The problem here is having such activities in his past makes him an exploitable by criminal organizations or foreign adversaries who would seek the sensitive information he now has access to.
First point is not even true of the Watergate burglars. What makes crime indistinguishable from politics here is the recent ruling on presidential immunity.
I was actually thinking of Hunt and Liddy, who did nothing of worth after their infamy. I don’t think the actual burglars did either?
-- original comment --
We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. You can't post like this here, and you've done it many times before.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
-- original comment --
We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. You can't post like this here, and you've done it many times before.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
There is little left to lose, it's a redistribution scheme rather than a savings scheme.
And maybe in some distant future post-scarcity society we would not have a need for a savings scheme.
People who have had access to that kind of data, and who have those kinds of skills, you'd better be careful about how you dispose of them. (Consider the term "blowback".)
I feel like from the perspective of the US, if we frame this conflict/battle for control of US services and computer systems, we needn't say 'the US is a hostile adversary'. It's fair to frame it as 'the US is the US, and the people seizing control of the systems against the interests of the US are hostile adversaries of the US'.
The specifics of who they're working for, how, why etc. can still be up for speculation or further discovery, but we needn't frame it as 'perhaps the US is actually the enemy and Musk's people are actually the liberators'.
No, whether misguided or not they're doing this out of patriotism. They care about US citizens and US interests, and believe the deep state is hostile to both.
They're carrying out the platform the president was elected on, and he'll very much be accountable for the results. The very fact that they're in the news and being talked about is the opposite of the deep state.
Funny, I'd say that describes the other side more accurately - they probably wouldn't put it in those terms, but the PMC bureaucrats who worked for federal agencies absolutely did think they were wiser and better educated and had better judgement and were simply better people than the people their agencies were meant to serve, and treated oversight as damage and routed around it (or, more often, subsumed it into the same complex - not hard when the people doing the regulation are drawn from the same pool as the people running the agencies).
I have a very close friend who works for VA. Her patients are veterans, many far poorer and with no higher-education. She cares about them deeply. She has a husband, kids, and two parents that depend on her paycheck, and her first thought post-election when rumors of furlough and mass layoffs started circulating were about how she can make sure her patients are taken care of if they lose access to her care.
If you think people shouldn't make that kind of generalisation, why didn't you call out the person I replied to? What good does calling me out do that calling them out wouldn't do?
Do you have any evidence for this at all, or are you just projecting your own beliefs?
1) The CIA et al, official parts of the government that work secretely and control the world through illegal and shadowy actions. They assassinate people going against them (eg. JFK), faked the moon landing and poison the water supply to keep the population weak willed aso.
2) Neo-feudalistic elites, a mix of billionaires, politicians and the previously mentioned security services. They meet at Bilderberg to perform satanic rituals, work together in the trilateral commission, and might all be lizard people.
Now both of those obviously contain a kernel of truth, both the unaccountability of intelligence agencies, on more than one occasion used even against the american population, as well as these neo-feudal, elitist structures are anti-democratic. But that's a whole other topic, the interesting bit. is that over the last 10 years or so, also with the rise of QAnon, the idea of the "deep state" has been reframed to basically mean "professional bureaucracy".
What was once the topic of cynical comedy in "Yes minister", is now phrased as an existential threat to democracy - ironically and cynically by people who openly admit to wanting to create a fully neo-feudal society.
It is not obvious to this observer that either of your claims contain any truth whatsoever, let alone a mere "kernel." In fact, to this observe, both of these claims seem quite ludicrous
Regarding intelligence services: There's a very long history of CIA misconduct, including spying, abusing and murdering Americans.[0] As well as an abundance of human rights abuses, which aren't, but should be a big issue in American discourse. NSA up in everyone's business is basically the same. [1] We like to claim China is a totalitarian state, but their surveillance is less sophisticated than ours.
Regarding the second point, I don't believe in satanic rituals or lizard people, but it is crazy that democratically elected officials go party with billionaires, european aristocrats and IC people in extremely secretive venues. The networking organizations consistently place them in important positions afterwards regardless of merit or preferences of the electorate. This leads to a neo-feudal class of elites and their sycophants, which is deeply anti-democratic.
Due to my background, I know quite a few of these people, and they are frankly disgusting. The amount of slime, butt-lickery and unearned pathos you have to endure at an "elite" party is just making my skin crawl.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CIA_controversies#
>it is crazy that democratically elected officials go party with billionaires, european aristocrats and IC people in extremely secretive venues. The networking organizations consistently place them in important positions afterwards regardless of merit or preferences of the electorate. This leads to a neo-feudal class of elites and their sycophants, which is deeply anti-democratic.
How, then, is Trump-Musk not the Deep State?
Because they're not part of that class - indeed that class hates them. Trump eats his steaks well done for goodness' sake. They might get invited to the parties now, but they certainly didn't up until a few years back. The elite class fell over themselves disassociating from Trump and Musk (or rather never had that association in the first place).
Trump is a democratically elected offical; Musk is a billionaire. They are literally part of that class. It is astonishing that you are trying to claim the opposite of things that are obviously true, and frankly, part of the very problem with Trump's administrations ("alternative facts") and Elon Musk (Nazi salute followed by an attempt to gaslight the planet).
Shame on you for such a blatant lie.
Trump is an extremely atypical democratically elected official, Musk is an extremely atypical billionaire, they are not part of that social class.
Maybe try to make an effort to understand what people are telling you rather than leaping to accusations and attempts at shaming. (That's assuming you actually want to understand, of course)
They are on some level fighting the deep state, but only to replace some minority interests with their own - and completely subvert democracy to create a neo-feudal plutocracy. People who voted for them as a solution to anti-democratic, elitist corruption are complete fools.
This type of religious fervor following these two people is what concerns me the most. Trump and Musk are the deep state if such a thing even exists. The only thing they care about are themselves. When Musk details and cuts all government funding to his companies and Trump stops openly taking bribes, then maybe we can have a conversation about whose interests they care about.
What are you trying to say? Trump was elected as close to directly as it gets, and is doing what he said he would. The people can - and did! - vote him out.
unconstitutionally
It's more the Musk, Thiel, Vance Group. Trump is simply a tool.
This is what actual schizophrenia looks like.
And it's not as though the pre-smartphone Internet was majority Republican, of course—quite the opposite, if anything!
Its "End the Fed"
But he and others (including his son Rand, and Bernie Sanders) have also used the phrase “Audit The Fed” repeatedly as well, for various “Federal Reserve Transparency Acts”[0] over the years, since 2009—including a bipartisan one with Senator Grassley just this past November.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Transparency_A...
Obviously this kid would reasonably expect to get a pardon for any law he breaks anyway so long as he breaks it in service of the cult.
The details about cybercrime discords involved in SWATting and DDOS attacks are fascinating.
The idea that anyone involved in this would be fast-tracked for a clearance is beyond the pale.