payment system.

According to the outstanding research and reporting on DOGE at Wired, Musk seems to be more interested in using the DOGE.gov website to generate traffic to his X social medium platform, than he is in conducting himself in a non-conflicted, professional manner.

Last Thursday, Wired reported this:

“A WIRED review of the [DOGE.gov] page’s source code shows that the promotion of Musk’s own platform went deeper than replicating the posts on the homepage. The source code shows that the site’s canonical tags direct search engines to x.com rather than DOGE.gov.

“A canonical tag is a snippet of code that tells search engines what the authoritative version of a website is. It is typically used by sites with multiple pages as a search engine optimization tactic, to avoid their search ranking being diluted.

“In DOGE’s case, however, the code is informing search engines that when people search for content found on DOGE.gov, they should not show those pages in search results, but should instead display the posts on X.”

After Musk promised for days to put DOGE’s “receipts” of savings on the DOGE.gov website, today that page shows $55 billion in savings thus far. The bulk of that appears to be from firing federal workers and canceling building leases, not fraud detection.

That there is fraud, waste and abuse in federal government programs is not some epiphany handed down from the heavens to Elon Musk and Donald Trump. GAO has been reporting that fact every year for decades.

As recently as April of last year, GAO reported that “annual federal losses due to fraud are estimated to be between $233 billion and $521 billion based on data from fiscal years 2018 through 2022….”

The GAO report also notes, however, that “The estimated losses represent about 3 to 7 percent of average federal obligations for fiscal years 2018 through 2022” and these fraud losses “are generally in line with fraud estimates” by foreign governments, including studies from the United Kingdom’s Public Sector Fraud Authority. (emphasis added)

The degree of criminality that both djt and Musk routinely operate with is staggering. And it is blatant. Repubs in congress are silent and therefore complicit in the criminality and needless, vast waste that djt, Musk and MAGA elites are causing. djt has immunity for his crimes and he can and probably will pardon Musk and all other MAGA elites that get caught in lawbreaking. The Constitution and rule of law are almost completely irrelevant in terms of being a source of accountability for large-scale MAGA criminality. 

A huge partisan fight is coming real soon, 

assuming it hasn't already started! 

Obviously, Repubs do not want the GAO to investigate DOGE. There is going to be a gigantic partisan fight this year over who and what the next Comptroller General (CG) of the GAO will be. The current CG's 15 year term in office expires in 2025. The CG has to be someone who the Dem and Repub leadership in the House and Senate approve of. Since the GAO was created in 1921, congress gave increasing responsibility on the agency to serve as a watchdog and a check on executive power. Initially, the GAO's principal goal was to get control of wasteful tax dollar spending after World War I. Congress directed the agency to find “efficiency in public expenditures” and gave it broad statutory investigative powers. Improved efficiency in public expenditures and evidence of corruption are the absolute last things congressional Repubs want to see made public. All or nearly all of them are authoritarian, kleptocratic, complicit and up to their eyeballs in MAGA's kleptocratic sleazefest. 

So, the Repubs will very likely pick a thoroughly corrupt MAGA zealot, while the Dems will probably pick someone reasonably competent, comparatively honest and mostly independent. Given the vast Dem and Repub mindset differences, a reasonable democratic compromise looks to be extremely unlikely. One side or the other will probably have to cave in.  

Until the war over the next CG starts in earnest, the Repubs could take steps to neuter the GAO, which is what they want to do. Since congress controls the GAO's funding, significant budget reductions could neuter it. The Repubs could also try to limit the GAO's access to certain agencies or information, i.e., DOGE and other MAGA operations in the executive branch that need to be protected from their secret criminality. Of course, the MAGA propaganda Leviathan will probably work hard to undermine public trust in the GAO's actual findings and recommendations, as opposed to the faux findings, lies and bullshit gushing out of DOGE. We can expect Faux News and other fine MAGA demagoguery sources to light a huge fire of outrageous lies, slanders, crackpottery and etc. under the GAO to help djt and MAGA burn it to ashes.

2025 is definitely going to be a very interesting year for politics. Heck, it already has been.

Properly defining/describing antisemitism: Possible or not?

Politics is loaded with contested concepts, which based on my AI searches appears to be most of the basis for at least ~70% of all political disagreements. The remaining grounds for disagreement arise from factors such as greed, tribalism, the joy of trolling, and defense of self-identity and self-esteem. In the title of this blog post, the word "properly" is contested in the context of defining antisemitism. A "proper" definition or description to one person will be seen by at least a significant minority of people as not proper. This gigantic Wikipedia article more than hints at how bitterly contested the "antisemitism" concept is.

Given my understanding of the high importance of contested concepts and the origins of political disagreement grounded in human cognitive biology and social behavior, I thought I'd take a stab at either finding a proper definition or coming up with with one of my own. Note, I don't consciously believe that I am an antisemite, seeing Jews as another group of people with a religion they (i) believe in to widely varying extents, and (ii) practice in widely varying ways. That's about the same as most any other religious group, like Christians, Hindus and Muslims. I'm not sure about where or how the Buddhists fit in, but that's OT.

A good definition or description will balance specificity with inclusivity. Too narrow a definition risks missing changing manifestations of antisemitism. But too broad a definition risks encompassing legitimate political speech, which in the US includes a heck of a lot of bad or dishonest speech, e.g., lies, slanders, crackpot conspiracies, bullshit, etc. 

My searching indicates that the most widely adopted formal definition of antisemitism is the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition, approved in May 2016 [1]. Its definition is this: 

"Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities."

That definition is surprisingly vague to me. So vague that in my opinion it's worse than not helpful. It's harmful because it is so easy to abuse the definition by rejecting legitimate criticism of Israel and Israeli policy as antisemitic. What the IHRA came up with is loaded with contested concepts, namely "a certain perception", "may be expressed as hatred", "manifestations of antisemitism" and "directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property" are all baffling to me. What does that all mean?

Another definition is the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism. It defines antisemitism more concisely: 

"Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, hostility or violence against Jews as Jews (or Jewish institutions as Jewish)." 

That definition was specifically developed to better distinguish between hatred of Jews and criticism of Israel. That is a lot less vague. It's harder to abuse. 

A 2025 description by the Universities Australia: 

Antisemitism is "discrimination, prejudice, harassment, exclusion, vilification, intimidation or violence that impedes Jews’ ability to participate as equals in educational, political, religious, cultural, economic or social life. It can manifest in a range of ways including negative, dehumanizing, or stereotypical narratives about Jews. Further, it includes hate speech, epithets, caricatures, stereotypes, tropes, Holocaust denial, and antisemitic symbols. Targeting Jews based on their Jewish identities alone is discriminatory and antisemitic."

That's interesting. But it's somewhat overbroad. For example, hate speech, epithets, caricatures, stereotypes, tropes, Holocaust denial, antisemitic symbols, and dehumanizing, or stereotypical narratives are all protected free speech in the US. Different parts MAGA routinely practices at least some of those bad behaviors, e.g., Holocaust denial, but mostly directs them at Democrats, liberals, the LGBQT community, ethnic minorities, illegal immigrants, etc. The USSC has consistently held that there is no "hate speech" exception to the First Amendment, meaning that hateful or offensive speech cannot be censored or punished solely because of its content or viewpoint.

The bottom line: This is too complicated for me. A "proper" definition or description is probably impossible. I'll stick with the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism.

Q: Should Jews everywhere and the state Israel be treated differently from other people, groups and nations? In what way(s)?

Footnote:

1. The IHRA set out 11 examples to clarify what antisemitism was in the view of the authors. My comments to each are appended.

1. Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion. (That seems reasonable, but arguably too limited. My improved version: Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical any ideology or an extremist view of religion.)

2. Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions. (That is desirable on its face. But in the US in the name of protected free speech, MAGA routinely makes mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about liberals, Democrats, and/or the LGBQT community, falsely alleging massive damage they have caused such as stealing or rigging elections, massive voter fraud, being criminals, pedophiles, child sex-traffickers, communists and/or enemies of the state or democracy. Viewed in that light, this complaint seems thin-skinned and overly broad.) 

3. Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews. (Fair enough - limit blame to the blameworthy. That makes sense for Jews and everyone else.)

4. Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust). (That makes sense.)

5. Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust. (That makes sense.)

6. Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations. (True loyalty to Israel or Jewry in general appears to be very rare in the diaspora, so this is OK.)

7. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor. (I don't buy this. Why can't the State of Israel be at least partly a racist endeavor? Why are Jews immune to racism that is exists to varying extents among all races all over the world? The question is, how much racism or at least bigotry is there in the overall enterprise?)

8. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. (That's pure nonsense. Politics is loaded with double standards. Get over it.)

9. Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism, e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel, to characterize Israel or Israelis. (That seems reasonable, but as we all know and despicable (DEPLORABLE!) as it is, free speech in America includes antisemitism, along with racism, bigotry and dehumanization.)

10. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. (This is bitterly contested. Comparisons by commentator and experts, including some Jews, have been made. Critics of comparisons argue that fundamental differences in scale, intent, and outcome make comparisons historically questionable. I'm not so sure about this one.)

11. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel. (Can one reasonably hold citizens in a democracy collectively responsible for actions of the state? Why not? Does one have to refer to Israeli citizens being responsible instead of Israeli Jews being responsible? That sounds like political correctness maybe running amok. But OK, let's hold Israeli citizens responsible, not Israeli Jews. No need to unduly agitate anyone.)

MAGA update: Law firm caves in to djt threats and attacks on DEI

Sorry, this started out as a news bit but wound up being near or in the realm of TL/DR. Sorry.

Two NYT articles report about a deal that a large law firm made to avoid losing business after djt signed an EO (executive order) targeting the company. One of the articles reports (not paywalled):

Paul Weiss Deal With Trump Faces Backlash From Legal Profession

Paul Weiss, a law firm targeted by President Trump, reached a deal to settle a conflict. Many in the legal field are condemning the agreement. Some lawyers said the deal was driven by profit. Others said it was enabling autocracy. One said the move had prompted her to quit her legal job in disgust.

All over the legal world, lawyers on Friday were talking about the deal that Paul Weiss, one of the nation’s most prominent law firms, had made with President Trump to escape an onerous executive order that would have prevented it from representing many clients before the federal government. To avoid the hit to its business, the firm agreed to do $40 million worth of pro bono work for causes favored by the White House.

It was a striking development in the White House’s broad retribution campaign against big law firms that represented lawyers or prosecutors in the criminal cases against Mr. Trump before the 2024 election.  

Paul Weiss’s move was a particular point of contention because of the firm’s standing in the legal community. The firm has long been dominated by Democrats and prided itself on being at the forefront of fights against the government for civil rights.

So there you have it, djt can not only neuter a major pro-civil liberties law firm with a quick, easy EO, he can extort millions of dollars worth of free legal services on top of it. The law firm rejects the criticisms of the deal arguing that it can still work with existing clients.  

From what I can tell, this is a new line of attack against the rule of law and civil liberties. It also appears to be a new method of extorting the private sector for services that will be used to support all avenues of MAGA authoritarian attacks on democracy, the rule of law, civil liberties and inconvenient facts, truths and sound reasoning, e.g., actual history, climate science, etc. 

djt signed the EO on March 14, 2025 with economically damaging provisions directed against the law firm. The key points:

1. It suspended security clearances for Paul Weiss attorneys 1 4.

2. It restricted the firm's lawyers' access to government facilities and official 1 4.

3. The order threatened to terminate federal contracts associated with the firm's clients 4.

4. It required government contractors to disclose any business dealings with Paul Weiss 4.

5. The EO cited the firm's connection to Mark Pomerantz, a former partner who had been involved in the Manhattan district attorney's investigation of Trump 1 11.

6. It also referenced the firm's internal diversity initiatives as a reason for the action 11.

This EO was just one of a series of similar actions by djt targeting law firms whose lawyers had provided legal work that he disagreed with. The order posed a significant risk to Paul Weiss's operations and client relationships.

In my opinion, the EO is a pack of lies and slanders [1], including the following insulting screed:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Background. Global law firms have for years played an outsized role in undermining the judicial process and in the destruction of bedrock American principles. Many have engaged in activities that make our communities less safe, increase burdens on local businesses, limit constitutional freedoms, and degrade the quality of American elections. Additionally, they have sometimes done so on behalf of clients, pro bono, or ostensibly “for the public good” — potentially depriving those who cannot otherwise afford the benefit of top legal talent the access to justice deserved by all. My Administration will no longer support taxpayer funds sponsoring such harm.

. .

. .

Additionally, Paul Weiss discriminates against its own employees on the basis of race and other categories prohibited by civil rights laws. Paul Weiss, along with nearly every other large, influential, or industry leading law firm, makes decisions around “targets”[1] based on race and sex. My Administration is committed to ending such unlawful discrimination perpetrated in the name of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” policies and ensuring that Federal benefits support the laws and policies of the United States, including those laws and policies promoting our national security and respecting the democratic process. Those who engage in blatant discrimination and other activities inconsistent with the interests of the United States should not have access to our Nation’s secrets nor be deemed responsible stewards of any Federal funds.

Here, djt and MAGA are making it absolutely clear and explicit that they consider DEI initiatives to be racist and sexist. In fact, DEI is the opposite of that. However, with MAGA elite's cynical racist and sexist mindset, this is the argument they now stand behind to re-establish legal White supremacy, racism, sexism, bigotry and discrimination throughout American government, commerce and society generally.

MAGA is making up insulting bullshit without solid empirical evidence. There is no solid evidence that can rationalize or justify MAGA's attacks on DEI [1]. In other words, the MAGA movement in relation to DEI is racist, sexist, bigoted, mendacious, malicious, arrogant, intolerant and crackpot. 

Q: is it hyperbolic, empirically false or otherwise flawed to assert that the MAGA movement in relation to DEI is racist, sexist, bigoted, mendacious, malicious, arrogant, intolerant and crackpot? What are rank & file MAGA supporters of anti-DEI who sincerely but falsely believe they and/or millions of others have been seriously harmed and/or discriminated against by DEI initiatives?

Footnote:

1. Deep research mode:

Q: MAGA elites constantly attack DEIO initiatives are sexist and racist, as exemplified in this EO, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/addressing-risks-from-paul-weiss/ . What has the overall cost-benefit of DEI been including major relevant factors such as increasing discrimination against white people and men, decreasing discrimination against non-white people and women, helping or harming the economy, helping or harming civil liberties generally, forcing diversity into the workforce at the expense of merit and/or worker quality, discrimination against heterosexual men and women by non-heterosexual people, and discrimination against non-heterosexual men and women by heterosexual people, and whatever other significant documented costs and benefits there have been from DEI initiatives? Note that the March 14, 2025 EO is not a phantom document. The link to that EO is on the White House website. Today is March 22, 2025.

A: .... complicated analysis ....

Impact on workforce quality and merit

The Merit vs. Diversity Debate
One of the most contentious aspects of DEI initiatives is their perceived impact on meritocracy and workforce quality. Critics argue that DEI prioritizes demographic characteristics over qualifications, potentially compromising organizational performance.

However, DEI advocates maintain that such initiatives don't bypass qualifications or lower standards. "DEI doesn't mean lowering hiring standards," asserts one analysis, emphasizing that "rigorous hiring processes remain intact" and arguing that such assumptions "undermine HR and leadership" by implying they are incapable of maintaining standards 11. Rather than contradicting merit-based practices, some researchers suggest that DEI and merit-based evaluation are complementary, working together to identify capable candidates who might otherwise be overlooked due to systemic barriers 18.

Research indicates that the debate between merit and diversity may represent a false dichotomy. Some experts argue that merit-based systems, while seemingly fair, often overlook critical realities that create uneven playing fields, and that DEI initiatives can actually enhance merit by expanding the talent pool and ensuring the best qualified candidates are considered regardless of background 18.

Conclusion
The cost-benefit analysis of DEI initiatives reveals a complex picture with substantial evidence supporting economic benefits, alongside legitimate concerns about implementation and impact. Research suggests that well-executed DEI strategies can enhance organizational performance, innovation, and competitiveness, while poorly implemented programs may create perceptions of unfairness or fail to achieve meaningful change.

As political and social tensions continue to shape the discourse around DEI, organizations face the challenge of developing approaches that genuinely foster inclusive environments while addressing concerns about merit, fairness, and effectiveness. The emerging evidence suggests that the most successful strategies will integrate principles of both merit and inclusion, creating workplaces that value excellence while ensuring opportunities are accessible to all qualified individuals.

The recent executive actions targeting specific law firms like Paul Weiss highlight how DEI has become a focal point in broader political and cultural debates about American values and institutions. As these debates continue, empirical assessment of outcomes rather than ideological positioning will be essential for meaningful progress. (emphasis added)

Pro-search mode (wimpy):

Q2: Roughly about how many people have been seriously harmed or unreasonably discriminated against by proven, unfair DEI initiatives? Is it roughly hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, millions or more? Roughly about how many people have been seriously helped or not significantly discriminated against by proven, fair and reasonable DEI initiatives?

A2: The scale of DEI's impacts remains challenging to quantify precisely due to limited comprehensive data, but available evidence suggests:

Estimated Harm From Unfair DEI Implementation
Legal Precedents: At least dozens to hundreds of documented reverse discrimination cases exist, with some high-profile awards like the $4 million verdict for a white male executive terminated amid DEI-driven restructuring 6. Federal courts have warned about DEI training creating hostile workplaces in certain contexts 6.

Regulatory Scope: The EEOC and DOJ warn that DEI programs violating Title VII protections could affect employees at "many of our nation’s largest... businesses, universities, and cultural institutions" 10, though no aggregate numbers are provided.

Estimated Benefits From Effective DEI Implementation

Workforce Impacts: Successful programs show:

1. 15% retention improvements for minority employees at individual companies 4

2. $1.2M annual savings per mid-sized tech firm from reduced turnover 4

3. 76% of employees valuing DEI-driven workplace equality 5

Demographic Reach: White women hold 19% of C-suite positions (vs. 4% for women of color) through DEI initiatives 7, while LGBTQ+ employees gain protections like lactation accommodations 3 and Pride Month recognition. 

Economic Scale: With 65% of companies maintaining DEI budgets in 2025 1, case studies suggest millions likely benefit cumulatively from inclusive hiring practices and workplace accommodations across participating organizations.

Key Considerations
Implementation Variance: Outcomes depend heavily on program design - poorly executed initiatives risk discrimination claims 6 10, while strategic ones yield measurable benefits 4 9.

Data Limitations: No government agency tracks comprehensive DEI impact statistics, forcing reliance on organizational case studies and court records.

Demographic Paradox: While intended to help marginalized groups, DEI has disproportionately benefited white women in leadership roles 3 7, creating equity debates within equity initiatives.

Conclusion 

This analysis suggests thousands have likely experienced measurable harm from problematic implementations, while millions have likely benefited from well-designed programs - though precise quantification requires better data collection frameworks. (emphasis added)

MAGA's new "legal reasoning": Absence of evidence is proof of guilt

This is beyond batshit crazy. MAGA thugs in government are now publicly arguing that for the people djt ordered to be deported to El Salvadore, the lack of evidence of criminal activity proves their guilt. The MAGA administration deported people without providing any evidence that they were either illegal immigrants or confirmed members of the Venezuelan TdA crime gang. 

I know, I know, this is beyond nuts. But, Above the Law writes:

Trump Admin Unveils New Legal Standard: 

‘We Have No Proof, Which Actually Proves Our Case’

The federal government took a couple hundred alleged gang members that they haven’t been able to actually convict of anything and sold them to a slave labor camp in El Salvador. .... The Trump administration responded with a crackpot theory about laws not applying in international waters followed by the even more batshit claim that court orders don’t apply unless they’re in writing. But this wasn’t even the craziest legal argument they uncorked.

For rule of law fans, when the White House call this “a plane full of rapists, murderers, and gangsters” what they mean is “a plane full of people that we can’t prove are criminals at all.”

But don’t take my word for it, that’s actually the administration’s argument!

While it is true that many of the TdA members removed under the AEA do not have criminal records in the United States, that is because they have only been in the United States for a short period of time. The lack of a criminal record does not indicate they pose a limited threat. In fact, based upon their association with TdA, the lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose. It demonstrates that they are terrorists with regard to whom we lack a complete profile.

The AtL article muses about whether, if you’re a right-leaning, law and order person who believes that the government should send the “worst of the worst” to a foreign prison, why not send actual convicts? That seems like a reasonable question.

However, there is recent American precedent of this line of thinking here, here and here.*** During the Satanic Panic in the 1980s and 1990s, some of the most crackpot believers argued that the absence of evidence proved their allegations were true. Secret satanic cults were kidnapping and torturing children, sacrificing them in elaborate rituals, but they were SO secret, they were able to hide the bodies and cover up all evidence. Some said they burned the bodies. Some said they buried victims in existing graves atop other bodies, where they would never be discovered. Some even said the cultists used the power of Satan to vaporize the bodies. For those conspiracy crackpots, the complete lack of evidence was taken as proof that a conspiracy existed.

*** If there is recent American precedent, then there probably is ancient, pre-American precedent too. Human brain-minds have not evolved a heck of a lot. Only some societies have noticeably evolved.

A peanut in the gallery, maybe a physicist?, commented: This was my big takeaway from the 2020 election denial movement. It hit me when I asked someone where the evidence for any of the alleged fraud was. He said, “if the media was all in on it, you’d expect to see no evidence!” I called this phenomenon the theory of terminal bullshit. It follows from the bullshit asymmetry principle, which says that refuting bullshit requires exponentially more energy than spewing it. I’ve found that sometimes bullshit reaches the point where the spewer alleges that the lack of evidence is proof itself. At that point, the energy required to refute the bullshit asymptotically approaches infinity, thus hitting terminal bullshit. There is simply no way to counter bullshit when the lack of evidence becomes proof.