djt wants to kill an important, almost ready for launch space telescope

SciAm reports that leaked documents show that djt want to stop all NASA funding for the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope (and important climate science projects), despite the telescope being almost finished and ready for launch:

Five Key Climate and Space Projects Are on Trump’s Chopping Block

Leaked budget documents indicate that key NASA and NOAA research projects, such as crucial climate research and the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, are at risk of being defunded in 2026

The Hubble and James Webb space telescopes, iconic for their views of the cosmos, won’t last forever. And now, their successor could be in trouble. The $4.3-billion Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope (NGRST) is nearing completion at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, but Trump’s preliminary proposal would cancel all funding for it, as well as for many other Goddard projects. During his first term as president in 2017–21, Trump, a Republican, tried repeatedly to eliminate funding for the Roman telescope, but was blocked by the US Congress in each case.

Artist rendition of the NGRST, a wide 

field infrared survey telescope

The NGRST is slated for launch as early as fall of 2026. The mission is designed to explore dark energy, locate exoplanets, and conduct massive surveys of the universe in infrared light. Scientists describe it as “200 Hubbles” because of its enormous field of view and Hubble-quality resolution. By March 2024, the project was in its final design and fabrication phase, and had met its revised cost and schedule commitments.

This beyond outrageous. Most of the $4.3 billion, which includes costs for designing, building and on-ground testing the telescope, launch, and 5 years of operation, has already been spent. For rational, reasonable people, it makes no sense whatever to cut the remaining funding. The telescope is now nearing completion, with final pre-launch integration and testing underway at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland.

So why propose this funding cut at this point? The amount of money to be saved is puny compared to the amount that would be wasted (sunk cost) and the value of the knowledge that would not be used for the economy or the public interest generally. 

What about Christian nationalism? Could that be relevant? Hell yes it is relevant. Highly relevant. In the relationship between CN (Christian nationalism) and some fields of science progress, including astronomy, there is religious ideological resistance to discoveries that challenge literal interpretations of religious texts. Obviously, not all Christian nationalists oppose cosmology or space science, but documented evidence shows that a significant number of CN elites and rank-and-file adherents view major scientific projects like the NGRST as threats to their religious worldview.  

Why? Young Earth creationism, that’s why. Significant opposition arises from evangelical CN belief in young Earth creationism. In that belief, there was a literal six-day creation event about 6,000 years ago. Scientific evidence of a 13.8-billion-year-old universe, including data from the James Webb Space Telescope confirming cosmic expansion, directly contradicts their interpretation of Genesis. The NGRST mission to study dark energy and the universe’s accelerating expansion would further challenge these beliefs by providing additional evidence for the Big Bang theory. Many creationists reject the Big Bang despite its alignment with the theological concept of God’s creation of the universe from nothing. Presumably, they reject the Big Bang because it contradicts six-day creationist dogma and therefore they oppose the NGRST. 

Other circumstantial evidence: Despite bipartisan support for the NGRST, MAGA justified cuts targeting NASA’s science programs through rhetoric emphasizing “fiscal responsibility.” However, canceling Roman now would waste what has been spent so far, probably at least ~$3.5 billion of the $4.3 billion that congress allotted for the project. Or maybe djt wants to sell the almost complete telescope to Musk for cheap, and then he can charge people to use it after it is sent into space. Musk can then give djt a kickback for a good job well done. 

Qs: 1) Is it irrational or crackpot to think that CN dogma had anything at all to do with djt wanting to kill the NGRST just before it is ready to be put in space and used? 2) If CN dogma did play a role, would any CN elite ever admit it? 3) Is the main motivator just money for djt, e.g., selling it off to Musk for next to nothing, while getting a kickback? 

(IMHO, no, no, maybe)

News bits: MAGA's terrorism demagoguery; Hegseth did it again

Yahoo and other sources are reporting that MAGA elites in government are contemplating federal crime prosecutions for people who want the rule of law to apply to immigration and deportations:

Donald Trump’s counterterrorism czar Sebastian Gorka [Senior Director for Counterterrorism in the White House and Deputy Assistant to djt] claims Americans who don’t support the president’s anti-immigration agenda and deportations policy are “on the side of the terrorists.”

He suggested advocates for Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran father living in Maryland who was mistakenly deported to a brutal prison in his home country, could be prosecuted for “aiding and abetting.”

“And you have to ask yourself, are they technically aiding and abetting them?” Gorka continued. “Because aiding and abetting criminals and terrorists is a crime in federal statute.”

“It’s not left and right, it’s not even Republican or Democrat. There’s one line that divides us: Do you love America, or do you hate America? It’s really quite that simple,” Gorka told Newsmax on Wednesday.

“It's quite telling that we have Democrats on Capitol Hill, not just the lunatics who are torching Tesla dealerships in acts of terrorism themselves, saying, ‘Oh my gosh, the rights of this individual!’” Gorka says of Garcia. “You mean the terrorist who came here illegally?”

Like all other MAGA elites, Gorka conveniently ignores inconvenient facts. Here, (1) Garcia is not a terrorist, (2) a US immigration judge granted Garcia "withholding of removal" status in 2019 because he was threatened by gangs in El Salvador, and (3) there is no solid evidence that Garcia is or ever was a member of any criminal gang.** All that reasonable people are asking here is just that Garcia get due process. The Department of Homeland Security and djt administration have alleged involvement in criminal activity and gang membership, but have not produced any evidence of felony charges, indictments, or convictions. There is no such evidence.

** The government's confidential informant said Garcia was a gang member active in the western New York M-13 criminal gang. Garcia never lived anywhere other than Maryland since he arrived illegally in the US in 2012 at the age of 16. In exchange for his uncorroborated confidential information, the informant was granted a visa to stay in the US, i.e., the informant was highly motivated to lie.

Q1: Should people who ask for due process for everyone entitled to due process, including Garcia, be prosecuted for aiding and abetting*** terrorists?

*** Under federal law aiding and abetting is a felony if the underlying crime is a felony. According to 18 U.S. Code § 2, anyone who aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, or procures the commission of a federal offense is punishable as a principal—that is, as if they committed the crime themselves. There is no separate charge for aiding and abetting; the aider and abettor faces the same penalties as the person who committed the original crime, including felony penalties if the principal offense is a felony. Garcia has no criminal record in the US or El Salvador. There is no underlying crime.

Q2: Should Gorka be prosecuted for treason, false prosecution or just plain threatening, lying to and insulting the American people? (just a rhetorical question)

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

From the only the best people files, everyone is reporting that defense secretary and stupid, incompetent MAGA thug Pete Hegseth blew off security concerns for a 2nd time. This time his wife and some other miscellaneous people got to see secret US defense plans. AL.com reports: Trump thinks Hegseth doing ‘phenomenal job’ despite new chat scandal, won’t fire him over ‘anonymous smears’ -- President Donald Trump won’t ask for Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s resignation following a report he divulged attack plans to his brother, wife and personal attorney, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday. “The president stands strongly behind Secretary Hegseth, who is doing a phenomenal job leading the Pentagon,” Leavitt said during an appearance on “Fox & Friends.”

In the first outrageous security breach, Hegseth participated in a Signal chat about the March 15 Yemen airstrikes with senior Trump administration officials. This time, the treasonous idiot shared essentially the same sensitive secrets—such as flight schedules for F/A-18 Hornets and timing of the airstrikes—on a separate Signal chat he created, which included his wife, brother, and personal attorney.

Q: In view of the recent massive, gigantic leak of secret government information to the Russians by Elon Musk, does this leak amount to anything of concern since the Russians already know just everything secret the US government had?

Getting to know your local tyrant-kleptocrat: Introduction to Russell Vought

Vought, a smiling tyrant-kleptocrat

With American secular democracy, rule of law and civil liberties all under a powerful, ferocious authoritarian-kleptocratic attack, it's time to get to know the thugs who are attacking and starting to oppress targeted people, destroying lives that need to be destroyed and also getting ready to steal as much loot as they can sink their self-righteous claws into.

I asked the DP house historian, Pxy, what the deal is with Vought.

Interviewer Germaine: Research and summarize the importance, power, ideology and tactics of Russell Vought. How influential was he in drafting Project 2025 and the still secret 180-Day Playbook on how to rapidly implement authoritarianism and kleptocracy? What are his Christian nationalist ties and credentials?

Analytic historian Pxy: 

Russell Vought: The Architect of Project 2025 and Christian Nationalist Influence in the Trump Administration

Russell Vought has emerged as one of the most powerful yet understated figures in the current political landscape, wielding enormous influence through his position as Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and his pivotal role in shaping Project 2025. As a self-proclaimed Christian nationalist and bureaucratic expert, Vought represents a nexus of ideology and governmental machinery that has profound implications for American democracy. 

Vought's Rise to Power and Governmental Influence

Russell Vought has cultivated significant influence in conservative political circles, particularly during and after his tenure in the first Trump administration. During Trump's first term, Vought served as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, a seemingly technocratic role that he leveraged into a position of considerable power 2. He has returned to this same position in Trump's second term, following Senate confirmation in early 2025 10.

What makes Vought particularly influential is his deep understanding of governmental operations combined with ideological conviction. As one analysis notes, he is among the small group of Trump advisers who possesses "a mechanic's understanding of how Washington operates" 2. This technical knowledge allows him to implement sweeping changes with maximum efficiency and minimum resistance.

Vought himself describes the OMB as "the President's air-traffic control system" and "the command center of the federal budget" with the capability to halt spending at various agencies and oversee "the execution of government operations" 6. This positioning gives him extraordinary control over federal resources and policy implementation. AFSCME President Lee Saunders warned that Vought's confirmation signals that "everything from Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security to Head Start and veterans' health care is on the chopping block" 8.

His influence extends beyond formal governmental structures. By the end of Trump's first term, Vought had become "one of the president's most trusted and obsequious officials—an acolyte with a knack for making the half-formed schemes from his boss achievable" 11. This combination of ideological alignment, technical expertise, and personal loyalty has made him a central figure in advancing the administration's agenda.

Christian Nationalist Ideology and Worldview

Vought's political philosophy is deeply intertwined with his religious convictions. He is frequently described as a "self-proclaimed Christian nationalist" 9 3. His religious upbringing and education at an evangelical Christian college have shaped his worldview profoundly 3. The Economist describes him as a "holy warrior" whose "calm exterior belies an incendiary streak, fueled by his religious convictions" 4.

His religious views have occasionally sparked controversy, particularly statements suggesting that "all non-Christians are 'condemned'"1. This theological perspective appears to inform his political outlook, blending religious convictions with governance in ways characteristic of Christian nationalism.

Beyond religious aspects, Vought's ideology embraces what he terms "radical constitutionalism" 6. He views the federal bureaucracy as a "constitutional crisis" and describes federal agencies as "woke and weaponized" 1 2 6. This perspective leads him to advocate for extreme measures to reshape government, including the "unitary executive theory" that vests presidents with almost complete control over the federal bureaucracy 7.

Vought frequently uses militaristic language when discussing governance, referring to political opposition as "enemy fire that's coming over the target" and urging allies to be "fearless at the point of attack" 2. This combative approach reflects his view that drastic, confrontational measures are required to achieve his vision of governmental transformation.

.... really long analysis .... 

Christian Nationalist Connections and Background
Vought's Christian nationalist identity is a defining aspect of his public persona. He openly embraces this label, describing himself as a Christian nationalist in various forums 9 3.

His religious formation includes: Being the youngest of seven children in a family with "a very strong Christian upbringing", attending an evangelical Christian college 3, and making controversial theological statements, including the assertion that non-Christians are "condemned"1.

The Economist describes him as combining Christian nationalism with budgetary expertise in a unique blend that makes him particularly effective in advancing his agenda 4. His religious convictions appear to provide both motivation and moral framework for his political activities.

Conclusion
Russell Vought represents a significant force in American politics through his blend of bureaucratic expertise, ideological conviction, and strategic positioning. As OMB Director and Project 2025 architect, he wields extraordinary influence over federal policy and resource allocation.

His vision combines Christian nationalism with "radical constitutionalism" in ways that seek to fundamentally reshape American governance. Through tactics including civil service restructuring, budget manipulation, and executive orders, he aims to concentrate power within the presidency while diminishing traditional checks and balances.

Critics view Vought's agenda as profoundly threatening to democratic norms, warning it could create an "imperial presidency" unrestrained by traditional limitations. Defenders might characterize the same approach as necessary to overcome bureaucratic resistance and implement conservative priorities.

What remains clear is that Vought possesses both the vision and technical capacity to pursue transformative authoritarian change in federal governance. His continued influence will likely shape American politics in significant ways in the coming years, particularly through the implementation of Project 2025 principles and the still-secret 180-Day Playbook. (edits and emphasis added)

Interviewer: What does Vought say about church-state separation and the primacy of biblical law over secular law?

Analytic historian:

 Vought articulates a nuanced but fundamentally revisionist approach to the separation of church and state. He does not call for a formal merger of church and state institutions, but he explicitly rejects the idea that Christianity should be separated from its influence on government and society. He asserts that the United States is a “Christian nation,” arguing that its rights and duties are “understood to come from God” and that “freedom is defined by God, not man” 3 6. He stated that the only way to return America to the vision of the Founding Fathers is through “radical constitutionalism”—a concept that, for Vought, involves re-centering Christian values in government policy and executive authority.

While Vought does not openly advocate for the wholesale replacement of secular law with biblical law, he frequently invokes biblical precepts as the proper foundation for American governance. For example, in immigration policy, he has argued that eligibility should depend on whether an individual “accept[ed] Israel’s God, laws and understanding of history” 2 3 6. This is a clear example of applying religious criteria to secular policy decisions.

Civil liberties and secular organizations have strongly criticized Vought’s approach, arguing that his vision would “decimate the line between church and state, elevating his personal religious views above the secular values enshrined in the U.S. Constitution” 4 6. They note that the U.S. Constitution is a secular document and warn that privileging Christianity in government policy is antithetical to pluralism and the founders’ intent 2 6.

Well, there we have it. Vought is a non-theocratic theocrat-kleptocrat with a smile. From what I can tell, he is an extremely intelligent, highly sophisticated demagogue-kleptocrat hiding behind "institutional boundaries" as a fig leaf to cover his authoritarian and kleptocratic[1] impulses. 

Q: By arguing that fundamentalist Christianity interpretations of biblical law is the guiding influence on American government and public policy, is Vought's claim to not be a Christian theocrat a cynical lie, or something he sincerely believes his own rationalization that "institutional boundaries" somehow keeps the church meaningfully separate from the state? 

Footnote:

1. Vought's pro-corruption mindset is evidenced by his support for firing independent inspector generals and instituting Schedule F (for easy firing of "disloyal" (honest) bureaucrats). That allows waste, fraud and abuse to be conducted on a far larger scale with far less chance of getting caught, and even smaller chance of being prosecuted, even if caught. Vought's actions and Christian nationalist ideology show his support for prioritizing loyalty to Donald Trump over the US Constitution in federal agencies like the FBI and Department of Justice. Vought sees independent agencies like the FBI and DoJ as extensions of presidential power, not nonpartisan law enforcement entities. No one in a MAGA administration one is going to prosecute anyone for corruption in government so long as they pay off MAGA elites. That is exactly like routine operations in Putin's Russian kleptocracy.

Finally in a blatant sign of disrespect for the rule of law, as OMB director in djt's first term in office, he illegally withheld $400 million in congressionally approved Ukraine aid at Trump's request. That lead to djt's first impeachment. When questioned about it, Vought refused to comply with a congressional subpoena. Vought never faced prosecution for his contempt of congress because Merrick Garland was a cynical traitor, secretly supporting djt and MAGA authoritarianism as best he could.

The cognitive biology of tyranny, dissonance and rationality: Three Overton Windows

CONTEXT

To be a reasonably well-informed citizen in a democracy succumbing to radical right kleptocratic authoritarianism, one needs to know a little about the Overton Window. As we all know, the GOP has realigned from old-fashioned, pro-democracy conservatism with elite MAGA and CN (Christian nationalist) tyranny and kleptocracy. 

However, while MAGA and CN elites are authoritarian and anti-democratic, their operational base remains within traditionally conservative institutions and structures, specifically the Republican Party and allied organizations like CPAC, the Heritage Foundation and The Federalist Society. The GOP has functionally merged with MAGA/CN factions, especially since 2016 but arguably going farther back to at least the John Birch Society of the 1960s. The merger and takeover of conservatism blurs traditional distinctions between "conservative" and both "radical right authoritarian" and "kleptocrat." 

MAGA and CN's anti-democratic agenda usually advances via legalistic authoritarianism rather than overt coups, although djt's 1/6/21 coup attempt was an exception. For example, they weaponize the rule of law concept by gerrymandering, judicial appointments, and procedural obstruction, e.g., Senate filibusters. The point is to exploit democratic systems to entrench authoritarian minority rule.

That's a deadly serious problem. For tens of millions of Americans, the label "conservative" effectively masks the authoritarian and kleptocratic agendas of both MAGA and CN elites. That's where the OW (Overton window) comes in.  Many people simply cannot see the ugly reality because authoritarianism and kleptocracy have been propagandized and demagogued to be within an authoritarian OW.

TRIFURCATION OF THE OW

The single Overton window is usually shown about like this  

I've discussed the OW before, e.g., footnote 1 in this post, footnote 1 in this post, footnote 1 of this post, and all of this post. Wikipedia discusses the concept (my inserts are underlined and emphasis added):

The Overton window is the range of subjects and arguments politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time. It is also known as the window of discourse. The key to the concept is that the window changes over time. The OW can shift, shrink, expand. The OW can move to the political extreme left or extreme right, especially when driven by decades of divisive demagoguery, lies, slanders and reality-detached, crackpot reasoning. It exemplifies the slow evolution of societal values and norms over time. 

The term is named after the American policy analyst and former senior vice president at Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Joseph Overton, who proposed that the political viability of an idea depends mainly on whether it falls within an acceptability range, rather than on the individual preferences of politicians using the term or concept.

What decades of dark free speech, including demagoguery and constant lies, from MAGA and CN elites has done is to create another "MAGA/CN" OW where authoritarianism and kleptocracy have been normalized and made acceptable concepts for normal political discourse, and government and society generally. According to information Pxy found, extreme polarization in American politics has created three different OWs. There is a 3rd OW at play and it can tip the balance of power:

Q: About what portion or % of adult Americans are trapped in the MAGA/CN Overton Window, what % is in the old pro-secular democracy window and where are the rest of the people politically situated in terms of mindset? 

A: Based on recent polling data and scholarly analysis, the American electorate can be segmented into three broad mindset categories: MAGA/Christian Nationalist (CN) adherents (20–25% of adults), pro-secular democracy advocates (40–45%), and disengaged or conflicted moderates (30–35%).

So there we have it, there are three different OWs. Lots of deep dives with Pxy into this trifurcated politics situation leads to absolutely fascinating research and analysis. For example, in terms of mindset, the moderates tend to be about halfway between the minds that MAGA/CN dark free speech traps compared to the much more fact, true truth and sound reasoning-based pro-secular democracy crowd. The moderates apparently tend to be a bit paralyzed (conflicted) by cognitive dissonance and thus many or most of them are not very informed or engaged with politics. 

Absolutely fascinating stuff. But to try to stay out of the land of TL/DR, or at least not get in any deeper, I'll stop here. 

Not really the OW trifurcation --

replace wise mind with conflicted and

disengaged and maybe that gets fairly close

Shredding the constitution or not?: Shield laws and abortion

The Economist reports about state shield laws that protect doctors in the state from prosecution for sending FDA-approved abortion pills to states that have banned abortions:

[A hypothetical teenage] patient [in rural Texas] is pregnant and wants an abortion. For years, she’s been told that it is illegal in her state, with almost no exceptions. But then, with a bit of Googling, “you find out that there’s this group of people in Massachusetts that will send you FDA-approved medications in the mail.” The ordeal will be over in a few days and will cost $5. “It sounds absolutely bananas, right?” she asks “How could it be legal? How could it be safe?”

Yet it is safe and legal. Dr Foster is one of the founders of the Massachusetts Medication Abortion Access Project (the MAP), a telehealth abortion provider outside Boston. It sends between 2,000 and 3,000 packages of abortion pills a month, 95% of them to states where the procedure has been banned. Massachusetts is one of eight states that protects abortion providers from criminal charges and civil litigation, regardless of where pills are sent (see map). Such “shield” laws are legal novelties that have sprung up since 2022, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade. In the first six months of 2024, nearly 10,000 abortions took place each month under these provisions—amounting to 10% of all legal abortions in America.

Anti-abortion activists are incensed by the workaround.

Doctors who send abortion pills to states with abortion bans face arrest if they leave their home states. That is a significant downside of practicing abortion telemedicine. Texas has filed suit against a New York doctor, but New York’s governor Kathy Hochul refuses to extradite the doctor and courts in the state are not enforcing Texas’ $113,000 penalty. Texas is claiming that “New York is shredding the constitution.” 

Sooner or later this will wind up at the USSC. If that court decides that abortion telemedicine is illegal under federal law, e.g., the Comstock Act, an 1873 anti-obscenity law, doctors who practiced abortion telemedicine will probably be targeted for prosecution by red states with abortion bans and laws against abortion telemedicine. 

Shield laws are causing major problems in terms of respect among states for judgments in one state being honored by other states. Shield laws conflict with long-standing interstate cooperation, such as extradition agreements and mutual recognition of court decisions. By refusing to honor subpoenas, arrest warrants, or civil lawsuits from anti-abortion states, shield laws risk eroding the constitutional framework that leads states to respect each other's laws and judicial processes. Also, some states might adopt reciprocal measures targeting other issues, escalating partisan "arms races" among states with contradictory laws. The loss of trust between states would probably further weaken national unity and interstate collaborative governance. 

What a mess. Abortion is tearing this country apart. Sadly, it is for no good reason at all. None. National abortion rights never forced even one pregnant girl or woman to get an abortion. Not one. But now, abortion ban laws are forcing tens of thousands of girls and women to have a child they do not want, destroying or disrupting many of those people's lives or future prospects. 

That is Christian nationalist theocracy in action, plain and simple.

Yesterday's anti-MAGA protests

There were anti-djt and anti-MAGA protests yesterday in hundreds of US towns and cities. At least hundreds of thousands of people protested publicly. Maybe about a million.

Miami, FL

Driggs, Idaho

Washington DC, National Mall

San Fransisco, CA

Lexington, MA

West Palm Beach, FL

near Mar-a Lago

New York City

Houston, TX

St. Paul, MN

Miami, FL

Washington, DC

at the White House

Washington, DC