21 Comments
User's avatar
β­  Return to thread
No Sympathy, No Charity's avatar

People are going to have a tough time hearing this, especially in our little corner of a capitalist country. But at this point, Elon is a national security risk and we need to remove SpaceX from his control. Not to mention, subsidizing this bigot seems like a poor use of our tax dollars.

Expand full comment
Walternate πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΉπŸ‡ΌπŸ‡©πŸ‡°πŸ‡¬πŸ‡±πŸ‡²πŸ‡½πŸ‡΅πŸ‡¦'s avatar

As much as I prefer freedom whenever possible and to limit state interference in private affairs, I feel like it shouldn't be legal for any private entity, especially a single person, to have total control over any crucial technology, service, material, etc. vital to national security. I don't know where to draw the line and I'd be weary of abuse via arbitrary declarations of risk, but surely there's a point where government involvement is required; somewhere between, say, starting a lemonade stand and control over the internet of a foreign ally during an existential war, or, perhaps being entrusted to put US intelligence and infrastructure satellites in space. If said person is also a fanboy of our authoritarian adversaries, all the more reason for intervention. Sadly, it's all irrelevant if we elect such a person to the presidency.

Expand full comment
Ryan Groff's avatar

I 100% agree. I think the debate evolves around nationalizing a private company. If we do it to him. Then it might open pandora.

Expand full comment
Travis's avatar

If USG contracts were only issued to companies whose CEOs are paid no more than 100x their lowest-level employee (includes passive income from shares held), you'd either see SpaceX losing its contract status or Elon living much more humbly.

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

Bond villain Hugo Drax never had a security clearance; Elon Musk shouldn't either.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Nov 16, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

Michael Cohen makes a case for Trump to not go to jail, but be under some kind of solitary house arrest. Trump has been exposed to a lot of national security information and will sell that knowledge to whomever for his benefit. Given the examples from the classified documents case, I would tend to agree.

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

Spandau?

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

Unfortunately, it has been demolished.

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

Spandau a Lago?

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

Could be. He can roam the hallways all by himself. That's is, if he will still own this or any of his properties after his fraud trial. Supermax in Colorado, perhaps. There are multitudes of options.

Expand full comment
knowltok's avatar

Rebuild it and get Germany to pay for it!

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

My requirements is for Trump to live alone (with monthly visiting privileges by close family members only, at best), a landline that only goes to the warden, and no access to anything golf-related in any way.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Living alone where? Any place but confinement is open to misuse by TFG and his minions and would-be Jonestowners. It is also easier to guard him in a facility designed for that purpose than a re-purposed suite at Mirage a Loco.

Expand full comment
Hortense's avatar

I am agnostic as to location and nature of confinement. Just Trump alone, no free access or communication with anyone else, no golf of any kind. If he is allowed to stay at Mar-A-Lago, then it ceases to be a social club. If it's Trump Tower, then the elevator is locked out so that he can't leave. It can be anywhere in the world. Maybe his own space station.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

The problem with "anywhere in the world" is that the Secret Service is legally bound to "protect" him there, meaning they have to have food, lodging, etc. A prison near the home of the agents, or at least some of them, should reduce that burden on the taxpayer. You KNOW that TFG would try to get them to stay at one of "his" properties to continue to rip us off.

Expand full comment
Tim Coffey's avatar

I think what should happen is Elon's security clearance getting revoked. If you look at how USG defines adverse information, his behavior and his connections to foreign adversaries meet that criteria.

Expand full comment
No Sympathy, No Charity's avatar

This would be the bare minimum in my opinion

Expand full comment
Travis's avatar

^he's right you know

Expand full comment