Does Musk have a security clearance? Has he accessed documents for programs that he hasn't been read in? I would go to jail if I did the latter. Our country's security is being compromised and no one is doing anything.
this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2025
313 points (96.2% liked)
politics
19777 readers
3726 users here now
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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I really hope what she has to say is "In hindsight, I sure was wrong about having a private email server and using it for government work. I don't know why, but it took me until Elon Musk started running private servers at government offices to realize that only fully vetted government servers should be used on government networks."
But, that's probably not it.
You mean the Hillary Clinton who said that it was okay to have different public versus private opinions on things, as an elected official, who got PAID to give speeches to wall Street, who used her influence to get the apparatchiks of the party to tip the scales in 2016 to ensure that SHE would be the nominee instead of an anti neo liberal who could have put up an amazing contrast to djt instead of her neoliberal centrism? The one who insisted that SHE needed to be president, and who very much helped us to get into the situation we find ourselves in today? Oh, cool. I am very much interested in what she has to say, because of course she holds the interests of the country above her own
who said that it was okay to have different public versus private opinions on things, as an elected official
I mean, I actually agree with this in theory. An elected official may not personally agree with something, even if they’re willing to vote it in. That’s just the nature of politics, because a representative should actually represent the people who voted them in, even if they don’t agree with every single fine detail. Sure, it’s worth examining whether their private opinions are affecting their public voting record. But at least in theory, there’s nothing wrong with voting differently than what your personal opinion would dictate.
For instance, what if a closeted racist gets voted in, but votes for DEI initiatives because it’s what their voter base would want? Sure, that’s a rare example, but it would be possible and should even be encouraged in that instance. In practice, it’s more likely that the closeted racist would get elected and then try to enact racist policies that align with their racist views. But at least on paper, the idea of “representatives shouldn’t have to agree with every single thing they vote for” is sound.
Why is Hillary posting on X. These people need to go over to BlueSky
You spelled Mastodon with almost none of the right letters.
Because she needs the center right folks to see her posts
This is great. Yes, I hate Hillary with the white hot heat of seven suns too.
We need anyone with influence to be shining a light on this. She will reach a portion of the people that aren’t following reason. Hell, I applauded Joe fucking Rogan for a critical piece on Trump.
We’re stronger united.
When you "unite" with certain people you become weaker
Rogan was critical of trump? The fuck? He helped get the fucker elected.
Oh he’s awful alright. He’s a notoriously soft interviewer who gives his large platform to misinformation, but he also pressed Trump over “having the election stolen,” and agreed to disagree.
That doesn’t mean anything to you or me, but it may add uncertainty to a brain dead Rogan/Trump follower.
I also believe he cancelled on Kamala. Apparently she did agree to an interview and then he dropped her over "scheduling issues" but still had Trump come on.
Because Elon told him to
Daddy said he had to choose
O wow, I didn't watch the interview and have no intention to. I used to watch him when he had people like NDT and other science related people.
Even those can be a rough watch. Neil has a bad habit of speaking with conviction on topics outside his expertise, and Rogan just sits there saying “wow.”
That's true, I have noticed NDT likes to step outside his field of study but at least he isn't trying to politically motivate people to vote for fascist. So yea he has his flaws but at least he is pushing people towards science.
Oh good, problem solved. Everyone can quit worrying now by golly.
Username checks out
It's interesting how no matter what level of depravity the Republicans are doing currently and how many news outlets are talking about it ad naseum, Microwave always finds the angles that pit progressives against liberals and centrists. He's more transparent than Kanye's date's dress at the grammys.
Is it really incitement just to post an article featuring the Democratic nominee from 2016? The connection to email servers is relevant.
Hmm gee why would anyone post articles that are vaguely negative about the Democratic establishment. Right now they're fighting the blatent corruption going on in our country by doing:
Don't forget all the things they did to protect federal workers like:
But of course you can't forget the ways they got popular policy enacted when their man was in office. Policy like:
It could be that Microwave is seeking such takes out because he's trying to control the conversation in that way, or it could be that such takes are the easiest to find because the mainstream media is trying to control the conversation in that way.
You opened that door.
view more: next ›