Dunno if it's still helpful, but https://www.highimpactprofessionals.org/talent-directory is a directory of EAs looking for work and contained several each of lawyers and accountants on a quick search.

I think speculating about what exactly constitutes the most good is perfectly on-topic. While 'murdering meat-eaters' is perhaps an overly direct phrasing (and of course under most ethical frameworks murder raises additional issues as compared to mere inaction or deprioritization), the question of whether the negative utility produced by one marginal person's worth of factory farming outweighs the positive utility that person experiences—colloquially referred to as the meat-eater problem—is one that has been discussed here a number of times, and that I feel is quite relevant to the question of which interventions should be prioritized.

My main observation is that he and his people really do think the election was stolen from them.

That sounds to me like a reason not to elect him? Self-deceiving for personal gain (endemic though it is 😔) is not a positive trait for a president to have.

I don't think illusionism is an accurate view, so I'd be opposed to adopting it.

If you don't think their arguments are convincing, I consider it misleading to attempt to convince other people with those same arguments.

The claim that they can't be moral patients doesn't seem to me to be well-supported by the fact that their statements aren't informative about their feelings. Can you explain how you think the latter implies the former?

Of course if we can't ascertain their internal states we can't reasonably condition our decisions on same, but that seems to me to be a different question from whether, if they have internal states, those are morally relevant.

I agree that LLM output doesn't convey useful information about their internal states, but I'm not seeing the logical connection from inability to communicate with LLMs to it being fine to ignore their welfare (if they have the capacity for welfare); could you elaborate?

What makes eyewitness reports of UFOs more credible than eyewitness reports of miracles, which are if anything more frequent?

If you qualify as a Highly Sensitive Person, IMO it's also worth considering whether you're autistic; as far as I can tell, the two are synonyms.