MAGA corrupts VOA; MAGA’s cynical federal debt lies; MAGA literally selling us out

 

Low credibility

MAGA elite insultingly calls it 

“reliable and credible”

(well, reliably not credible)

djt and MAGA elites continue their campaign to corrupt sources of facts, truths and sound reasoning. MAGA lies, slanders, crackpottery revised history and fake science will be on the broadcast menu. This time they are subverting the VOA (Voice of America), a long-standing source of reasonably unbiased news based on facts, truth, and sound reasoning that is delivered in a pro-democracy and pro-human rights framework. MAGA elites want to convert the VOA from the voice of democracy to the voice of kleptocratic tyranny and crackpottery. 

NPR reports: “Kari Lake says OAN's far-right coverage will fuel Voice of America -- Senior presidential adviser Kari Lake appears to have resolved any doubts about what she wants to do with the Voice of America. Lake seeks for it to look and sound a lot like the far-right One America News Network: on Tuesday night she announced that she had struck a deal to serve up the pro-Trump outlet's news reports for Voice of America's foreign audiences, at no taxpayer cost. “I can ensure our outlets have reliable and credible options as they work to craft their reporting and news programs,” Lake wrote on social media posts on Elon Musk's X and on Truth Social.”

This comes after djt’s March executive order that put over 1,000 staff on leave and suspending VOA broadcasts. OAN is well-known for promoting false claims about Covid-19, the 2020 election, and djt’s January 6 coup attempt. NPR points out that OAN reached settlements to resolve separate defamation lawsuits filed by the voting software company Smartmatic, a former executive at Dominion Voting Systems, and two Georgia election workers. OAN spread disproven claims that they had helped rig the 2020 presidential elections for Biden.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

MAGA Republicans in congress want to extend djt's tax cuts from 2017. Various sources have reported that MAGA elites claim there will be no added federal debt, but reliable estimates put the added debt at ~$400-$550 billion/year for the next 10 years. If additional proposed tax cuts, eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits, overtime pay, etc., are included, the total cost rises to approximately $7.8 trillion, or $9.1 trillion with interest in 10 years.

To get tax cuts passed while falsely claiming there will be no added debt, MAGA senate Republicans plan to ignore the Byrd Rule and side-step the senate Parliamentarian. Senate Republicans plan to circumvent Byrd Rule constraints by procedural maneuvers that avoid direct violations, and they will ignore the senate Parliamentarian if they have to. Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham plans to unilaterally set a “current policy” baseline MAGA thug Graham will just say that extending Trump tax cuts maintains existing policy rather and creates no new new costs. This accounting trick (i) nullifies the impact of added trillions of deficit, and (ii) bypasses the Byrd Rule’s 10-year deficit neutrality requirement. Senate MAGA thugs plan to override Parliamentarian rulings will be overridden by simple majority votes if MAGA gets challenged.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

To pay for the allegedly non-existent added federal debt (yes, I know, that is incoherent, but MAGA is incoherent), congressional MAGA thugs plan to sell off federal lands, presumably to bidders who bribe djt by buying into his bitcoin scam. The amount of money they can get is maybe ~15% of the debt that MAGA wants to add. In the meantime, people who get our land for cheap, will be free to ravage the hell out of it and turn it into a desolate or polluted hellhole. examples of developer hellholes in progress or completed:

The federal government owns approximately 620 million acres about 27% of U.S. land.  A 2009 estimate valued federal land holdings at approximately $1.8 trillion, about $2,903 per acre. A current Republican proposal mentions selling 11,000 acres in Utah and Nevada. That would need to be vastly increased to make any noticeable dent in the added debt.

Q: How good an idea is it to sell off our precious public lands to pay for MAGA’s allegedly non-existent added federal debt to extend djt’s 2017 tax cuts, mostly for high income people?[1] 

 

Footnote:

1. djt’s 2017 $1.3 trillion corporate tax cut overwhelmingly benefited high-income shareholders and executives. According to a study by the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Federal Reserve, 81% of the gains from the corporate rate cut went to the top 10% of the income distribution, with the top 1% alone capturing 24% of the benefits. For individual tax provisions, the top 5% of households (those earning more than about $450,000) received over 45% of the benefits from extending the TCJA, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The top 10% of households received 56% of the value of the proposed tax reductions in 2026, while the bottom 80% captured only 29%. The law also created a 20% deduction for pass-through business income, which mostly benefits the richest 1%, and significantly raised the estate tax exemption, allowing married couples to leave more than $27 million tax-free-changes that overwhelmingly benefits wealthy households.

Things you think about once you fall…

I am a senior.  I fell on April 7th while changing the bedsheets.  I fractured my little toe on the right foot and hurt my shoulder.  That gets a mind/body to thinking...

Do you think in the future they will come up with something to keep (especially) seniors safer from those hard falls?  Say some protective shield or other physical device, like, for example, a clear plastic bubble type encasement that’s thin, lite-weight, maybe 1-2 inches of air cushioning, easy to put on, etc?  What kinds of other things must be taken into consideration for such a gizmo?

It would have to be some kind of temperature controlled “outfit.” How would it affect the skin/body? How to make it comfortable for all day use?  How to make it “mobile-friendly” and “cost-friendly?”  Could such a shield eventually become some kind of “invisible force field” (something akin to the fundamental forces)?  If so, that’s far in the future, I suspect.  But hey, I’m a believer.  If something is possible, it will happen somewhere, some way, somehow.

Granted, such an “Air Suit” (patent not pending 😜) can’t stop all falls, but it can probably mitigate the potential injuries of the really bad ones. 

As technology progresses, such an Air Suit could do other tasks to the body, like keep it moisturized (deluxe models 😁).  What else does my imaginary Air Suit need?

Also, any other good patent ideas about anything, from anyone here?

(by Primal “still kinda OP rusty” Soup)

The Trump/Musk AI Coup

Imagine a government where chatbots replace skilled workers, critical services falter, and a handful of tech billionaires pocket massive contracts with little oversight. This isn’t science fiction—it’s the reality unfolding under President Donald Trump’s “AI-first” policies, driven by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). While sold as a path to streamline bureaucracy, these policies risk degrading governance, endangering public safety, and consolidating power among a narrow elite. Here’s what Americans need to know about this unprecedented shift and why it matters.

 

The AI-First Agenda: Efficiency or Exploitation?

 

Since Trump’s inauguration in January 2025, DOGE has spearheaded a radical overhaul of federal agencies, prioritizing artificial intelligence (AI) to automate tasks and slash jobs. Internal government reports estimate 500,000 federal positions—across agencies like the Social Security Administration (SSA), Department of Education, and General Services Administration (GSA)—could be cut over five years by replacing workers with AI chatbots and algorithms (Forbes, March 10, 2025). Already, 280,253 jobs have been eliminated by March 2025, disrupting agencies that serve millions (Government Executive, April 9, 2025).

 

Musk, as DOGE’s head, champions this as modernization. But the reality is messier. At the GSA, a chatbot called GSAi, meant to handle tasks like drafting emails and summarizing text, has been dubbed “about as good as an intern” by employees, producing generic, error-prone responses (Inc., March 10, 2025). Workers are barred from inputting sensitive data due to security risks, yet this tool is replacing over 1,000 fired staff. Similarly, AI systems at the Department of Education struggle with student loan inquiries, and SSA’s document processing faces delays as chatbots falter (The Times of India, February 16, 2025). Experts warn that AI lacks the nuance for complex tasks like regulatory compliance or public health oversight, risking a “dystopian nightmare” of degraded services (Scientific American, April 14, 2025).

 

Pay-to-Play: Tech Oligarchs Cash In

 

The biggest winners of this AI-first push aren’t taxpayers—they’re tech billionaires with close ties to Trump. Musk’s own companies, like xAI, Tesla, and SpaceX, have secured lucrative contracts, often without competitive bidding (The New York Times, February 11, 2025). xAI’s GrokGov chatbot powers automation at GSA, SSA, and the Department of Education, while SpaceX’s Starlink provides infrastructure for agencies like USAID (The Atlantic, March 10, 2025). These no-bid deals raise red flags, especially since Musk oversees DOGE, creating blatant conflicts of interest (The Guardian, February 27, 2025).

 

Other tech moguls are also cashing in. Palantir, backed by Trump ally Peter Thiel, uses AI-driven dashboards to track layoffs and automate compliance at agencies like the IRS and HHS (The Atlantic, March 10, 2025). OpenAI, led by Sam Altman, supplies chatbot APIs for Education’s call centers and GSA’s knowledge management (The New Yorker, February 12, 2025). Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Google Cloud provide the cloud backbone for these AI tools, despite employee criticism of their firms’ ties to the administration (TechTarget, January 29, 2025). Even Accenture, once a staffing provider, now profits from “AI transition consulting” as human help desks vanish (The Times of India, February 16, 2025).

 

This pattern—where political donors and supporters like Musk, Thiel, Altman, and Jeff Bezos (AWS) reap massive contracts—smacks of pay-to-play politics. The rapid, opaque awarding of deals, coupled with the firing of inspectors general who ensure accountability, takes American  kleptocracy-- where elites enrich themselves at the public’s expense-- to new levels. (The New York Times, February 3, 2025).

 

The Risks: Governance and Safety on the Line

 

The AI-first push threatens more than jobs—it undermines the systems Americans rely on. AI’s flaws, like “hallucinations” (fabricating information), make it unreliable for critical tasks like processing Social Security benefits or managing student loans (Scientific American, April 14, 2025). At the EPA, Musk’s Grok monitors employee communications for “hostility” to Trump, raising fears of politicized firings disguised as efficiency (Reuters, April 8, 2025). Such surveillance chills dissent and erodes trust in government.

 

Algorithmic bias is another danger. AI tools, trained on flawed data, could unfairly deny welfare benefits or misprocess claims, disproportionately harming vulnerable groups (Forbes, March 12, 2025). Cybersecurity risks loom large, too, as rushed AI deployments expose sensitive data to breaches (CNN Business, March 4, 2025). Economically, mass layoffs—80% of federal workers live outside D.C.—could devastate local communities (Government Executive, April 9, 2025).

 

Most alarmingly, this shift concentrates power among tech oligarchs, sidelining democratic oversight. DOGE’s unchecked access to agency systems, bypassing Congress and courts, creates an “undemocratic deep state” of tech elites (The New Yorker, February 12, 2025). By replacing bureaucrats with “technocrats” and machines, the administration risks a government that serves corporate interests over citizens (The Washington Post, February 6, 2025).

 

What Can We Do?

 

The AI-first agenda isn’t inevitable. Citizens deserve transparency about who profits from these contracts and how they impact services. Demand accountability from elected officials—ask why no-bid deals favor Trump’s allies and why oversight is being gutted. Support lawsuits challenging DOGE’s overreach, like those from resigned U.S. Digital Service workers who exposed data mishandling (CNN Business, March 4, 2025). Stay informed through independent outlets like The Guardian or TechPolicy.Press, which track these trends.

 

America’s government should serve its people, not enrich a tech elite. The AI-first gamble threatens our safety, services, and democracy. Speak out, stay vigilant, and demand a government that puts citizens first.

 

-PD 5/5/25

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

 

Sources:

 

 Musk Replacing Workers with AI: Should You Be Worried? (Forbes; March 10)

 

  State to slash 15% of domestic staff, eliminate 132 offices (Government Executive; April 9, 2025)

 

DOGE’s AI App Replacing Fired Federal Workers Proves ‘About as Good as an Intern’ (Inc.; March 10,2025 ) 

Musk-led DOGE Plans to Replace Dept. of Education Contract Workers with AI Chatbots (Times of India; Feb. 16, 2025) 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/musk-led-doge-plans-to-replace-department-of-education-contract-workers-with-ai-chatbots/articleshow/118298230.cms 

Replacing Federal Workers with Chatbots Would Be a Dystopian Nightmare (Scientific American; April 14, 2025)

Elon Musk’s Business Empire Scores Benefits Under Trump Shake-Up (NYT; Feb. 11, 2025)

 DOGE’s Plans to Replace Humans With AI Are Already Under Way (The civil service is being turned over to machines) (The Atlantic ; March 10, 2025) 

Exclusive: Musk's DOGE using AI to snoop on U.S. federal workers, sources say (Reuters ; April 8, 2025)

For wonks: A deep dive into immigration due process violations under Obama and djt

This is a TL/DR post, but it tells an interesting story about the rule of law and how Obama and djt differ in how they deal with it. These are comments made here recently.

Comment 1: Claims that 75% to 83% of those deported "never saw a judge or had a chance to plead their case" are based on statistics from individual years, particularly 2012 and 2013. And who was President back then? Snopes ruled that statement mostly true.

Response: The Snope analysis is here: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-deportations-court/

A couple of points need to be made clear.

1. If Obama or his subordinates violated due process or engaged in any other serious, widespread violations of the Constitution, I would want him prosecuted and jailed. I want to Constitution to be applied to everyone equally and fairly. I seriously believe in the rule of law and it's fair and equal treatment for everybody, including Democrats, Republicans, independents, crooks, liars, traitors, innocents, communists, capitalists, crackpots, creeps and everyone else.

2. Court cases about due process violations associated with "summary removals" by legal procedures such as "expedited removal" and "reinstatement of removal" have found that those deportation procedures do not violate the US Constitution. Courts have generally upheld expedited removal under Congress’s plenary power over immigration, citing the "entry fiction" doctrine that treats noncitizens at the border as outside constitutional protections. Also, the Supreme Court in Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam (2020) declined to extend due process rights to noncitizens detained shortly after entry, reinforcing the distinction between those "on the threshold" of entry and those with established ties. The Supreme Court and lower courts have upheld reinstatement under the rationale that noncitizens who illegally reenter forfeit procedural rights.

3. Civil rights advocates like the ACLU strenuously argue that expedited deportation procedures violate due process, but so far they have not won.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigrants-rights/ice-and-border-patrol-abuses/due-process-immigration
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/expedited-removal

4. I searched for due process violations in expedited deportations under Obama. During the Obama administration, there were two federal court cases that found due process violations in expedited deportation procedures, US v Ramos (2010) and US v Raya-Vaca (2014). Those two cases identified violating deportation procedures, and Obama responded by implementing procedural reforms and adjustments.

The Ramos decision exposed widespread flaws in the stipulated removal program, where unrepresented detainees waived their rights to hearings and appeals without adequate understanding of the consequences. In response:

In response to Ramos, Obama's Executive Office for Immigration Review issued Operational Policy and Procedure Memorandum 10-01 in September 2010, mandating that Immigration Judges conduct individualized reviews of stipulated removal requests. Judges were required to verify that waivers of rights were “voluntary, knowing, and intelligent,” including confirming detainees’ comprehension of charges, relief eligibility, and consequences of removal.
https://www.aila.org/infonet/eoir-oppm-procedures-requests-stipulated-removal

Also, Obama's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) updated its stipulated removal forms to include clearer explanations of rights in Spanish and English, addressing the language barriers highlighted in Ramos. Detainees were also provided access to legal orientation programs in detention centers to improve awareness of procedural options. And, DHS stopped doing mass presentations of stipulated removal forms in group settings, instead employing individualized meetings between officers and detainees.
https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Deportation-Without-Due-Process-2011-09.pdf

The Raya-Vaca ruling held that expedited removal violated due process when officers failed to provide notice of charges or opportunities to contest removal. The Obama administration responded by having U.S. Customs and Border Protection implement mandatory training modules emphasizing proper notice procedures, language access, and documentation of interactions during expedited removal interviews. Agents were instructed to ensure noncitizens understood their right to request asylum or voluntary departure.
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/practice_advisory/final_expedited_removal_advisory-_updated_2-21-17.pdf

A November 2014 DHS Memorandum prioritized enforcement actions against “threats to national security, public safety, and border security,” indirectly reducing reliance on expedited removal for long-term residents or low-priority cases.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/14_1120_memo_prosecutorial_discretion(1).pdf

Critics still argue that Obama's changes, although improvements, still fall short of what critics see as continuing non-trivial due process violations in deportations. As far as I know, the courts did not go back and whack Obama a second time after policy changes he implemented in the wake of the Ramos and Raya-Vaca court cases. Apparently, Obama's policy changes satisfied the federal courts.

5. This point is very important. Two wrongs almost never or never make a right. Obama's earlier wrongs do not justify or sanction Trump's later wrongs. Their wrongs, if any, are separate and independent things. So, what about the Trump administration? Oops! It turns out that Trump is a very, very naughty boy.

Trump reintroduced stipulated removal, a process allowing noncitizens to waive their right to a hearing-through executive orders in early 2025. This policy re-establishes the pre-Ramos practices where detainees, often unrepresented and under coercive conditions, signed removal orders without understanding their rights. Despite Ramos mandating clarity in forms, non-English speakers in Trump-era stipulated removals often receive inadequate translations, leading to erroneous waivers of rights.
https://www.vera.org/explainers/trumps-week-one-orders-on-immigration-law-explained
https://immigrantjustice.org/know-your-rights/mass-deportation-threats

The Trump administration expanded expedited removal in March 2025 to apply nationwide to noncitizens unable to prove two years of continuous U.S. residence. This policy directly conflicts with Raya-Vaca’s holding that noncitizens must receive notice of charges and opportunities to contest removal. Trump eroded of notice requirements under his expanded policy. Now, Border Patrol agents conduct rapid interviews without ensuring comprehension of charges or relief options. That violates Raya-Vaca’s mandate for meaningful notice. For example, Venezuelan deportees in 2025 alleged they were not informed of their right to seek asylum, leading to a Supreme Court challenge.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/28/trump-immigration-100days-due-process-00307435

Although Raya-Vaca emphasized the right to consult counsel, Trump has again restricted it. Expedited removals under Trump now usually occurs within hours of apprehension, leaving no time for legal representation. The ACLU estimates that 90% of expedited removal cases in 2025 lacked attorney participation.
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/immigrants-rights-advocates-sue-trump-administration-over-fast-track-deportation-policy
https://www.nilc.org/resources/know-your-rights-expedited-removal-expansion/

Beyond Ramos and Raya-Vaca, the Trump administration’s policies have introduced new due process risks. Trump policy eviscerates of asylum protections by empowering immigration judges to dismiss asylum cases without hearings. That directly contradicts the “credible fear” screening process upheld in Raya-Vaca. In April 2025, the Department of Justice (DOJ) reported that 40% of asylum cases were summarily dismissed under this policy.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/28/trump-immigration-100days-due-process-00307435
https://www.aila.org/library/featured-issue-u-s-immigration-courts-under-trump-2-0?page=391

Federal courts have repeatedly cited the Trump administration for disregarding due process obligations. Wrongful Deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia: In April 2025, a Maryland district court found that DHS deported Abrego Garcia to El Salvador despite a 2019 order barring his removal. The administration defied court mandates to facilitate his return, prompting Judge Paula Xinis to order sworn testimony from DHS officials.
https://www.jurist.org/news/2025/04/us-judge-orders-sworn-testimony-of-trump-officials-on-compliance-in-wrongful-deportation-case/

ACLU v. Trump (2025): A coalition sued the administration over its expanded expedited removal policy, alleging violations of the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause. The lawsuit cites Raya-Vaca and Ramos to argue that the policy “replicates and amplifies past constitutional failures”.
https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/immigrants-rights-advocates-sue-trump-administration-over-fast-track-deportation-policy

Ninth Circuit due process violation found: In Doe v. Trump (2025), the Ninth Circuit blocked the administration’s use of expedited removal for long-term residents, noting that the policy “ignores decades of precedent requiring individualized hearings”.
https://immigrationforum.org/article/the-first-100-days-of-the-second-trump-administration-key-immigration-related-actions-and-developments/

Trump and his officials have openly rejected due process as an impediment to deportation goals. President Trump stated in April 2025, “We cannot provide everyone a trial… doing so would take 200 years,” while Acting DHS Secretary Benjamin Huffman called due process “a luxury we cannot afford”.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/23/us/politics/trump-immigrants-trials-deportation.html

The administration’s “self-deportation” initiative, including the CBP Home app, pressures migrants to leave without hearings, undermining Ramos and Raya-Vaca.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/03/trump-administration-expedited-removal/

One can reasonably and fairly conclude that the Trump administration has systematically dismantled due process protections upheld in Ramos and Raya-Vaca, reviving stipulation practices, expanding expedited removal, and curtailing asylum access.

Therefore, if Obama was X bad regarding illegal deportations because his fixes arguably weren't good enough, Trump is at least ~5X bad because (1) Trump has gone back to the old problems that Obama tried to fix and had at least partly fixed, (2) Trump says due process is too much trouble, and (ii) Trump is openly telling the federal courts to fuck off, something that Obama never did.

Kleptocracy rising; Law hangs by one last thread, the Senate filibuster

djt’s corruption runs very deep. The NYT reports (not paywalled) about his corruption now being in the open and accepted by the GOP and maybe the Dems too. Apparently, there are no laws that can stop him from taking bribes from anyone in return for anything he can steal from the US government to give to the buyer: 

Secret Deals, Foreign Investments, Presidential Policy Changes: 

The Rise of Trump’s Crypto Firm  

World Liberty Financial has eviscerated the boundary between private enterprise and government policy in ways without precedent in modern American history. 

Mr. Trump’s return to the White House has opened lucrative new pathways for him to cash in on his power, whether through his social media company or new overseas real estate deals. But none of the Trump family’s other business endeavors pose conflicts of interest that compare to those that have emerged since the birth of World Liberty.

The firm, largely owned by a Trump family corporate entity, has erased centuries-old presidential norms, eviscerating the boundary between private enterprise and government policy in a manner without precedent in modern American history.

Mr. Trump is now not only a major crypto dealer; he is also the industry’s top policy maker. So far in his second term, Mr. Trump has leveraged his presidential powers in ways that have benefited the industry — and in some cases his own company — even though he had spent years deriding crypto as a haven for drug dealers and scammers.

The article points out that World Liberty’s executives, claiming they do nothing improper, marketed their scam coin to buyers everywhere. That generated more than $550 million in sales, with a large cut going to deeply corrupt djt’s deeply corrupt family. Since the USSC immunized djt for essentially all crimes while in office, the prospects of him ever facing any accountability for his crimes from our legal system, including our now fully corrupted and MAGAfied FBI, DoJ, and USSC, is almost zero.

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

MAGA’s proposed pro-crime, pro-corruption 

and pro-dictatorship law

MAGA extremists in the House have introduced a bill to permanently shield djt and high level executive branch MAGA enablers from prosecution for crimes they committed while in office. The shield extends to time after they have left government. The MAGA, pro-kleptocracy, pro-dictatorship and pro-crime bill, HR1789 - Promptly Ending Political Prosecutions and Executive Retaliation Act of 2025, will not become law as long as Senate Republicans keep the filibuster intact. If they get rid of it, we’re really screwed. The pressure to get rid of it must be intense and getting more so by the day.

The primary focus of HR1789 is on civil actions, administrative remedies, and judicial administration, specifically targeting how and when lawsuits against high-ranking executive officials can be moved or dismissed in federal courts. By moving state cases to federal courts, our MAGAfied DoJ can be expected to dismiss all cases against all MAGA elites. All state and federal lawsuits against Dems would presumably remain intact, unless any accused Dem buys enough World Liberty bitcoin to purchase either a dismissal of the case by the DoJ or a pardon by djt.

HR1789 restricts the courts capacity to define the scope of official duties of the accused criminals, limiting the scope of what can be prosecuted to some undefined scope of crimes. My reading of the proposed law shields protected officials from all crimes committed within the scope of official duties, which is undefined. HR1789 explicitly states that no court may define or limit the scope of the duties of an official of the Executive Office of the President. This section of the proposed law includes some of these stunningly corrupt MAGA bits:

§ 1456. Official Immunity 

“(a) Immunity.—In any case that is subject to removal under section 1442(a), a Federal official shall be presumed to have immunity under article VI, clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States from any charge or claim made by or under authority of State law which may only be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that the official was not acting under the color of such office or on account of any right, title or authority claimed under any Act of Congress for the apprehension or punishment of criminals or the collection of the revenue.

“(b) Determination of immunity.—For purposes of making a determination of immunity under subsection (a), the following may not be admitted into evidence:

“(1) The nature, elements or any other aspect of the charge or claim made by or under authority of State law.

“(2) An act alleged to be official that is not the subject of the charge or claim made by or under authority of State law.

“(d) Prohibition on limitation of scope.—No court may define or limit the scope of the duties of an official of the Executive Office of the President.

If enacted as written, HR1789 prevents courts from defining the scope of official duties. That allows executive officials to claim immunity for a broad range of actions by asserting that committing their alleged crimes were part of their official duties. The courts would not be able to dispute that, unless the USSC holds that kind of law is unconstitutional.

Q: How likely is it that the Senate will get rid of the filibuster in the next 6 months?[1] 

Footnote:

1. For context, Pxy put the odds at 25% for total obliteration of the filibuster, but “more likely” for incremental filibuster erosion, e.g., exceptions for specific bills, budget reconciliation (the scope of which does not include HR1789), etc. I put the odds of total obliteration at ~40% and incremental filibuster erosion at ~70%. Rationales, in part:

Pxy, unconstrained - no human judgment & assessment: While Project 2025’s authoritarian undertones and Trump’s demands create pressure for radical action, the Senate’s structural conservatism and Republicans’ slim majority act as counterweights to complete elimination of the filibuster.

Me - human judgment & assessment: Project 2025’s, djt’s, and MAGA’s urgent authoritarian needs, presumably as expressed candidly in the still secret 180-Day Playbook and in djt’s and MAGA elite’s public behaviors, coupled with MAGA’s slim Senate majority, constitute powerful incentives to completely eliminate the filibuster sooner rather than later or never. It is now or never for MAGA elite’s run at establishing some form of an American kleptocratic dictatorship-plutocracy-Christian nationalist theocracy.

Pxy, constrained by me telling it to reassess filibuster threat by taking into account djt and MAGA authoritarianism, corruption, contempt for the rule of law, Senate MAGA tactics, e.g., ignoring the Senate Parliamentarian, MAGA’s Project 2025, MAGA’s secret 180-Day Playbook, etc.: Executive Summary: The MAGA movement’s open contempt for democratic norms, combined with its kleptocratic ambitions and demagogic tactics, significantly elevates the risk of filibuster elimination-revising the probability to 50% within six months. While institutional inertia and Republican moderates like Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Susan Collins (R-ME) remain barriers, the GOP’s accelerating authoritarianism, Trump’s retribution agenda, and procedural brinksmanship (e.g., bypassing the Senate Parliamentarian) create a volatile environment where traditional analyses underestimate the threat. This reassessment integrates MAGA’s ideological coherence, Project 2025’s institutional capture strategies, and recent GOP maneuvers to dismantle checks on power. (emphasis added)