Two days ago, federal trial court judge Paulina Xinis ordered djt's corrupted, morally rotted DoJ to explain what steps had been taken to return a person the US illegally deported to an El Salvadore death camp. The judge issued this 2 page order.
The judge’s order includes these comments: Second, the Defendants’ [the DoJ] suggestion that they need time to meaningfully review a four-page Order that reaffirms this basic principle blinks at reality. Third, the Defendants misconstrue the Supreme Court’s Order stating that the original deadline at ECF No. 21 is “no longer effective,” as 1 Case 8:25-cv-00951-PX Document 57 Filed 04/11/25 Page 2 of 2 somehow suggesting that the Court’s amended Order requiring prompt attention to this matter is “inconsistent” with the Supreme Court’s directive. Nothing could be further from the truth.
An article The Guardian published points out that the DoJ’s response basically tells the federal court to fuck off. djt’s DoJ still refuses to comply with court orders by specifying what, if anything the US government has done to get the illegally deported person back to the US. The DoJ’s response framed the USSC’s ruling as a validation of executive authority over foreign affairs, which is contemptuous, insulting and beside the point. The USSC’s order explicitly required the government to “facilitate [Abrego Garcia’s] release from custody in El Salvador” and provide updates on its efforts in this ongoing illegal deportation affair. The DoJ had previously conceded in court that Abrego Garcia’s deportation was unlawful. Justice Sotomayor’s concurrence criticized the government’s position as enabling unchecked executive overreach, stating it would allow deporting even U.S. citizens “without legal consequence.”
djt and MAGA elites in power are inching ever closer to bull-blown, open rebellion against federal courts and rule of law. Our democracy and rule of law are on a knife’s edge.
Peanut 1: When someone is kidnapped and sold into slavery, there’s not really a refund policy.
Peanut 2: Unless, of course, the express goal was to make the person go away and slavery just facilitates the transaction. Art of the Deal!
Peanut 3: Their arguments for ignoring the judge just don't hold water. Just get on the phone and find out where he is and order him moved to a room in a hotel with guards. WTF, Noem went down there for a photo op for Christ's sake. It's not like he is on the dark side of the moon.
Peanut 4: Better yet, just yank Trump off his golf cart, take him to an unknown facility, strip him of all his rights and send him to a prison in say… Iran? I’m sure we wouldn’t even have to pay for them to hold him! It’s a win-win!
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
Several sources are reporting that Meta (Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg) have polluted Llama 4 with MAGA propaganda, deceptively claiming to be searching for more balance and fact accuracy between left and right content. 404 Media reports:
Bias in artificial intelligence systems, or the fact that large language models, facial recognition, and AI image generators can only remix and regurgitate the information in data those technologies are trained on, is a well established fact that researchers and academics have been warning about since their inception.
In a blog post about the release of Llama 4, Meta’s open weights AI model, the company clearly states that bias is a problem it’s trying to address, but unlike mountains of research which established AI systems are more likely to discriminate against minorities based on race, gender, and nationality, Meta is specifically concerned with Llama 4 having a left-leaning political bias.
“It’s well-known that all leading LLMs have had issues with bias—specifically, they historically have leaned left when it comes to debated political and social topics,” Meta said in its blog. “This is due to the types of training data available on the internet.”
So, as usual, the question is what is the empirical basis for trust in Zuckerberg’s or Meta’s asserted concern to wipe out liberal bias in the name of neutrality and fact accuracy? Apparently none. What was done, was in secret.
Q4: How much truth is there in this assertion by 404 Media (link given above): "In a blog post about the release of Llama 4, Meta’s open weights AI model, the company clearly states that bias is a problem it’s trying to address, but unlike mountains of research which established AI systems are more likely to discriminate against minorities based on race, gender, and nationality, Meta is specifically concerned with Llama 4 having a left-leaning political bias." Are there "mountains of research" showing that AI systems are more likely to discriminate against minorities?A4: The assertion by 404 Media that Meta’s Llama 4 prioritizes correcting perceived left-leaning political bias over addressing well-documented discrimination against marginalized groups aligns with extensive independent research. A synthesis of recent studies reveals systemic AI biases harming racial, ethnic, and gender minorities across critical domains—a reality largely absent from Meta’s public framing of Llama 4’s objectives..... long analysis ....
[From A5] Political Appeasement: The Substack analysis, 2A, ties Llama 4’s development to Meta’s apparent post-2024 election pivot toward conservative U.S. politics, mirroring Elon Musk’s "anti-woke" Grok. This aligns with Mark Zuckerberg’s recent lobbying efforts and Meta’s historical algorithmic boosts to conservative content.
Conclusion: A Misdirected Priority (a misdirection or false equivalence propaganda tactic)
The "mountains of research" referenced by 404 Media—encompassing healthcare 1, employment 2 8, finance 7, and linguistics 4—demonstrate that AI’s most damaging biases disproportionately harm marginalized groups. Meta’s singular focus on political neutrality risks weaponizing false equivalence under the guise of balance, particularly given the current climate of eroded institutional trust. Until LLM developers prioritize transparency 5 and demographic equity 3 over ideological appeasement, claims of "reduced bias" will remain dangerously incomplete.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
The American Prospect reports about MAGA congressional support for banks and Big Tech Cos. screwing consumers:
Congress Stops CFPB From Capping Overdraft Fees, Monitoring Big Tech
The two Congressional Review Act resolutions now go to President TrumpThe House of Representatives passed resolutions Wednesday that will nullify two Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) rules. As a result, low-income customers will pay an estimated $5 billion more annually in overdraft fees, and Big Tech will get to pursue its ambitions to make payment apps and other financial services products with little regulatory oversight.All House Republicans decided to reveal themselves as objectively pro-junk fee in supporting blocking the overdraft fee rule; only Rep. Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA) voted against the larger participant rule. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) voted against both resolutions in the Senate, but no other Senate Republican did.Republicans have justified overturning the overdraft fee rule by saying they want to protect consumer choice, an old fallacy that banks have to rip off their customers or they cannot survive. Yet former CFPB director Rohit Chopra’s pressure on larger banks led to many dropping their overdraft fees entirely. (emphasis added)
So, once again djt and his elite MAGA thugs in power are out to screw and screw and screw the consumer in any and all ways possible. There is nothing and no one standing in the way of MAGA’s rape of the American people by endlessly greedy banks, greedy billionaire plutocrats and greedy, corrupt politicians, all of whom are always in desperate need of more wealth and power, and in the case of politicians, in desperate need of more free speech from donors.**
** Free speech from donors = campaign contributions in federal offices and "gratuities" in state offices
Q: How was that last paragraph for a principled, fact-based emotional appeal, bad, mediocre or good?
He got the fees lowered,
MAGA is going to raise them
with a vengeance
