Supreme Court shockingly sides with Jack Smith on a January 6 case
Supreme Court shockingly sides with Jack Smith on a January 6 case
The Supreme Court has told Elon Musk to buzz off.
The Supreme Court has told Elon Musk to buzz off.
The Supreme Court refused Monday to hear an appeal from Elon Musk’s X Corp. on the company’s claim that special counsel Jack Smith took an unlawful deep dive into Donald Trump’s social media account without notifying the former president.
X Corp. begged the Supreme Court in July to determine under what circumstances a tech company can be compelled to turn over information on its users, while being prevented from alerting those users that they’re being investigated.
…
When X Corp. challenged the order, it was found in contempt and fined $350,000. Prosecutors argued that notifying Trump of the search would endanger the evidence.
🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/
Boy…. Musk sure is simping hard for the turdmonger.
Probably should check his bank accounts for rubles
It seems to me that Musk is trying to get deeper into politics, and one way to do that is to be a part of Trump’s cabinet. So I’d imagine he is bootlicking for the role. And it’s probably working.
Two of his largest businesses depend on the US government being friendly to him. Space X and Telsa. The grift is in plain sight. “Please keep buying my rockets, and please don’t make life hard for EV manufacturers.”
Always have and always will. Tesla is barely a car company, they're a company that sells EV carbon credits to other car companies, that happens to also sell cars
Yeah, specifically when you consider Elon's troubling interference about the use of his Starlink during the Russo-Ukrainian war. Potentially hobbling the Ukrainians to the benefit of the Russians.
I want to be clear about the situation. He made them agree that StarLink wouldn't be used for offensive operations. (As though any operation is offensive in a fully defensive war.)
When it came time to attack Russian ships, Elon wouldn't extend the operational range.
Because, you know, apparently it's not fair to go attack the Russian navy before it attacks you... in an ongoing war.
Hobbling is a good way to put it. It's not quite sabotage, but it sure as hell wasn't great.
Musk did seem to lurch to the right after his meeting with Putler
I don’t necessarily think this is a boon. I mean this time is against people i hate, and that’s cool. Just as long as the government can be trusted not to abuse their power.
This was my takeaway as well. They're not agreeing with Smith for any reason other than this nets them more discretionary power.
X Corp. begged the Supreme Court in July to determine under what circumstances a tech company can be compelled to turn over information on its users, while being prevented from alerting those users that they’re being investigated.
Ah, after reading the headline I was wondering what motive could be so ulterior that it could override the MAGA Justices' [sic] corrupt compulsion to help Trump. Yep, putting gag orders on services while investigating their users is nefarious enough to fit that bill.
Just to be clear here, if there's anybody who eminently deserves to be fucked over by secret subpoenas, it's Trump. But despite that political expediency serving the good guys (for once), it's still a bad precedent.
This isn't the NSA snooping on your private conversations because it's a day ending in a y.
This is a search for corroborating evidence against someone credibly accused of inciting a fucking insurrection done with reasonable suspicion, court order, the works.
As for the "gag order" part, Trump is known to routinely delete evidence and there's no doubt that Musk would warn him to do so if it didn't put himself in legal jeopardy.
Tl;Dr: you're comparing apples and hand grenades.
The NSA were looking through our webcams. Donnie committed a felony on live television. Hope this helps you spot the difference.
CNN - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for CNN:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceNew Republic - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for New Republic:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
