MAGA’s continuing anti-consumer attack

A federal appeals court has lifted its ban on djt almost completely gutting the CFPB (Consumer Finance Protection Agency. In Project 2025, the CFPB was a very high priority target for obliteration. Banks and financial institutions hated it because it protected consumers from predatory financial practices such as imposing high fees, which were often hidden. All of that is going to come back. As usual, the people most damaged will be low income households. The NYT reports (not paywalled) about how djt and MAGA elites were going to blow past the feeble, i.e., non-existent, protection the court initially said must apply. Once again, the court stopped the final obliteration of the CFPB: 

Two weeks ago, a three-judge panel from the federal appeals court in Washington lifted a freeze on firing employees at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, with some conditions. The judges, ruling on a Friday night, said that workers could be fired if agency leaders determined, after a careful assessment, that they were not needed to carry out the bureau’s legally required responsibilities. 

Within hours, Trump administration officials — working closely with Elon Musk’s associates at the Department of Government Efficiency — scurried to fire nearly all the agency’s employees. By the following Thursday afternoon, bureau leaders sent termination notices to nearly 1,500 employees, retaining barely 200 people, and ordered that the fired workers’ access to agency systems be shut down the next day.

A judge has again stopped the cuts for now. .... Firing so many workers at once, with no transition period, would destroy the bureau’s ability to operate, employees warned their bosses in emails, chat messages and verbal conversations, according to court records. Within days, critical technical systems would fail, enforcement lawyers would miss court deadlines and agency data that federal courts had ordered be preserved would be lost (which is exactly what kleptocratic MAGA elites want). (emphases added)

Workers could be fired if agency leaders determined, after a “careful assessment”?? Bwahahahahaha!! The only assessment that elite MAGA thugs conducted was to send out emails to the CFPB employees telling them YOU’RE FIRED!! That’s one heck of an “assessment.” 

Once again, the sheer ruthlessness of morally rotted djt, MAGA elites and Project 2025 is crystal clear. They are authoritarian, cynically kleptocratic and deeply opposed to protecting democracy, consumers, workers, the environment, the rule of law, civil liberties, and honesty, transparency and competence in government, or even a meaningful existence of a democratic government.

Q: Are (1) rank and file supporters of all of this, whether they know or believe they are supporters or not, good, decent, honest people who are simply deceived, manipulated and betrayed, or (2) am I a fool who has been deceived, manipulated and betrayed by MSM and socialist propaganda, lies and slanders, or (3) is something else going on here and both rank and file supporters and me are right, wrong, or something else?

MAGA horrors on parade

Elite MAGA and djt horrors are coming fast and furious. They're deadly. Instead of lots of details, short descriptions are in order, at least for the time being for most of it. I need to avoid TL/DR.

Law & Crime reports: ‘Trump is spitting in the face of law enforcement’: President pardons ‘Lady Trump’ for spending slain officer charity funds on ‘rent, cosmetic procedures, and her daughter’s wedding’ --  djt granted a “full and unconditional pardon” to Michele Fiore, the former Las Vegas councilwoman also known as “Lady Trump,” who was convicted of “fleecing” the community out of about $70,000 in a scheme to defraud donors to a charity for a police officer who was killed in the line of duty, using the money she collected for plastic surgeries, rent, and her daughter’s wedding. Fiore, a former Republican gubernatorial candidate who was a justice of the peace when she was federally indicted on six counts of wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, was convicted on all seven charges following an eight-day trial in October 2024. .... A White House spokesperson told The Hill that Trump issued the pardon because Fiore was allegedly targeted for prosecution due to her “outspoken conservative views.”

Pardoned corrupt, cynical elite MAGA thug Fiore

She stole 100% of the contributions to her "charity",

not 1¢ went to real charity

Comment: Here, djt is both spitting on law enforcement and openly lying to the American people. This shows he feels the same kind of cynical contempt toward the rule of law, the courts, American democracy and the American people. 

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

Above the Law reports that one of DoJ's  Pam Bondi-style court filings was flat out lying about what the USSC ordered the DoJ to do about getting the illegally deported Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador: DOJ Makes Up Fake Supreme Court Quote About Deportation Hoping No One Notices -- The government’s response is basically “everyone knows the Supreme Court unanimously ordered us to ‘facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release from custody,’ what this filing we’re signing as officers of the court presupposes is… ‘maybe they didn’t?'” .... For the record, the Supreme Court’s order reads: The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. 

[The DoJ’s filing reads] “take all available steps to facilitate the return of Abrego Garcia to the United State.” .... “United STATE”?!?! That’s an embarrassing “[sic]” in any circumstances but for the United States Department of Justice you’d think they’d get it right because it’s RIGHT THERE IN THEIR NAME. They put “emphasis added” on a quote that ISN’T IN THE USSC ORDER!

The highlighted quote is allegedly but falsely

claimed to be what the USSC said in its order to the DoJ

BTW, the DoJ continues to flaunt that order by stonewalling it

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

Gizmodo reports that djt's MAGA DoJ is attacking Wikipedia for posting foreign propaganda: Trump DOJ Threatens Wikipedia’s Nonprofit Status Over Alleged ‘Propaganda’ -- Between scrubbing government websites of information about everything from vaccine efficacy to LGBT health matters and the ongoing war with higher education, the Trump administration seems to have has a problem with freely available information that doesn’t align with its particular ideology. That war on knowledge appears to have extended now extends to Wikipedia. Earlier this week, a Trump appointed attorney sent a letter to the Wikimedia Foundation accusing it of allowing the spread of propaganda and threatening its nonprofit status. [The DoJ's letter] accuses the Wikimedia Foundation of falling short of requirements to maintain that status because, he claims, Wikipedia is “allowing foreign actors to manipulate information and spread propaganda,” and “permitting information manipulation on its platform, including the rewriting of key, historical events and biographical information of current and previous American leaders, as well as other matters implicating the national security and the interests of the United States.” (edits added for clarity and accuracy)

Comment: MAGA elites are OK with allowing Russian propagandists to manipulate information and spread propaganda and permitting pro-MAGA or MAGA-approved disinformation manipulation on any platform. But inconvenient content, factual or not, is now being openly attacked by djt and his elite, morally rotted MAGA goons. People, this is deadly serious, real time democracy-killing dictatorship, not a fever dream or hallucination.

MAGA wants to replace real medicine with alt/MAGA-medicine; MAGA guts the 4th Amendment

A STAT News article reports that the NEJM (New England Journal of Medicine) recently received a letter from MAGA thug Edward R. Martin (appointed by chief thug djt). Martin is the interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia. His letter questions alleged editorial bias. NEJM’s editor-in-chief, Eric Rubin, responded by reaffirming the journal’s commitment to evidence-based research, rigorous peer review, and editorial independence, while also invoking First Amendment protections for scientific discourse. The inquiry is part of a broader pattern, as similar letters were sent to at least three medical journals, including CHEST, a pulmonary care publication. The DoJ’s letter demands explanations about how journals handle “misinformation”, “competing viewpoints”, i.e., pseudoscience and crackpottery, and potential influence  (presumably woke/DEI influence) from funders like the NIH. 

Jeremy Berg, former editor of Science, called them an attempt to pressure editors into accommodating unscientific “alternative perspectives.” The DOJ’s threats her show radical MAGA aggression against peer-reviewed scientific publishing. Martin’s letters frame peer-reviewed journals as “partisan”, which is a blatant lie that misrepresents the role of academic rigor and peer review in validating research.

No, I am not saying that academic rigor and peer review always works. But, it beats the hell out of the alt-perspectives (crackpottery and lies) that MAGA crackpots, liars, grifters and poisoners want to inject into medical and all other science, including climate science. 

Q: Why would MAGA want to poison science and public health, e.g., to avoid inconvenient science that contradicts or undermines MAGA’s fake reality, and its idiotic and kleptocratic policies?

(yes, that’s why)

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

The Daily Boulder reports that attorney general and MAGA thug Pam Bondi has issued a memo telling ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents they no longer need to get a warrant to look for possibly illegal immigrants. ICE is a federal law enforcement agency in the Department of Homeland Security. Bondi’s March 14 order, uses the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 as authority to give law enforcement nationwide the power to bypass basic constitutional protections. So now ICE agents can break into a home if getting a warrant is “impracticable.” They don’t need a judge’s approval. Instead, immigration officers can sign their own administrative warrants. The bar for action is low, requiring a “reasonable belief” that someone might be part of a Venezuelan gang is enough. In this matter, a “reasonable belief” can be reasonable or unreasonable because it is a mostly subjective standard [1], which is significantly lower than traditional Fourth Amendment requirements.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified in 1791, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures. It ensures that no warrants shall be issued without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and that the place to be searched and the items to be seized are particularly described.

Bondi’s memo was obtained by watchdog group Property of the People from a public records request that the group posted online. The 12-page memo is here. What it shows is a massive expansion of federal power that skips over courts and due process. Bondi has put anyone suspected of gang ties at risk of deportation without a hearing. The DOJ memo is clear that anyone labeled an “Alien Enemy” is “not entitled to a hearing, appeal or judicial review.”

The dishonorable, corrupt MAGA thug and traitor,

Pam Bondi telling us to STFU and take it like a patriot

or risk deportation to a death camp with no due process

And, in case you missed it, here’s djt putting it all in his own words on his lovely antisocial media site, Lies Antisocial: 

Here djt tells us that due process is toast

And, in his humble, gracious Easter Day comments to the public on his Lies Antisocial website, djt made clear what is on his mind:

“Happy Easter to all, including the Radical Left Lunatics who are fighting and scheming so hard to bring Murderers, Drug Lords, Dangerous Prisoners, the Mentally Insane, and well known MS-13 Gang Members and Wife Beaters, back into our Country.”

“Happy Easter also to the WEAK and INEFFECTIVE Judges and Law Enforcement Officials who are allowing this sinister attack on our Nation to continue, an attack so violent that it will never be forgotten!”

“Sleepy Joe Biden purposefully allowed Millions of CRIMINALS to enter our Country, totally unvetted and unchecked, through an Open Borders Policy that will go down in history as the single most calamitous act ever perpetrated upon America. He was, by far, our WORST and most Incompetent President, a man who had absolutely no idea what he was doing. But to him, and to the person that ran and manipulated the Auto Pen (perhaps our REAL President!), and to all of the people who CHEATED in the 2020 Presidential Election in order to get this highly destructive Moron Elected, I wish you, with great love, sincerity, and affection, a very Happy Easter!!!”

Aw, what lovely sentiments. I do not recall any president making uplifting comments anything like these.  /s

Footnote:

1. The normal, old-fashioned “reasonable belief” standard is for targeted people, Venezuelan crime gang members, in this situation: 1) being a Venezuelan national without U.S. citizenship or permanent resident status, 2) at least 14 years of age, 3) having alleged association with the Tren de Aragua gang, and 4) being present at the residence in question. 

Bondi's new “reasonable belief” standard applies the old 4-point standard in a fun and easy scoring game to determine gang affiliation where alleged aliens scoring 8 points and higher are “validated” as members of the crime gang. Aliens scoring 5 points or less should not be validated as gang members. It is unclear what happens to 6 and 7 pointers, but they probably get boxed up and mailed off to a death camp somewhere along with the 8 and above pointers. Points are assigned based on various factors including court history, communications with alleged gang members, observations of hand signals (like 🖕?), graffiti usage, clothing choices, tattoos and other symbolic associations. The factors presumably also include whether the ICE agent is in a bad mood, hungry, racist or in caught up in a messy divorce.

See? That’s clear as mud. Relax. You probably won't get boxed up and mailed out. Probably.

 

He is in charge of your civil liberties,

including taking them away

The theology of lies and deceit: Lying for God

I am not very familiar with the Bible. Not an expert, not even a novice. I've read some scholarship about the origins and conflicting messages in it. I understand that there are about 45,000 denominations of Christianity, which presumably reflect about 45,000 different interpretations. One projection is that there will be about 49,000 denominations by some time in 2025, which is this year!  

A question that comes up a lot is why is there so much lying by Christian nationalists and some other kinds of Christianity when the Bible says do not lie? The bible says things like you shall not bear false witness against your neighbor (Exodus 20:16), you shall not steal, nor deal  falsely, nor lie to one another (Leviticus 19:11), lying lips are an abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly are his delight (Proverbs 12:22), put away falsehood and speak the truth (Ephesians 4:25), and the Bible designates Satan as "the father of lies" (John 8:44). To me it seems pretty clear, don't lie. 

But, lying by some Christian nationalists is off the charts. Why? Welp, the Bible condones lying in some situations. In the Hebrew Midwives story (Exodus 1:17-21), Pharaoh ordered Hebrew midwives to kill male infants, they disobeyed and lied about why the babies survived. The text states that "God dealt well with the midwives" and "gave them families" after their deception. In the protection of spies (Joshua 2:1-7), Rahab hid Israelite spies and lied to authorities about their whereabouts. Rather than being condemned, she is praised in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25 for her faith and actions. So there's two examples of lying condoned by God to save lives.

But in Samuel's deceptive mission (1 Samuel 16:1-5), God sent Samuel to anoint David as king, but Samuel expressed fear that Saul would kill him. So God instructed Samuel to say he came to sacrifice, concealing his primary purpose. That is, or seems to be, an example of lying for God.

Some Christian theologians, including some church fathers, have maintained that lying is inherently sinful without exception. This view is often associated with Augustine, who defined lying as "communicating contrary to what one thinks or knows" and considered it necessarily wrong. From this perspective, even deception for seemingly noble purposes remains sinful. In that theology, God blessed the Hebrew midwives and Rahab for their faith and protective intentions, not for their deception.

Other Christian thinkers adopt a more nuanced approach, suggesting that in extreme circumstances—particularly when innocent lives are at risk—deception may be morally justified. Theologian Martin Accad writes that "a justifiable lie is not evil, it's justified and good. Therefore those who implement a justifiable lie on an appropriate occasion are not committing an evil act, but rather a righteous one."

Accad's theological thinking about the morality of lies and deceit aligns with my secular thinking. Lying and deceit, especially in politics in a democracy, is usually morally bad (unjustifiable), say, maybe ~99% of the time. Why? Because when people are lied to or deceived, e.g., by irrational emotional manipulation, and they act on false beliefs, their power to choose on the basis of truth has been taken from them. Thus, in my opinion lying and deceit is inherently authoritarian in a democracy. In an authoritarian regime, that doesn't matter because the leaders (dictators, plutocrats, theocrats and/or kleptocrats) act mostly as they wish, regardless of facts, truths, sound reasoning and opposing public opinion.

What about Christian nationalism?

I asked Pxy about lying and deceit by Christian nationalist elites and how aware of the corrupt, authoritarian wealth and power agenda most of the rank and file are. Short answer, not very aware, mostly deceived.

Q: To what extent do modern Christian nationalist elites rely on lies or deceit to advance its wealth and power agenda? To what extent is rank and file supporters and sympathizers aware of the level of deceit and lying their elites rely on?

A: Modern Christian nationalist elites systematically employ deception to consolidate wealth and political influence, leveraging fabricated historical narratives, conspiracy theories, and manipulated religious rhetoric. While rank-and-file supporters often perceive their engagement as morally justified, evidence suggests many remain unaware of the movement’s reliance on falsehoods, instead trusting leaders who frame their agenda as divinely ordained. This is based on data from investigative journalism, sociological studies, and primary source materials to analyze the interplay between elite manipulation and grassroots comprehension.

Fabricated Historical Narratives
Christian nationalist leaders frequently distort U.S. history to claim the nation was founded as an explicitly Christian polity. Organizations like the National Council of Churches highlight how elites propagate the myth that “America is a Christian nation” by selectively citing colonial-era theocracies while ignoring the secular framework of the Constitution 16. For instance, fundraising letters from groups such as the Family Research Council falsely assert that the Ten Commandments underpin American law, despite no evidence of their influence during the founding era 14. These claims are amplified through media networks like ReAwaken America, which blends election fraud conspiracies with pseudo-historical revisionism 18.

.... long analysis ....

Ignorance Among Supporters
Rank-and-file adherents exhibit varying levels of awareness. Surveys cited by the Brennan Center show that 64% of white evangelicals endorse Christian nationalist tenets like declaring the U.S. a Christian nation, yet only 12% self-identify with the label 8. This disparity suggests many supporters unconsciously absorb movement rhetoric without critically examining its contradictions.

Podcast hosts like Matthew Maher argue that elites weaponize terms like “Christian nationalism” to marginalize traditional believers, framing dissent as persecution 12. This victimhood narrative insulates followers from critiques, as seen in reactions to Diane James’ praise of Putin: when pressured, she retracted her statement, illustrating how adherents prioritize social acceptance over ideological consistency 3.

The Role of Media Echo Chambers
Disinformation thrives in tightly curated information ecosystems. Analysis by Cailee Page reveals that 78% of Christian nationalists rely on partisan media (e.g., Fox News, Breitbart) and religious leaders for news, creating a feedback loop where falsehoods go unchallenged 4. For instance, repeated claims of “voter fraud” in 2020 were debunked yet still cited by 61% of supporters in 2024 polling 7.

Theological Manipulation and Moral Licensing
Elites exploit theological concepts to sanctify deception. By framing political goals as “biblical mandates,” leaders like Franklin Graham conflate partisan agendas with divine will, granting moral license to unethical tactics. The NAR’s “Seven Mountain Mandate”—which calls for Christian dominance over education, media, and government—reinterprets the Great Commission as a call to political conquest, legitimizing lies as “strategic spiritual warfare” 9.

Conclusion: Power, Deception, and the Crisis of Accountability
Christian nationalist elites have institutionalized deception as a core strategy, leveraging historical revisionism, conspiracy theories, and theological manipulation to consolidate power. While rank-and-file supporters are not universally complicit in these tactics, systemic factors—including media fragmentation and doctrinal authoritarianism—limit their capacity to recognize manipulation.

The movement’s success hinges on conflating religious identity with political loyalty, a dynamic that incentivizes elites to perpetuate falsehoods while shielding themselves from accountability. Countering this threat requires dismantling the financial networks and media infrastructures that profit from deception, alongside grassroots education initiatives that empower adherents to critically engage with their beliefs 15 16. Until then, the gap between elite deceit and grassroots awareness will remain a defining feature of Christian nationalism’s rise.

MAGA's moral rot: The USSC & Christian nationalism’s homophobia

Slate writes about how a hyper-biased, homophobic USSC Republican Party MAGA judge, Sammy Alito, blatantly lies about anything that irritates or offends his arrogant Christian nationalist majesty:

The Supreme Court’s conservative justices unleashed a torrent of homophobia on Tuesday as they debated the meaning and propriety of several LGBTQ-themed children’s books. Throughout arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor, these MAGA justices voiced concern—and at times, outright disgust—toward these books for portraying LGBTQ+ people as normal and loving. They argued that parents should have a First Amendment right to shield their children from such material in public schools, ostensibly to protect them from exposure to diverse families under the auspices of religious liberty. Justice Samuel Alito reserved special ire for Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, a gentle picture book that homophobic parents initially attempted to censor when it debuted in 2008. Alito suggested, over the objections of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, that the book is devious propaganda aimed at indoctrinating children who harbor reservations about same-sex marriage.

He is wrong. Alito did not just arguably miss the point of the book; he fundamentally distorted it.

So what was the message of Uncle Bobby’s Wedding? “That change can be hard for children,” Brannen told me. “Change in their families can be hard, but Uncle Bobby’s Wedding shows that can be good.” When writing the book, Brannen was not attempting to trick children into supporting same-sex weddings, but to impart a more timeless message about the importance of open-mindedness when life presents challenges. She depicted a gay wedding as an utterly normal occurrence that fades into the background of the book’s central narrative. And it was this choice that may have broken Alito’s brain: He could not grasp the idea that no one in the book objects to Bobby’s sexual orientation, injecting a fraught conflict over homosexuality that does not exist on the page.

The Slate article points out that the book’s author, Sarah Brannen, says that Alito completely distorted the story’s central conflict. IMHO, he knowingly lied about it. Brannen said that the child character, Chloe, worries about losing time with her uncle post-marriage—not opposing same-sex unions. Brannen’s assertion is corroborated by direct quotes from the book, which Sotomayor raised in rebuttal arguments. Being told that Alito was full of crap pissed Alito and Roberts off. The Slate article points to Alito’s critique as part of a pattern of MAGA (Christian nationalist) justices framing LGBTQ+ representation as “indoctrination.” MAGA judges argue that parents should have a First Amendment right to opt children out of exposure to such morally horrific content.

People, this is what our morally rotted MAGA-dominated USSC has degenerated into. I think it's been like this at least since ~2019-2020. When it comes to Christian fundamentalist morality, Christian nationalist judges (1) openly lie about inconvenient evidence in important cases that affect fundamental civil liberties, and (2) apply MAGA flawed, biased reasoning to the evidence there is. 

I asked Pxy, how likely is it that Alito is lying by knowingly mischaracterizing the children's book, Uncle Bobby's Wedding, in view of his intelligence and years of experience in analyzing complex litigation with complex written evidence? What about his Christian nationalism? Pxy said:

Given Alito’s analytical precision, the book’s unambiguous text, and his pattern of distorting facts in ideologically charged cases, the likelihood that he knowingly mischaracterized Uncle Bobby’s Wedding is high. While ideological bias might explain a genuine misinterpretation, the disparity between the text and his description—coupled with authorial and judicial corrections—suggests a calculated narrative rather than an innocent error. 

Justice Alito’s Christian nationalist beliefs significantly increase the likelihood that he deliberately mischaracterized Uncle Bobby’s Wedding. His ideological framework motivates opposition to LGBTQ+ inclusivity and, by viewing queer identities as threats to “traditional values,” Alito is predisposed to rely on distortion or denial of inconvenient facts. While cognitive bias might explain some misreading, the combination of Alito’s analytical rigor, the book’s clarity, and his pattern of ideological misrepresentation points to deliberate action. Christian nationalism does not merely inform his jurisprudence—it actively shapes how he constructs factual realities to serve its ends. [that’s Pxy’s nice way of saying that Alito knowingly lied about the evidence] (comment and emphasis added)

Qs: Is Alito a cynical, bald-faced liar and arrogant breaker of God’s Commandment to not lie? Are the other five Christian nationalist, Republican Party judges basically the same?

Getting to know your local tyrant-kleptocrat: Elon Musk

Musk claims to be a lot of wonderful things, intelligent, successful businessman, honest, etc. Maybe at one time he was mostly that. Nowadays, he seems to be seriously flawed, authoritarian, hypocritical, cynically corrupt and opaque. The NYT reports about his hypocrisy regarding his false claims of supporting absolute free speech: They Criticized Musk on X. Then Their Reach Collapsed. -- "When Mr. Musk purchased X in 2022, he promised to create a free speech haven and named himself a “free speech absolutist.” Critics still feared that Mr. Musk would use his control of the app to pick and choose his favorites, amplifying voices he admired while suppressing people or topics he loathed. The New York Times found three users on X who feuded with Mr. Musk in December only to see their reach on the social platform practically vanish overnight. Musk is the most popular user on X with more than 219 million followers, so his actions to block or mute users could hold holds significant sway." (clarification added)

In my experience, what Musk did to his critics is a lot like most or nearly all other radical right MAGA demagoguery and lies sources do. They don't tolerate criticism. Musk, like other MAGA propagandists and liars just shut it down. In my case, I get banned or blocked, but have never had an account on X. The point is simple: MAGA cannot handle inconvenient truth or any criticism.

In other Musk sleaze, the great entrepreneur has been sued by a Tesla owner for rigging the odometer on Teslas to show higher mileage than was actually driven. Reuters reports (and others report) that Tesla has been sued in a proposed class action lawsuit for cheating people out of their warranty rights. By making the software-controlled odometer clock more miles than people actually drove, their warranties expire sooner. Normal odometers are mechanical, not software calculations like on Teslas.

The person who filed the lawsuit said that his Tesla's odometer was running at least 15% faster than his other vehicles based on his typical driving patterns. He claims his particular Tesla recorded an average of 72 miles daily despite him driving only about 20 miles per day (a lot more than 15% faster). Quantitative data from Road & Track further reinforced these claims, documenting discrepancies ranging from 15% to 117% higher odometer readings compared to Hinton’s other vehicles under similar conditions. The case is now sitting in a California federal court. Part of the scam could also include putting fake miles on the odometer would deceive people into believing they get more driving range than they actually were. 

The empirical basis, clear & convincing evidence of distrust in Musk

Will Tesla get whacked for odometer fraud? Maybe. Musk himself publicly called the lawsuit “idiotic” in a social media post, so there's that marvelous defense. These days, corporations reign supreme and are mostly above the law. And, djt can pardon whoever and whatever he wants. What about Musk's track record? I checked on his profile with Pxy. 

Q1: Why does the absence of conclusive large-scale data and Tesla’s vehement denials introduce reasonable doubt about systemic intent? Musk is a well-known liar and criminal. Why give him the benefit of one shred of doubt? Consider in detail (i) all the lies about cost savings and transparency that Musk has alleged from his DOGE effort, (ii) his lies about support for unfettered free speech, as exemplified in this article (I forgot to put in the link), and (iii) other lies you can find in the public record. What empirical basis is there to trust anything from Musk or Tesla?

A1: Systemic Dishonesty in Government Efficiency Claims: Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has repeatedly made unsubstantiated or demonstrably false claims about cost savings, undermining trust in his transparency pledges. In March 2025, DOGE asserted it had saved taxpayers $115 billion through measures like contract cancellations and workforce reductions, .... 

The scale of these discrepancies is staggering. .... A canceled Immigration and Customs Enforcement contract, initially touted as an $8 billion saving, was later exposed as a $5.5 million saving. Such patterns suggest are solid evidence of deliberate inflation of figures to create a false narrative of fiscal responsibility while obscuring the minimal real-world impact of DOGE’s actions.

Hypocrisy on Free Speech and Platform Governance:  Musk’s professed commitment to “free speech absolutism” collapses under scrutiny. While claiming that X (formerly Twitter) should function as a “digital town square,” he has threatened legal action against users criticizing Tesla, stating, “We’re going to go after the ones pushing the lies and propaganda.” This contradiction is stark: Musk leverages free speech rhetoric to defend far-right conspiracy theories but weaponizes legal threats to silence detractors of his businesses.

Documented Lies and Misrepresentations in the Public Record 
False Claims About Vehicle Safety and Autonomy: Tesla’s marketing of its Full Self-Driving (FSD) and Autopilot systems has repeatedly overstated capabilities. .... Internal communications revealed in lawsuits show engineers warned Musk about overpromising FSD’s readiness, yet public statements continued to assert its reliability.

Election Disinformation and Conspiracy Theories: Musk has promoted baseless claims undermining democratic institutions. During a 2024 Pennsylvania town hall, he falsely alleged Dominion Voting Systems conspired to rig elections in Philadelphia and Maricopa County, despite Dominion clarifying it had no contracts in Philadelphia and all its systems use voter-verified paper ballots. ....

.... more analysis ....

Behavioral Consistency: Musk’s conduct aligns with a documented strategy of “lying for the greater good,” as described in Walter Isaacson’s biography. This includes overpromising timelines (e.g., Cybertruck, Starship) to buoy stock prices and dismissing critics as “propaganda pushers” to deflect accountability.

Conclusion: The Absence of Doubt in a Pattern of Deception
The “reasonable doubt” argument collapses when confronted with Musk’s cross-domain history of deception. From DOGE’s fabricated savings to election lies and safety misrepresentations, the empirical record reveals a consistent disregard for factual accuracy. Legal settlements, third-party audits, and platform data all corroborate this pattern. Trusting Musk or Tesla requires ignoring a decade of evidence that their public claims are engineered narratives, not empirical realities. In the absence of systemic reform, skepticism remains the only rational response.

Q2: Please repeat your analysis in view this article, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/04/23/business/elon-musk-x-suppression-laura-loomer.html, which I mistakenly failed to include in my original queries. Does consideration of that article change your analysis?

A2: The New York Times’ April 23, 2025, investigation into Elon Musk’s suppression of critics on X provides empirical confirmation of systemic deception that directly undermines any remaining basis for granting Musk or Tesla the benefit of doubt. This new evidence corroborates and amplifies the pattern of dishonesty previously documented across Musk’s government, corporate, and platform governance activities.

Operationalizing "Freedom of Reach, Not Speech"
The NYT analysis demonstrates Musk’s direct involvement in suppressing critics through three mechanisms: 

Algorithmic Demotion: 

Premium Access Revocation: Both Loomer and Owen Shroyer (Infowars host) lost X Premium status during disputes with Musk, stripping their ability to monetize content or amplify posts—costing Loomer an estimated $50,000 1.

Selective Reinstatement: Engagement metrics rebounded only after Musk resumed interacting with their posts, illustrating his personal control over visibility. Loomer’s account recovered when Musk replied “You’re welcome” to her February 2025 gratitude post 1.

This contradicts Musk’s November 2024 claim that “there is no shadowbanning anymore” and his February 2025 assertion that he “doesn’t attempt to silence critics” 1. The suppression occurred despite X’s public policy stating it “does not block, limit, or remove content based on an individual’s views” 1.

.... long analysis ....

Conclusion: No Room for Doubt
The X suppression evidence eliminates any residual credibility for Musk’s denials. When combined with his documented lies about DOGE savings, election integrity, and vehicle safety, the NYT findings confirm a cross-platform strategy of deception. Trusting Musk or Tesla now requires willful disregard of the evidence. .... The only rational response is categorical distrust.[1]

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Footnote 1, for the wonks

roaming in the land of the TL/DR

This focuses on the two levels of evidence in court cases. One is the preponderance of the evidence level (more likely than not or >50% likely), which is evidence level needed to find liability in civil lawsuits. The other is the clear and convincing level of evidence needed to support a finding of civil fraud or civil rights violations. The clear and convincing evidence standard is expressed qualitatively as enough evidence to be "highly probable" or "highly and substantially more probable to be true than not." I liken it to enough evidence to lead a person to be at least ~80% sure, but courts staunchly reject putting a % likelihood number on it.

Footnote 1: 

Q3: You assert that Musk’s conduct meets the preponderance of evidence standard for systemic fraud. Does it meet a clear and convincing standard, keeping in mind that in criminal trials, especially for high profile white collar crimes, guilt at a beyond a reasonable doubt standard is often based only on circumstantial evidence, e.g., patterns of conduct.

A3: The question of whether Elon Musk’s alleged misconduct meets the "clear and convincing" standard for systemic fraud requires analyzing the interplay between legal evidentiary thresholds, patterns of conduct, and the unique challenges of proving white-collar crimes. Drawing on the NYT investigation into X’s suppression tactics, prior DOGE savings fabrications, election disinformation campaigns, and Tesla’s safety misrepresentations, the evidence demonstrates a systemic pattern of deception that not only meets but exceeds this standard.

This standard sits between the civil "preponderance of the evidence" (50.1% likelihood) and the criminal "beyond a reasonable doubt" (near certainty). It is often applied in fraud cases where intent and systemic misconduct must be established by direct or circumstantial evidence 13.

.... long analysis .... 

Conclusion: Systemic Fraud Proven to a "Clear and Convincing" Standard

While criminal "beyond a reasonable doubt" would require a jury’s determination, the "clear and convincing" threshold is met by the sheer weight of circumstantial and direct evidence. Musk’s conduct reflects not isolated missteps but a corporate philosophy prioritizing deception over transparency—a conclusion that is "highly probable" under any rigorous analysis.

Well, there we have it, a legal analysis by Pxy of the solid evidence that reasonably leads a reasonable person to distrust Musk and his companies, including Tesla.