MAGA bits: Musk sells secret US data to Russia; Republican Senator says, I'm scared

Mediaite reports about a very disturbing connection between MAGA elites and Russian operatives:

A whistleblower’s attorney made shocking allegations regarding a DOGE security breach at the National Labor Relations Board during an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper on Tuesday afternoon.

Earlier on Tuesday, news broke that a relatively new NLRB staffer claimed that DOGE not only accessed data from his agency but also took a substantial amount of sensitive data with them, according to a disclosure shared with Congress that read, “around ten gigabytes of data are, quote, the equivalent of a full stack of encyclopedias worth if someone printed these files as hard copy documents.”

Daniel Bertulis appeared on The Lead, joined by his attorney Andrew Bakaj, and explained the details of how he apparently uncovered a massive amount of missing data from the NLRB following DOGE’s efforts. He ostensibly mocked a White House statement touting the transparency at play, noting that none of the code used by DOGE technicians has been shared publicly.

The article points out that accounts based in Russia were using newly created DOGE usernames and passwords to access sensitive data. Allegations directly tied the effort to Elon Musk and his Starlink concerns, which has a relationship with the Kremlin. Attorney Bakaj: “There are two data points that I wanna point out that should give everybody pause. The first thing, what Dan witnessed was that within 15 minutes of DOGE employees creating user accounts, i.e. Usernames and passwords, within 15 minutes of those accounts being created, somebody or something from Russia tried to log in with the right username and right passwords — that is to say — the right credentials. And that happened over 20 times. The second data point, which is really critical, is that DOGE has also been using Starlink as a means to exfiltrate data. What that means is that, from our understanding, Russia has a direct pipeline of information through Starlink, which means that anything going through Starlink is going to Russia. We also know that this is not unique to the NLRB. This is happening government-wide.”

Qs: What kind of corrupt MAGA hell is going on here? Will djt's corrupt DoJ arrest the whistleblower and deport him to a death camp ion El Salvador?

For deep insights we go to the Peanut Gallery

Peanut 1: God knows what Russia has or if it hacked and placed sleeper viruses/malware into those Dept. of Energy systems. Chernobyl meltdown time!

Peanut 2: This is a huge deal and some people aren't grasping the magnitude of the possible breach here. DOGE has legally and illegally gathered access to most ALL US government systems and depending on the access Russia got, they now have ALL of that information or even access.

Peanut 3: Even with just the employee databases, you could technically run some programs to parse that information and find spies, which the intel community was screaming about not too long ago. Especially after the other DOGE fuckups leaking data.

Peanut 4: We are probably talking about the largest data breach in US history, so another record for Trump! The fact that Trump specifically directed the NSA and intel communities to stop going after Russian Cyber threats is also going to be talked about a lot when we get into the weeds of this thing. This is one of those hanging offenses and someone should be either hanging from the gallows or should be spending their lives behind bars. Christ, I hope we make it out of this as a country.

Well now, that puts things in context. 

Musk playing with the Russians

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

The NYT reports (not paywalled) about some discomfort among at least some Republican Senators about what djt and his thug MAGA elites are doing to the US and its government: 

Senator Lisa Murkowski, the moderate Alaska Republican who has routinely broken with her party to criticize President Trump, has made a startling admission about the reality of serving in public office at a time when an unbound leader in the Oval Office is bent on retribution against his political foes.

“We are all afraid,” Ms. Murkowski said, speaking at a conference in Anchorage on Monday. After pausing for about five seconds, she acknowledged: “It’s quite a statement. But we are in a time and a place where I certainly have not been here before. I’ll tell you, I’m oftentimes very anxious myself about using my voice, because retaliation is real. And that’s not right.”

“I just regret that our party is seemingly becoming has become a party of Donald Trump,” she told CNN last year. (edit for clarity and truth)

Geez, she's finally figuring it all out? Good for her. 

Oops, it's too little, too late. 

Regarding the USSC's pro-MAGA, pro-authoritarianism and anti-Democrat and anti-democracy biases

 An article that Slate published shows the intense biases that the MAGA Republican USSC has, heavily favoring djt and MAGA elites and policies, while heavily disfavoring Biden, Democrats, democracy and the rule of law: 

The story of Kilmar Abrego Garcia—the Maryland father wrongly deported to a Salvadoran prison—has captivated the nation and spurred Democratic lawmakers into action, with Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen flying to El Salvador on Wednesday to try to get him freed. But the Supreme Court does not appear to appreciate the urgency of the crisis. Last week, the court struck a compromise in Abrego Garcia’s case that has left him trapped in prison: The majority faulted a federal judge for potentially interfering with diplomatic negotiations, declaring that she could not compel the U.S. government to “effectuate” his return, only to “facilitate” it, a distinction based in “due regard for the deference owed to the executive branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” Predictably, the Trump administration has seized on this deferential language as a justification to do nothing to bring Abrego Garcia home. In offering Trump this opportunity, the Supreme Court very directly set different rules for President Donald Trump than it had for President Joe Biden, gifting the former freedom from judicial intervention into negotiations with a foreign nation.

The court’s profound solicitude for Trump’s power over foreign affairs marks a sharp break from its attitude toward Biden’s authority in this field, one that seems to reflect reflects judicial hostility toward both immigrants and Democratic presidents. It rarely intervened when conservative federal courts repeatedly intruded into the Biden administration’s immigration policy—most notoriously, when U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk effectively seized control over the southern border for nearly a year. In 2021, Kacsmaryk ordered the Biden administration to restart Trump’s Remain in Mexico program, an undertaking that required complex diplomatic negotiations with the Mexican government. He instructed U.S. officials to beg their Mexican counterparts for permission to house migrants from other countries in Mexican territory. He oversaw these weekly diplomatic talks between two sovereigns, subjecting U.S. officials to invasive interrogations about their goals and strategies. And he threatened to hold these officials in contempt if they failed to coax the Mexican government into a new agreement.

The Supreme Court allowed this arrangement to drag on for more than 10 months before finally putting a stop to it by a 5–4 vote that reflected, at most, mild concern over Kacsmaryk’s seizure of Biden’s foreign affairs authority. Its blasé attitude toward the episode could not stand in sharper contrast to its deep concern for the slightest encroachment into Trump’s prerogative over diplomatic negotiations in Abrego Garcia’s case. The court appears to apply has applied different standards to Biden and Trump in the arena of foreign affairs, tying Biden’s hands while freeing Trump’s. And it is always immigrants, democracy and the rule of law who pay the price. (edits added for clarity and respect for truth)

1. I really wish that what's left of the MSM would stop coddling and normalizing illegality and cruel, corrupt authoritarianism by djt and MAGA elites. Hence my edits, seems to reflect reflects,  appears to apply has applied, and democracy and the rule of law. From what I can tell, the MSM remains in a state of MAGA subversion, systemic incompetence and/or paralysis by fear. 

 

2. I assert that democracy and the rule of law are damaged by activist, unprincipled MAGA judges. In this case, it's the hyper-radical Kacsmaryk and the five radical authoritarian Republicans on the USSC bench. Inexplicably, Barrett was a MAGA Republican who voted against the other five Republicans (maybe she has a brain worm?). In essence, what those five authoritarian Republicans did was to allow djt to break the law and get away with it. The law the five MAGA judges allowed djt to break was due process. Abrego Garcia was arrested and deported illegally without any due process. With djt and authoritarian MAGA elites, our authoritarian MAGA USSC allows the rule of law to be crushed by djt and radical right authoritarianism without reason or one iota of shame.

Q: How probative or convincing is this of a heavy USSC bias favoring djt and MAGA elites and policies, while heavily disfavoring Biden, Democrats, democracy and the rule of law (when it is inconvenient), or is this limited to an anti-immigrant bias or something else?

Regarding anti-Christian bias in the federal government

A person tethered to reality and reason would think that in a majority Christian country with majority Christian executive, legislative and judicial branches, there would be little overt bias against Christians and almost no illegal discrimination in the federal government.

But, would that hypothetical reality and reason-tethered person be right? As we all know, the deep state is evil, communist, atheist, socialist, fascist, Nazi, pedophile, neoliberal, brass knuckles capitalist, and hyper-radically anti-Christian. Right?

Hm, good questions. Astute, who asked that . . . . . Anyway, Pxy?

Q: How much of the targeted kinds of bias in Trump's Feb. 6, 2025 EO actually exist in the state department and federal government generally?

A: The Trump administration’s February 2025 executive order, Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias, and subsequent State Department directive instructing employees to report alleged anti-Christian discrimination have sparked intense debate over the prevalence of such bias in the federal government. While proponents frame these measures as necessary to combat systemic discrimination, critics argue they weaponize religious freedom to advance a Christian nationalist agenda. An analysis of available evidence reveals a disconnect between the administration’s claims and documented patterns of bias.

Claims of Anti-Christian Bias
The executive order and supporting documents allege widespread anti-Christian discrimination in federal agencies, particularly during the Biden administration (2021–2025). Specific accusations include:

Retaliation for Religious Accommodations: Employees reportedly faced disciplinary action for refusing COVID-19 vaccines or opposing policies conflicting with their beliefs, such as gender pronoun usage 6 9.

Suppression of Religious Expression: Alleged prohibitions on displaying religious symbols (e.g., crosses) or discussing faith in workplaces 1 14.

Targeted Prosecutions: The Biden Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecuted nearly two dozen anti-abortion protesters under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which the Trump administration framed as anti-Christian persecution 14.

Documented Evidence of Bias
1. Prosecutions Under the FACE Act
The Biden DOJ secured convictions against anti-abortion activists for blockading clinics, including a Catholic priest and elderly demonstrators14. While these prosecutions were legally justified under the FACE Act—a neutral statute protecting access to reproductive healthcare—the Trump administration characterized them as anti-Christian bias, pardoning those convicted in January 2025 14. No evidence suggests these cases targeted individuals solely for their faith rather than their actions.

2. Religious Accommodation Disputes
The State Department’s directive cites vaccine mandates as a source of anti-Christian bias, yet religious exemptions were routinely granted under federal law. For example, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reported that 95% of religious exemption requests for COVID-19 vaccines were approved in 2022–2024 12. Instances of denied accommodations typically involved insufficient documentation or failure to prove sincerity of belief, not anti-Christian animus 6.

3. Alleged Suppression of Expression
Claims that employees were forced to remove religious symbols or avoid faith-based discussions lack corroboration. The State Department’s own 2024 internal survey found no statistically significant complaints about religious discrimination, with only 2% of employees reporting faith-based hostility 12. By contrast, 18% reported experiencing or witnessing racial or gender bias 12.

Critiques of the Anti-Christian Bias Narrative
1. Lack of Empirical Support
Independent analyses contradict the administration’s claims:

The Pew Research Center found that Christians, who comprise 63% of the U.S. population, represent 72% of federal employees and 87% of Congress 12. This overrepresentation undermines assertions of systemic bias.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), while focused abroad, noted in its 2025 report that domestic religious freedom violations primarily affect non-Christian minorities (e.g., Muslims, Sikhs), not Christians 8.

2. Political Motivations and Project 2025
The executive order aligns with Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation-led initiative to infuse government with Christian nationalist policies 7. Its proposals—defunding agencies promoting LGBTQ+ rights, banning abortion nationwide, and privileging Christian symbolism in public spaces—suggest the anti-Christian bias narrative serves as pretext to advance this agenda 7 13.

.... more evidence and analysis ....

Conclusion
Available evidence does not support the existence of systemic anti-Christian bias in the federal government. While isolated conflicts over religious accommodations or expression may occur, they reflect broader societal debates rather than targeted persecution. The Trump administration’s focus on "anti-Christian bias" appears driven by political objectives—notably, the implementation of Project 2025’s theocratic vision—rather than empirical need. By conflating inclusive policies with discrimination, the directive risks legitimizing retaliation against marginalized groups and undermining constitutional secularism. (emphases added)

Well now ladies 'n germs, once again we've been lied to by MAGA and CN elites. djt's Feb. 6, 2025 EO has nothing to do with stopping anti-Christian bias. It is in fact the opposite. That EO is MAGA and CN elites normalizing, implementing and empowering fundamentalist Christian bias, bigotry, racism, hate, slander, intolerance, discrimination and oppression of non-Christian groups and people.

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

To further reveal the stench of cynical CN lies, we go to the land 

of TL/DR with Pxy bravely leading the way:

Q2: In view of all the evidence and political circumstances, isn't the whole point of that EO to legitimize retaliation against marginalized groups and undermine constitutional secularism? Aren't those key goals laid out in Project 2025 and in Christian nationalist rhetoric and policy goals?

A2: The executive order (EO) mandating State Department employees to report anti-Christian bias, issued by President Trump in February 2025, must be analyzed within the broader context of Project 2025 and Christian nationalist ideology. The evidence demonstrates that this EO serves dual purposes: legitimizing retaliation against marginalized groups and undermining constitutional secularism, both central objectives of Project 2025 and its affiliated actors. 

1. Project 2025’s Theocratic Blueprint

Project 2025, a 922-page policy agenda spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, explicitly seeks to infuse government with "biblical principles" and dismantle church-state separation. Key elements include:

Eliminating secular oversight: Defunding agencies promoting LGBTQ+ rights, reproductive healthcare, and racial equity 7 9.

Prioritizing Christian symbolism: Mandating religious displays in public spaces and privileging Christian-majority perspectives in policymaking 4 7.

Centralizing executive power: Enabling a president to bypass congressional and judicial checks, accelerating the implementation of theocratic policies 2 9.

The EO aligns with these goals by framing secular or inclusive policies as inherently "anti-Christian," thereby justifying their eradication. For example, Project 2025’s education proposals—diverting public funds to religious schools and censoring curricula—mirror the EO’s focus on rooting out policies perceived as hostile to Christian values 7 12.

2. Retaliation Against Marginalized Groups
The EO’s anonymous reporting mechanism and task force create a framework for targeting policies that protect marginalized communities:

LGBTQ+ rights: By defining opposition to gender-neutral pronouns or pride flags as "anti-Christian," the EO empowers employees to challenge inclusive practices. This aligns with Project 2025’s explicit calls to ban transgender healthcare and repeal anti-discrimination protections 9 12.

Reproductive autonomy: The EO’s emphasis on "religious accommodations" for anti-abortion views dovetails with Project 2025’s plan to criminalize abortion nationwide and revoke FDA approval for contraception 9 14.

Racial equity: The Biden administration’s enforcement of the FACE Act—prosecuting anti-abortion activists who blockaded clinics—was labeled "anti-Christian persecution" under the EO, despite being race-neutral. This mirrors Project 2025’s efforts to dismantle DEI programs and redefine civil rights as "reverse discrimination" 1 14.

These retaliatory measures are not isolated but part of a systematic effort to codify Christian supremacy. As noted in Project 2025’s Mandate for Leadership, "The success of the conservative movement depends on ... punishing dissent" 2 7.

3. Undermining Constitutional Secularism
The EO advances Christian nationalism’s goal of eroding the Establishment Clause by:

Equating secularism with bias: The EO conflates neutral policies (e.g., vaccine mandates) with anti-Christian animus, weaponizing religious freedom to privilege Christian employees 6 10.

Promoting religious exceptionalism: By tasking agencies to prioritize Christian concerns, the EO institutionalizes a hierarchy of rights, contradicting Madisonian principles of church-state separation 4 15.

Normalizing theocratic governance: The EO’s language mirrors Project 2025’s vision of a "Christian democracy," where biblical precepts override secular law 3 9.

This aligns with Christian nationalist rhetoric framing secularism as a threat to national identity. As Project 2025 architect Russell Vought stated, "The separation of church and state is a myth" 7 12.

4. Empirical and Legal Counterarguments

Critics argue that claims of systemic anti-Christian bias lack evidence:

Demographic overrepresentation: Christians constitute 72% of federal employees and 87% of Congress, far exceeding their 63% share of the U.S. population 14.

Selective enforcement: The EEOC approved 95% of religious exemption requests during the Biden administration, undermining claims of persecution 14.

First Amendment concerns: Legal scholars warn the EO violates the Establishment Clause by privileging one faith, a view supported by Madison’s originalist interpretation 4 15.

However, these critiques are dismissed by Project 2025 proponents, who frame secular governance itself as discriminatory.

Conclusion
The EO is a tactical component of Project 2025’s broader strategy to dismantle secular democracy and enforce Christian hegemony. By legitimizing retaliation against LGBTQ+, reproductive rights, and racial equity advocates—while eroding church-state boundaries—it advances the Christian nationalist vision of a "post-Constitutional" America29. As Amanda Tyler of the Baptist Joint Committee warned, this agenda represents "a direct existential threat to religious freedom"712. The EO’s true purpose is not to address discrimination but to institutionalize it, ensuring governance aligns with a reactionary theological worldview. (emphasis added)

What more evidence do we need? At least I'm convinced.

Q: Is Germaine naive, dense or otherwise wrong about all of this?

MAGA update: Christian nationalism sinks its poison claws in very deep

From the we expected something like this files:

Feb. 6, 2025 E.O.

The EO says anti-Christian bias to be exterminated includes (i) denial of religious accommodations (e.g., for vaccines or religious holidays), (ii) mistreatment for refusing to participate in events or policies (such as those involving personal pronouns) that conflict with religious beliefs, (iii)  opposition to displays or content in government spaces due to religious objections, and (iv) retaliation for exercising religious rights. The amount of that going on in the State Department? Probably little to very little.

Politico reports that djt and his thug MAGA enforcer Marco Rubio, nominally our Secy. of State (whatever the hell that means), is openly promoting bitter divisions and deep distrust in the State Department using Christianity as the weapon against everything else deemed objectionable: 

The Trump administration has ordered State Department employees to report on any instances of coworkers displaying “anti-Christian bias” as part of its effort to implement a sweeping new executive order on supporting employees of Christian faith working in the federal government.

The department, according to a copy of an internal cable obtained by POLITICO, will work with an administration-wide task force to collect information “involving anti-religious bias during the last presidential administration” and will collect examples of anti-Christian bias through anonymous employee report forms.

The cable encourages State Department employees to report on one another through a tip form that can be anonymous. “Reports should be as detailed as possible, including names, dates, locations (e.g. post or domestic office where the incident occurred,” the cable reads.

Note that various federal laws (and this) prohibit discrimination against employees on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity), national origin, disability, age (40 or older), genetic information (including family medical history), disability, and retaliation for reporting or opposing discrimination, or participating in an investigation. 

Why are they sowing discord and hate?

So, should we expect a djt EO to report bias against people of a certain race, sex, national origin, members of a non-Christian religion, atheists etc.? Hell no. Why? That would be woke! MAGA elites hate DEI and they are gonna kill it as much as they can, as soon as they can. That is the start of hypernormalizing theocratic CN bigotry and racism.

But why is goon djt and thug Rubio doing this? djt isn't remotely close to Christian. Because CN (Christian nationalist) elites want to weaponize Christianity and put it above all other things, including all secular laws. CN elites** are open, not conspiratorial, about their intent to make America into a Christian theocracy. For example, they oppose secular education, church-state separation, pluralism, and civil liberties that God opposes (abortion, access to contraception, same-sex marriage, LGBQT rights, voting rights, etc.). They also want to force taxpayers to pay for religious institutions. All of that is documented fact, not opinion.

** From what I can tell, CN elites are openly theocratic, but most of the rank and file frame their goals as something like preserving "traditional Christian values", not imposing theocracy. There is a huge gulf in understanding between the elites and the R&F. The elites use dark free speech and demagoguery to keep their theocratic and kleptocratic intentions shrouded in confusion, disinformation, distrust and irrational fear and anger.

 

Also note that the EO focuses on bias, not discrimination. Bias is not illegal unless it rises to the level of discrimination. The distinction between lawful bias and illegal discrimination hinges on actionable harm, intent, and the context in which behaviors happen. Harassment or pervasive conduct that creates an abusive environment based on protected characteristics can amount to illegal discrimination. To be actionable, the behavior must be severe or pervasive (e.g., racial slurs, sexual advances). Isolated incidents or minor slights generally do not qualify. 

Obviously, overt discrimination, e.g., racial slurs, is a lot easier to prove than expressions of bias. Bias is difficult and usually requires pattern evidence. Anyone with half an ounce of brain can avoid creating a pattern against a targeted person or group. Pattern evidence requires showing of thinks like (1) statistical disparities in promotions or discipline, or (2) inconsistent application of policies between protected and non-protected employees.

In other words, it is usually very hard to prove illegal discrimination. It is almost impossible to show that bias amounts to illegal discrimination. By implementing this policy, which one can expect to apply everywhere in the federal government, CN MAGA elites openly encourage and fully weaponize CN bigotry to go after people and groups that God hates and demands to be suppressed. There are going to be purges of innocents in the federal government and we are powerless to stop it. All a MAGA or CN adherent has to do, is make up examples of anti-Christian bias and anonymously submit them. 

We all know where this is going. Straight to hell.

Q: How much more evidence of authoritarian elite CN theocratic intent and power would be needed to convince those with open minds that the CN wealth and power movement is a deadly serious threat to our democracy, secular law, pluralism and civil liberties? 

(Nearly all of the closed-minded, CN-sympathetic crowd will never see a threat, no matter how much evidence there is -- they are trapped in MAGA's/CN's fake-reality world)