Rich guys installed loyalists in agencies that regulate them

Walter Einenkel of Daily Kos reported that on Friday the nasty guy threatened 50% tariffs on the European Union, then on Sunday had a call from Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission on Sunday and backed off. And on Tuesday he boasted what he had done was a successful negotiating tactic to speed things along. The article doesn’t say the nasty guy got anything through this negotiation, other than avoiding tariffs the EU would impose on the US. He also changed the deadline (by one day) for I’m not sure what, probably the date for trying to reimpose tariffs again. Market analysts have a new phrase for this tariff dance: TACO – Trump Always Chickens Out. In the comments of a pundit roundup on Kos there are a lot of cartoons about the nasty guy, chickens, and tacos. Also in the comments Shelly Kirchoff posted a meme:

Jake Tapper is now calling Joe Biden’s mental decline “Worse than Watergate.” If he was an actual journalist he would be reporting how Trump is committing crimes worse than Watergate every single day.

For those interested in the details James Fallows, writing for his own Substack, posted an account of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem telling Harvard University that she was canceling all the visas of their international students. That is followed by Harvard’s response and lawsuit, followed by a court issuing a temporary restraining order saying the visas must remain valid while the case goes through the courts. Kos celebrated that Daily Kos is now 23 years old. That’s geriatric in internet years. And the site has lasted because it created a community. He wrote:

That spirit is alive and well. In the past year alone: You published over 40,600 stories More than 4,500 different writers contributed The community submitted 1.9 million comments And logged-in users viewed community-authored stories 17.5 million times On an average day, 21,000 of you log in to read, write, recommend, and respond. On Election Day last year, nearly 45,000 of you showed up. You’re not background noise. You’re the engine.

Kos also noted the site changed its revenue stream (I think more than a year ago, though he doesn’t say) from ads, political campaigns, and advocacy groups. The members were the product. Not any more. Now 80% of revenue comes from members. Ten days ago Lisa Needham of Kos wrote about four Silicon Valley tycoons who were able to install loyalists in the government agencies that regulate their industries. The big one is, of course, Musk who through DOGE has people planted in over a dozen agencies, including the ones regulating his industries. Those industries include the FAA, NASA, NOAA, the departments of Transportation, Labor, and Energy. Peter Thiel got friends in the Department of Health and Human Services. The Wall Street Journal reported that HHS has given Thiel’s data company Palantir almost $376 million since 2010, meaning already a long term relationship. Palmer Lucky got a director of his company Anduril nominated to a high position in the Department of Defense. Anduril, Palantir, and SpaceX are all courting the DoD. This director has said he’ll keep his Anduril stock as he works for the company that has the power to give contracts to Anduril. The fourth is Marc Andreessen, whose role, at the moment, is a moneyman investing in his pals’ companies. Needham detailed more corruption between these four and the government, then concluded:

None of these technocrats will do the right thing and put the interests of the taxpayers and the country above their own. Indeed, they’re valuable to Trump precisely because of that. People who actually value the work of government and its role in regulating companies pose a problem for Trump, as he sees the presidency only as a vehicle for personal profit and a means for revenge. Now, he has four incredibly rich and terrifyingly amoral friends to help.

Almost two weeks ago Alix Breeden of Kos discussed the latest issues with AI systems. This was prompted by Lee Zeldin, administrator of the Environmental Protections Agency saying he has plans to make the US the “AI capital of the world.” He didn’t say what that has to do with the EPA. Here are those issues: Americans fear that AI will take away jobs. It looks like AI is also making hiring decisions. Those decisions are likely to be as biased, or biased in new and unknowable ways (AI doesn’t say how it decides things) based on the biased data it was trained on or the biased connections it came up with. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is promoting a bill that proposed a ten year moratorium on state and local restrictions on AI. That means AI companies will have a decade to do what they please. More people are reporting the environmental harm of AI. That includes the huge amount of water AI computers will need, perhaps equivalent of half the water needs of Britain. And researchers are just beginning to look at the public health burden of AI needs. Maybe this is where the EPA comes in (as in an EPA that looks out for polluters, not the environment in its name). Zeldin likes that AI centers like huge amounts of energy. So Interior Secretary Doug Burgum is fast tracking uranium mines for nuclear power and signing new coal leases while delaying a new rule that would protect miners from black lung disease. Two weeks ago Needham reported that Russell Vought, in his side job as acting director of what’s left of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, tossed out a proposed rule that would have limited what data brokers could do with private data, like credit history. Needham wrote this seems to be a part of the nasty guy’s assault on privacy. Needham then discussed several ways this is taking place or is planned. An autism database, supposedly to learn the “real” cause of autism. A massive government database, a terrible idea in many ways, one of which would be to make deportations easier. Hacks into and thefts from government databases even before they’re combined. Government used to strive to protect privacy. Now it is assaulting privacy. Also two weeks ago Needham discussed goodies for AI companies going into the budget bill the House has passed. A half billion so the Department of Commerce can adopt AI. The ban on AI restrictions at the state and local levels as mentioned above – free of restrictions AI companies can spew a lot of pollution. Permission to train AIs on copyrighted data without compensating the copyright holder (the reason why the U.S. Copyright Office Director was fired).

Protecting AI companies from spending their own money or obeying pesky regulations is just the latest iteration of the Trump administration’s AI fever dreams. AI is supposed to increase government efficiency by ferreting out fraud and replacing government workers. Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency has already deployed AI at the Environmental Protection Agency to spy on employees, including looking for anti-Trump sentiments. It’s not clear how that sort of witch hunt increases efficiency, but at least it will cost a lot of money and line the pockets of some already stupendously wealthy people. And, really, isn’t that what the Trump administration is all about?

In a pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin quoted G Elliott Morris of Strength in Numbers. I’ll summarize. There is a debate among Democratic strategists. One side says to read the polls and move to the middle on key issues (such as immigration) to win back the pivotal center. The other side says Democrats should shape public opinion, not just follow it, then lead on what is right. This side says the party lacks leadership, especially on corruption, democracy, and civil rights. There are plenty of examples to work with, such as the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Democrats need the courage and conviction on these issues to create mass support. Yeah, I’m looking for Democrats to take the second side. In the comments are a couple cartoons posted by paulpro. The first is by an author whose name I can’t make out. The caption is “Innovations in Medicaid” and shows a woman with an ice pack on her head, her left arm bandaged and in a sling, and with an IV pole behind her. She is on her knees mopping the floor with a bucket and sponge. The administrator standing over her says, “Good news, Beth! You’ve earned almost enough work-credit points for your pain killer!” The second is much further down in the comments. It is based on the King Charles visiting Canada to give the throne speech on the opening of the new parliament. The cartoon, created by deAdder, has the caption “How things have changed since 1776:” the king and the nasty guy are shown at podiums. The king’s podium says, “The King defends democracy.” The other says, “The President defends autocracy.”

They know their plan is not legal and not moral

I watched the funeral for President Jimmy Carter this morning. In all a fitting tribute to the great man. I was amused and a bit annoyed that the church officials, in their prayers, referred to him as “James” and not “Jimmy.” Carter was the one who insisted he take the oath of office beginning with “I, Jimmy Carter.” I was also annoyed that the CBS commentators took the moments of music to talk, to share their useless observations. I wanted to hear the music. Thankfully, at each musical moment they talked less and let us listen more. Seven people gave eulogies. Carter’s predecessor Gerald Ford had written one that his son Steve Ford read. Carter’s VP Walter Mondale had also written one that his son read (I didn’t catch the name). Both eulogies talked about how they became solid friends with Carter. Stuart Eizenstat, a staffer in the Carter White House said we should evaluate a presidency by how his policies and programs have lasted through time. By that measure Carter’s presidency did quite well. Rev. Andrew Young (he has his own long list of accomplishments) did a good job. I was disappointed in Biden’s eulogy – it seemed to be a lot of recycled cliches. Grandsons Joshua and Jason Carter talked about their grandfather. Jason gave the best eulogy of the bunch. Jason said his grandfather was the same in public as he was in private, demonstrating his integrity and authenticity. The hearse arrived about 20 minutes before the service and the casket was kept in it until the service started. An honor guard also stood in the cold with a wind strong enough the soldier with the presidential flag struggled to hold on to it. Yes, a fitting tribute. Oliver Willis of Daily Kos reported that Mark Zuckerberg, head of Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, announced the company will no longer use independent fact checkers. He claims he is a big defender of free speech, as is the incoming Oval Office occupant. Yeah, that’s a similar reason Musk gave to fire the moderators in what was then Twitter. And his claim about the nasty guy being a defender of free speech is laughable. Another reason for the change: Fact checkers are too politically biased. Does this confirm reality has a liberal bias? Zuckerberg said Meta would use the same idea used on X, that individuals can post corrections and then they are voted on.

But in practice, very few users see these notes, which are easily manipulated, and they are published after misinformation has been widely circulated. Meta’s announcement that it is pursuing the same model to deal with misinformation as Musk likely means that the company’s platforms will be awash with lies, bigotry, and other content that misinforms the public. ... Ditching fact checking is the most Trump-like behavior that Meta could embrace and is another sign that tech and media leaders are lining up behind the incoming administration and against an informed public.

Not surprisingly, this came after Zuck visited Mar-a-Lago and donated to the inaugural committee. I wrote after the election that the nasty guy’s base won’t turn on him, no matter how bad their lives get, because they won’t know he was the cause of their oppression. This is another reason why they won’t know. In a pundit roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quoted a few articles describing Zuck’s change. Kev also quoted Jordi Pérez Colomé of El País in English talking to disinformation researcher Renee DiResta about the difference between “misinformation” and “propaganda.” I’ll summarize: In the case of misinformation when more accurate information is presented a person would change their mind. So most of what we’ve been calling misinformation is really propaganda. Jan Sorensen posted a cartoon on Kos about corporations cozying up to the nasty guy with the key line: “It’s almost as if capitalism doesn’t have a problem with a dark authoritarian future.” I had written that Rep. Nancy Mace had proposed a transgender bathroom ban that would affect only new Rep. Sarah McBride. The new House convened. They elected Mike Johnson as speaker again (after a couple members switched votes to him). And they adopted the rules that are to be followed for this Congress. Alix Breeden of Kos reported that Mace’s ban is not in the rules. Was Mace snubbed? Did other Republicans back away from the bathroom ban? Or are they all relying on statement Johnson said a couple months ago that there is a ban? When Johnson announced the ban it was not accompanied by any House approval. Amanda Becker of The 19th, in an article posted on Kos, wrote about how Project 2025 could get implemented. The nasty guy has already nominated to important positions several key people who were authors of the project. Likely many of them will be confirmed. One of the authors is Russell Vought, nominated to lead the Office of Management and Budget. Vought’s vision for the OMB, according to Bel Olinsky of the Center for American Progress, is “to basically change the plumbing so they can do whatever they want without any meaningful checks and balances” during Trump’s second term. Vought has said his goals are to destroy diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives (unknown whether that’s in government or across the country, likely both) and to advance Christian Nationalism. Vought sees his purpose is to ensure all policy initiatives are in sync with his goals and to stop plans veering off course. He has two ways to guide wayward policies. First, by eliminating dissent within agencies. Second by withholding money appropriated by Congress for programs he and the nasty guy don’t support. That first goal is to be accomplished by reclassifying federal employees, turning 50,000 jobs from being career jobs to being political jobs. Then firing those who aren’t loyal to the nasty guy. As for the second, yes, the Constitution says Congress controls the purse. The executive branch is to spend money in the manner Congress directs. More below. Vought’s alignment with Christian Nationalism means implementing Project 2025’s call for restricting abortion and removing policies that support LGBTQ families. He would also work to turn the FBI into a political entity to settle scores and help with deportations. Project 2025 says all its goals are to be done by executive action. No Congressional oversight needed. Here’s the “more below.” Back at the end of November Molly Redden of ProPublica, in an article posted on Kos, explained what the nasty guy and Vought plan to do. The idea is called impoundment. The name refers to a president deciding to “impound” or not spend money he deems wasteful. The nasty guy would use it to cut the vast array of government services Musk and Ramaswamy want to make disappear. Most of the examples of impoundment are cases where Congress left details up to the President. When Jefferson was president Congress said the number of gun boats to be purchased should not exceed 15 and the price should not exceed $50,000. Jefferson decided zero fit within what Congress authorized.

President Richard Nixon took impoundment to a new extreme, wielding the concept to gut billions of dollars from programs he simply opposed, such as highway improvements, water treatment, drug rehabilitation and disaster relief for farmers. He faced overwhelming pushback both from Congress and in the courts. More than a half dozen federal judges and the Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the appropriations bills at issue did not give Nixon the flexibility to cut individual programs. Vought and his allies argue the limits Congress placed in 1974 are unconstitutional, saying a clause in the Constitution obligating the president to “faithfully execute” the law also implies his power to forbid its enforcement.

To me that sounds like Alice in Wonderland style reasoning. “Faithfully execute” is supposed to mean carry out and enforce every detail of the law. It doesn’t mean prevent a law from being fulfilled. The Supremes confirmed my understanding back in 1838. But this will likely be the first case the nasty guy takes to the Supremes and this court is quite different from the court in 1974 or 1838.

Vought was also a top architect of the controversial Project 2025. In private remarks to a gathering of MAGA luminaries uncovered by ProPublica, Vought boasted that he was assembling a “shadow” Office of Legal Counsel so that Trump is armed on day one with the legal rationalizations to realize his agenda. “I don’t want President Trump having to lose a moment of time having fights in the Oval Office about whether something is legal or doable or moral,” Vought said.

Note that last bit. The nasty guy and Vought know what they want to do is not legal. They know what they want to do is not moral. They intend to do it anyway.