A history bit: Tax cheating in the second century

The papyrus, named Papyrus Cotton

A NYT article reports about what a recently analyzed 1,900 year old papyrus says:

It may not have been the tax-evasion trial of the century — the second century, that is — but it was of such gravity that the defendants faced charges of forgery, fiscal fraud and the sham sale of slaves. Tax dodging is as old as taxation itself, but these particular offenses were considered so serious under Roman law that penalties ranged from heavy fines and permanent exile to hard labor in the salt mines and, in the worst case, damnatio ad bestias, a public execution in which the condemned were devoured by wild animals.

[The papyrus] contains the prosecutor’s prep sheet and the hastily drafted minutes from a judicial hearing. According to the ancient notes, the tax-evasion scheme involved the falsification of documents and the illicit sale and manumission, or freeing, of slaves — all to avoid paying duties in the far-flung Roman provinces of Judea and Arabia, a region roughly corresponding to present-day Israel and Jordan.

This ancient legal drama unfolded during the reign of Hadrian, after the emperor’s tour of the area around A.D. 130 and presumably before A.D. 132. That year, Simon bar Kochba, a messianic guerrilla chief, led a popular uprising — the third and final war between the Jewish people and the empire. The revolt was violently suppressed, with hundreds of thousands killed and most of the surviving Jewish population expelled from Judea, which Hadrian renamed Syria Palestina.

Damnatio ad bestias? Now there's a tax law with literal teeth! I like it a lot!

Tax cheating from long ago. Some things never change.

Update: The collapsing rule of law saga

The USSC has decided something, I'm not exactly sure what, about the case of the guy illegally arrested and sent to a death camp in El Salvador. The wording of the order, if that's what it is, sounds like the six MAGA Repubs on the USSC have let djt and the DoJ off the hook, leaving El Salvador free to murder the guy. Joyce Vance writes at her substack on April 10, 2025:

Late this afternoon, the Supreme Court issued a 9-0 response to the government’s application to vacate federal District Judge Paula Xinis’ order that the Trump administration return Kilmar Abrego Garcia from prison in El Salvador to the United States. Xinis had ordered him returned by the end of the day on Monday. The Supreme Court let him sit for an additional three days before ruling, in the end ordering the government to “facilitate” his return but suggesting they might not need to “effectuate” it.

The difference between those two could determine whether Abrego Garcia spends the rest of his life in prison in El Salvador, charged with no crime and with no prospect or release, or whether he returns to the United States, where he lacks legal status but has filed for asylum based on claims he was being threatened, including with death, by members of the MS-13 gang. It is likely he is now housed in prison with members of that same gang. [hence, my reference to a death camp]  

If the government were acting in good faith here, this order would probably be fine. But the government has made clear that it is not, showing absolutely no concern about the fact that the “removal to El Salvador was therefore illegal.” Unless the administration suddenly changes its tune, we can expect to see them claim they tried to facilitate but weren’t able to effectuate Abrego Garcia’s release. “Oopsie … Too late,” as El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele tweeted .... 

In other words, the six conservative Justices on the Supreme Court sent Donald Trump’s administration a message that they’re willing to let him get away with it.

Vance points out that the three Dems could not get to six MAGA Repubs to agree to include three painfully obvious but important points in defense of the rule of law: ‘’

• The US had no basis to arrest or deport Garcia and El Salvador is unable or unwilling to protect him.

• “Instead of hastening to correct its egregious error, the Government dismissed it as an ‘oversight.’”

• “The Government now requests an order from this Court permitting it to leave Abrego Garcia, a husband and father without a criminal record, in a Salvadoran prison for no reason recognized by the law. The only argument the Government offers in support of its request, that United States courts cannot grant relief once a deportee crosses the border, is plainly wrong.”

That the six MAGA Repubs could not even agree to those basic points is evidence of how corrupt, morally rotted and subverted they are. They truly are kleptocratic, authoritarian Trump judges. Vance is OK with this order, but “just barely.” In my opinion, the USSC did not get it right. Unless I misunderstand something here, the three Dems failed by not dissenting. What were they thinking, or were they? Are the Dems on the USSC so scared of djt that they are complicit?

Q: In view of how ineffective this “order” appears to be, should the three Dem judges have dissented because the MAGA judges refused to state the obvious? 

Election 2026 update: Chaos and subversion are on the MAGA menu

Before a plurality of mostly deceived voters re-elected djt in 2024, assuming the election wasn’t rigged by MAGA, it was clear that the 2026 election would be pivotal for the radical, corrupt, authoritarian MAGA wealth and power movement. Project 2025 was crystal clear in its cynical intent to subvert elections and disenfranchise opposition voters while pretending to be concerned with “election integrity.” MAGA claims it wants to stop all the massive, but non-existent, voter fraud and prevent it in future elections. The WaPo reports (not paywalled) about a MAGA initiative to inject vast amounts of chaos into the 2026 elections: 

Trump’s order could force states to buy costly new voting machines

The edict could hurl elections into tumult, though lawsuits challenging the order mean it probably won’t be implemented anytime soon

President Donald Trump’s plan to overhaul elections could hurl 2026 into turmoil by forcing states to hand-count ballots or scramble to spend millions of dollars on voting systems that aren’t yet on the market, according to election officials and voting experts.

If put into effect, his recent executive order attempting to transform elections could make it impossible for some states to use voting machines, election experts said. No voting systems are commercially available that meet the standards the president put forward in his executive order. Election officials broadly oppose hand-counting ballots as an alternative because the practice is time-consuming and prone to errors.

If Trump’s plan ever comes to fruition, it could hit taxpayers hard. Outfitting every state with new machines could cost $1 billion or more.

“It will create chaos in the states, and it seems almost designed to create chaos,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research.

As usual, is there evidence that MAGA elites want to get rid of meaningful elections starting in 2026 while pretending they are protecting meaningful elections? As equally usual, yes there is.

Q: What does Project 2025 say about election integrity and is that a stalking hose for subverting elections and disenfranchising voters opposed to MAGA and Trump?

A: Project 2025, a comprehensive 900+ page policy blueprint developed by the Heritage Foundation and over 100 conservative and authoritarian organizations, outlines significant changes to how elections would be administered under an authoritarian administration. While its authors frame these changes as protecting election integrity, multiple analyses suggest these proposals could fundamentally alter democratic participation in America.

Shifting Enforcement from Civil Rights to Criminal Prosecution
One of the most consequential proposals in Project 2025 involves transferring responsibility for investigating and prosecuting election-related offenses from the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division to its Criminal Division 2 4 5. This represents more than a bureaucratic reshuffling—it signals a fundamental change in approach.

Weakening Election Security Infrastructure
Project 2025 proposes significant cuts to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) 1 4, an agency created during the Trump administration in 2018 that provides essential cyber and physical security support to election offices across the country 1.

The plan would strip CISA of most of its ability to assist local election offices with security matters and bar it from any role in countering election-related conspiracies—even those originating from hostile foreign actors 4. For many local election administrators with limited IT resources, CISA has been a critical partner in navigating evolving security threats and providing accurate information about elections 4.

Undermining the Fight Against Misinformation
Project 2025 proposes eliminating Department of Homeland Security efforts to counter election disinformation 1 2 4, which has been central to addressing rising threats against election workers 1. The document argues that CISA's and the FBI's work to identify potentially false information about elections violates the First Amendment 1.

.... very long analysis ....

Conclusion
While framed as enhancing election integrity, these proposals shifts focus from protecting voting rights to criminalizing voting, reduces critical security resources for election offices, enables the spread of misinformation, and creates mechanisms for federal interference in state voter rolls.

The evidence suggests these changes collectively serve as a means to selectively disenfranchise voters opposed to MAGA and Trump by creating an environment of fear and intimidation for both voters and election officials, enabling targeted voter purges, and weaponizing federal agencies against political opponents. Despite Trump's public attempts to distance himself from Project 2025 during the campaign, his appointment of one of its creators [Russell Vought, OMB director] to a significant administration position indicates major alignment with its goals.

Welp ladies 'n germs, there we have it. djt and MAGA want to subvert the 2026 election. They’re doing their darnedest to git 'er done before it’s too late and voters toss enough of MAGA out of congress to shift some power back to the Dems.

MAGA bits: The DoJ says F.O. to the court; MAGAfying AI; MAGA in congress votes to screw consumers

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 Trump

The 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