Government contractor to set spending of government. Nothing wrong with that at face value at...all...
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I'm a Republican who KNOWS the Deep State is out to Get Me and THAT'S why I'm Voting for the Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein Friend who's Bankrolled by the RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD! Because they OBVIOUSLY will Drain The Swamp!
I hope his ROI on this is worse than his Twitter purchase.
The value of twitter was what he is using it for.. the money is irrelevant.
Start referring to trump as President Musk. That’ll sour the milk fast.
There's no way Musk owns Trump ... Putin would never sell him.
It's a time share
No, Putin has a controlling interest in the stock (and is unlikely to sell enough to lose that controlling percentage), but he did sell Elon a significant interest in Trump.
Trump's niece doesn't know anything more than the rest of us. And, even if Trump did "promise" Musk a key government role, we all know how likely he is to keep his promises.
But, what Musk is doing is clever, though evil. He's ingratiating himself to Trump. If Trump is elected, he won't consider Musk an enemy which is absolutely key, and might throw Musk a bone. If Harris is elected, she'll govern using traditional norms and values, which means not vindictively prosecuting people who helped her political opponent, even a guy who went right up to the line of what's legal in trying to get Trump elected.
Heads Musk wins. Tails he doesn't lose.
If Harris is elected, she'll govern using traditional norms and values
You're right, but it probably also means she'll keep FTC chair Lina Khan as chair of the FTC. As chair she's been aggressive, in a good way. Musk and the FTC haven't gotten along much over the past few years and I expect with more time the FTC with Khan in charge will cause problems for Musk, who continues to violate obvious laws and regulations.
So tails probably isn't just doesn't lose, it's probably a real loss.
Ms. Khan has been chair of the FTC since 2021. When did she start aggressively pursuing big business illegal activities, and why are we only hearing about them this year?
- From Dec 2022, https://www.npr.org/2022/12/08/1141613281/ftc-microsoft-activision-blizzard
- From July 2023, https://apnews.com/article/republicans-ftc-khan-technology-companies-41610756160e10732f7ded6c587cec0e
- From Jan 2024, https://apnews.com/article/ftc-antitrust-inquiry-openai-chatgpt-microsoft-anthropic-google-amazon-67feef411ef311f0be543f546ef34b3d
As a few quick examples of the work (not necessarily success).
Wikipedia probably has a better outline, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Trade_Commission#Biden_administration
I'm assuming we're hearing about it more since it's an election year.
I admit I'm far from an expert on the subject and position. I didn't follow much until I saw her interview with Jon Stewart on The Daily Show, https://youtu.be/oaDTiWaYfcM
Thank you, I look forward to reading those sources.
You’re right, but it probably also means she’ll keep FTC chair Lina Khan as chair of the FTC
I really hope so, but we'll see. There has been a lot of pressure from rich democratic donors to dump her.
I admit it is a hope and not a guarantee. However I also learned that unless the President takes an active role and nominates someone (and they are confirmed), then the current member can just continue in their role as an acting member/chair.
So depending on the political climate, Khan may be able to just quietly continue her work.
The best thing about Khan is that there's nothing quiet about her work.
Oh I agree. By quietly I just mean without undue political interference.
I upvoted because you're probably right but I hate both you and myself for it.
A tech billionaire responsible for creating the laws his own companies run under? What could go wrong.
lol, that picture can't be real. Look at that https://static.independent.co.uk/2024/10/09/20/GettyImages-2176083179.jpg?quality=75&width=640&auto=webp
Conservative hegemony is just one cock sleeve after another.
What a fugly couple of mugs. Why do popular bad people look like that as they obviously obsessed with their own image? I remember Zuckerberg had something for a particular roman politician thus maintaining this weird hair thing, but then we have OpenAI guy who looks like he's one of Dexter's villains, and also these guys. Are they intentionally working on their Dr Evil persona or what? It's not that they should be visually pleasuring to me, like no one, but with my small sample size and bias it seems to me that it's some trend.
Sam Bankman Fried wanted FTX headquarters to look like his hair.
I've got hair like his.
Just not on my head.
What. I need some time to process it.