I've read a fair bit about Miller, but don't understand why Trump has given him such free reign. Who else has Trump's ear and supports Ghoul Miller?

There is simply no other option left for President Trump to restore his good name but send Miller packing without a pardon.

I got a bit off topic here with some underdeveloped tech and political brainstorming, thanks to Jason DiNapoli and @alanrozenshtein.com for the legal framing and perspectives, both articles are worth a read.

Models which are publicly shared can be used by researchers, media and the public to see if they are sticking to their positions over time after the election. Models which say stupid shit, equivocate or lie will be rewarded or penalized by the voters and press. I naively think this favors truth.

I am also intrigued by how publicly shared or accessible AI models of political positions and messaging can be used as a means of civic engagement. Ask the candidate's AI about their positions, and play them off against each other. Distribute them in voter pamphlets.

It seems more likely to have a complex network of AI models produced by experts and validated outside the political sphere that feed into aggregative AIs that both create and reinforce the political posturing. Does a politician really want a single AI that can show off their dirty laundry?

The notion of one big model seems over fit to the current presidency, a hollow bullshitting presidency pairs well with a bullshitting AI because neither needs to be grounded in reality. For this presidency, hallucinations are a feature as long as they distract and reinforce divisive hate.

As a semi-professional tech guy and amateur political observer, there seem to be significant practical and technical challenges to this idea of a unitary Presidential AI Model. Some of this is down to the hype versus reality of AI, some is more forward looking at the legal frameworks of what if.

Wasn't it finally passed due to Gaza, not China?

"A government that kills, then lies, and then threatens its citizens is not protecting the nation. It is undermining the foundations that make it worth protecting in the first place. And if those who claim to be the law are permitted to kill without consequence, then the law no longer governs them"

"An administration confident in its legitimacy does not smear the dead, block investigators, or threaten journalists for reporting what cameras show. Yet instead of restoring trust, the response escalated further."