Musk's lawyer asks the SEC to quit pestering the shy and retiring billionaire Ever in the sights of the SEC, Elon Musk is engaged in another public spat with America's financial watchdog, this time in the form of a letter from the billionaire's lawyer published on X (better known as Twitter). Musk shared the letter from his brief, Alex Spiro, to SEC boss Gary Gensler on the tycoon's personal social …
"Yesterday the commission staff issued a settlement demand that required Mr Musk agree within 48 hours to either accept a monetary payment or face charges on numerous counts," Spiro wrote, presumably meaning Musk could have accepted making a payment rather than receiving one.
Sounds like the SEC might be copying their ideas about law enforcement from the Bbc. Pay up, or we'll prosecute you. Maybe.
If Musk broke the law, then he should be facing the charges the SEC claim they could prosecute him for. Then, being how law is supposed to work, Musk would have the right to defend himself and might win. The SEC may be trying to circumvent the traditional due process and if Musk believes he's innocent, he could quite rightly tell the SEC to go forth and multiply. Or just 'See you in court'.
It sounds a bit.. dubious. On the one hand, the SEC might be trying to save themselves the cost of what would likely be an expensive trial. On the other, Musk has the right to a fair trial. But it has eau de fish about it, ie only giving Musk 48hrs to seek counsel on 'numerous' and unspecified counts, in what is usually a pretty complex area of law.
Then again, it's also how the US 'justice' system works. So settle now, or be taken to court, which can be unjust given defendents might not want to waste money on lawyers to fight a claim that could often have little merit.
We're missing a whole bunch of important information.
I would not be surprised if the SEC has indeed charged Musk with something, his lawyer failed to handle it, and now they want the settlement the lawyer agreed on.
I'm sure the lawyer tried to talk to Musk, and Elon waved his hand imperiously, said "settle it" and forgot about it the moment the guy was out of his office. I've seen lots of CEOs/VPs/Sr. mgmt like that.
We're missing a whole bunch of important information.I would not be surprised if the SEC has indeed charged Musk with something, his lawyer failed to handle it, and now they want the settlement the lawyer agreed on.
If they had charged Musk, then there would be records like court documents. If there had been an agreed settlement, then the claim that Musk had been given 48hrs to pay up or else would be false, and his lawyer could get in trouble for that.
It's like the old days of file sharing cases where sharp lawyers would buy lists of illegal downloaders, get John Doe court orders to match IP addresses to physical ones, then fire off a bulk mailer telling people they'd been very naughty, but could settle for only $1,000 (or more). Which works because if a percentage do settle, lawyers make money and if people are innocent, they know it'd cost them a lot more than $1,000. Might be legal, but still borders on extortion.
But if Musk is guilty of.. something, then he should be charged. The shakedown in this case is probably going to be for a lot more than $1,000 though.
These sorts of fines don't go through a court anymore than if you didn't pay your property tax on time and were assessed a late fee wouldn't.
We don't know what the alleged charges are, but they're probably more serious than say, late filing penalties. If they're allegations around stuff like securities fraud, then they would end up in court. Plus there's stuff like having to state litigation risks in company reports, if they might have a material impact on the company. But those get fun given privately held companies are a lot more opaque than publicly traded ones.
You appear to be basing your comment entirely on Musks lawyers take on the situation. We all know that everyone denies everything all of the time, so it's no real surprise what Spiro said. At least until or if he's shown to be stating "alternative facts".
You appear to be basing your comment entirely on Musks lawyers take on the situation.
If it were untrue, then surely the SEC would just deny it? Then potential fun going after the lawyer for making a false allegation. I still suggest it stinks, because it demonstrates the 2-tier justice system. Pay the demand, and all your troubles go away. Can't pay? Face the full weight of the law. See also the US and their asset forfeiture scams..
Given their policy of not directly commenting on open cases, no, they wouldn't just deny it. Of course, the article does quote another source who does deny it, though not in specifics. Maybe that other source is just lying, I can't prove they're honest, but maybe Musk's lawyer is the one who is lying. You have already come to your own conclusion about what the truth is from no more and potentially less evidence than the rest of us.
@Jellied Eel "If it were untrue, then surely the SEC would just deny it? Then potential fun going after the lawyer for making a false allegation."
What form would this denial by SEC take, a quick tweet 'Oh no we didn't' by Gary Gensler on X, followed by a Musk tweet 'Oh yes you did' poop emoji or a press release.
The lawyer was not making allegations he was demanding to know who directed those actions in a letter he emailed (private correspondence) to SEC Chair Gary Gensler. There is nothing for SEC to deny, it's for SEC's lawyers to respond to the letter from Musk's lawyer. I am sure SEC's lawyers reply will be confidential, well up until the point Musk tweets it.
Musk's lawyers letter was dated the 12th Dec, so don't expect SEC or their lawyers to reply the next day, within 24 hours.
There is nothing for SEC to deny, it's for SEC's lawyers to respond to the letter from Musk's lawyer.
Sure there is. They could deny the demand for money. Which they kinda have with their NCND response.
Musk's lawyers letter was dated the 12th Dec, so don't expect SEC or their lawyers to reply the next day, within 24 hours.
Why not? If the lawyer's letter is true, then the SEC expected Musk to pay up or face multiple charges, and only gave Musk 48hrs to respond. If true, that isn't a lot of time. Then again, the investigation(s) probably aren't entirely a suprise given the statement that they'd refused to co-operate with subpoenas from the SEC. And then there's possible leaks-
CNBC, on the other hand, claims to have had more success and cites an unnamed source with knowledge of the investigation who contradicted some of Spiro's claims.
But the 48hrs is up, so if SEC hasn't been paid, they can now file charges and we might learn more. And for avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending Musk, simply questioning whether this is justice, or not. Again if SEC has evidence of crimes, they should charge. If they only gave 48hrs to settle, that doesn't seem entirely reasonable given the complexities around securities law. And it doesn't seem fair if the world's 2nd richest man can buy his way out from those charges.
"Musk's lawyers letter was dated the 12th Dec, so don't expect SEC or their lawyers to reply the next day, within 24 hours.
Why not? If the lawyer's letter is true"
It's a lawyer's letter truth is not its function. The only truths there will be are ones that best support their narrative. Likewise SEC's lawyers reply will only contain truths that support their narrative. Who judges the letter true, and decides SEC has to reply in 24 hours X users, Social media?
SEC's lawyers respond to the email letter, Musk tweeting what may be a copy of the letter does not change that. Tweeting the letters your lawyer sends does not change their legal standing. Musk tweeting does not mean you now have to respond within a day.
Why would Musk's lawyer expect a next day reply, they emailed a letter to the Chair of SEC, not ordered a toaster off Amazon Prime. No lawyer would expect a next day reply, after all there is no guarantee the Chair of SEC will have even opened the the email within 24 hours.
"On the other, Musk has the right to a fair trial. But it has eau de fish about it, ie only giving Musk 48hrs to seek counsel on 'numerous' and unspecified counts, in what is usually a pretty complex area of law."
Mr E. Musk has failed to appear several times after being subpoenaed/summon/invited to explain himself. Apparently, it wasn't convenient for Mr Private jet flies 100 miles instead of driving due to traffic. If he had appeared, he would have a chance to make an argument for not receiving fines for non-disclosure of material information regarding his stock purchases before he purchased Twitter. Very simply, if you buy more than a certain percentage of the outstanding stock in a publicly traded company, you are required to fill out some forms. Any broker in the US will send you a notice if you made that amount of purchases through them. Even I know this and I'm far from having the sort of money to be able to buy that much stock.
If he had appeared, he would have a chance to make an argument for not receiving fines for non-disclosure of material information regarding his stock purchases before he purchased Twitter.
This is just more speculation and we have no idea what the SEC's beef might be, other than it might be related to Neuralink. Plus there's potential lawfare, ie demanding Musk respond to subpoenas could just be a timewasting exercise. Sure, deposing Musk at a time and place of the SEC's choosing might have some legal weight, but if the SEC has questions, fire them off to Musk's lawyers to deal with. People can take the 5th (hic) and refuse to attend, and then the SEC can charge based on what they have, or go forth and multiply. Much the same with fining for non-disclosure. If the SEC thinks there's a penalty, then they can just issue the fine, Musk could appeal it, El Reg can write another article about Musk, and the rest of us can sit back and eat more popcorn.
"This is just more speculation and we have no idea what the SEC's beef might be, other than it might be related to Neuralink."
There have been official statements that the fines were for non-disclosure of Twitter stock purchases prior to the buyout. The Neuralink issues are separate.
There have been official statements that the fines were for non-disclosure of Twitter stock purchases prior to the buyout.
Where? This is the problem with fake news. An official statement would be something on the SEC's website. Otherwise all we still have is speculation, hearsay and anonymous sources say.. Which aren't official statements. I (well, someone with deeper pockets) could say that an anonymous FWS source said that unless Gensler donated $10m to the FWS's home for wayward goats, he'd face 34 counts of animal molestation.
But as El Reg put it-
"Yesterday the commission staff issued a settlement demand that required Mr Musk agree within 48 hours to either accept a monetary payment or face charges on numerous counts,"
Charges and counts. Not fines. Plea deals and plea bargaining is normal (or abnormal, if you're a Biden), but aren't necessarily justice. Spiro's a lawyer, they're generally specific with language, so if they were fines, he could/should have said 'face numerous fines'.
There's nothing wrong with a legal process offering a settlement before going to a full trial. We do it all the time with fixed penalty notices in the UK and other such fines. "Pay this amount and its all finished with, or you can go to court".
You are also taking what Musk has said as gospel, and he has repeatedly, well, let's just say "stretched the truth". Which, coincidentally is what has put him in the SEC's sights at least once.
There's nothing wrong with a legal process offering a settlement before going to a full trial. We do it all the time with fixed penalty notices in the UK and other such fines.
You, along with most of the downvoters are missing the point.
So the claim is essentially pay up, or face charges. Let my try an analogy. You bring me the head of the SEC. I then say I won't prosecute you for murder if you pay, say, $100m So a 2-tier justice system where the rich and shameless can settle to make crimes go away, and the less wealthy can't. Then there's the claim that there was only 48hrs notice to make a decision. FPNs are rather different given legislation permits that as a disposal route and specifies it as a penalty option. I also think they're equally unfair given they're priced in such a way to tempt people to pay the penalty rather than challenge the decisions.
You are also taking what Musk has said as gospel, well, let's just say "stretched the truth"
Not me, because I've repeatedly said 'we don't know', and that if the SEC believes Musk is guilty of something, then they should charge and argue the case(s) in court. Maybe they're not very confident, hence the pressure to decide in only 48hrs. But others have suggested they're fines, in which case SEC just issues the fine(s) and then Musk has the right to appeal those, but again we just don't know. But people are happily allowing their own prejudices to shape their opinions, ie Musk has 'stretched the truth' in the past, therefore he must be guilty of something.. But that's up to the courts to decide. But it's been >48hrrs, and doesn't seem to be any new news, which can also be a problem with settlements given they're often confidential.
"So the claim is essentially pay up, or face charges. "
If you don't pay government fines, at some point bad things happen. If you don't pay taxes, the government will figure out what you owe themselves and then come take all of the assets they find in your name. There's no court trial in the US in that instance. The IRS has been granted the power to do it in advance. You can file in court against them, but you will have to show that no tax was due, you filed the appropriate paperwork (on time), etc. The downside to getting assistance for doing your taxes in the US from the IRS is they don't guarantee anything they tell you. If they give you bad advice, you have to pay the fines so it's better to hire an accountant that has a written guarantee that their advice is solid. Chances are that they'll know more than some government drone that can't be fired.
The SEC works a bit differently than the IRS and other US governmental agencies can be different as well. If you get fined by the SEC, you can contest it in court and if you lose, you have to pay the entire statutory fine. What can often happen is the SEC will make an initial offer for a reduced fine in exchange for some conditions, often excluding making no admission of guilt so the settlement can't be used in a subsequent case. They are trying to avoid going to court since that takes ages and costs loads in attorney fees. Yes, it's the government and they have endless money to pay blood sucking lawyers, but there all sorts of budget wrangling, headcount limitations and it pulls staff off of doing other tasks so it's faster and less costly to settle and move on.
Because I'm starting to think it is the other way around. Trump publicly lowers himself to Musk the way he does to Putin, so either he sees Musk as his boss or Musk has some sort of dirt on him (again just like Putin) that gives him no choice.
Though I struggle to guess what could be bad enough that Trump would be worried about having it go public. He's had affairs with porn stars go public, even including descriptions of his tiny mushroom dick, he's had all his crimes aired out in indictments, and everything seems to make his followers believe in him more. If for example it became known that Trump had once personally murdered someone I think his followers would get a hard on over it and love him even more. What would he feel he had to hide? An affair with another man?
Because I'm starting to think it is the other way around. Trump publicly lowers himself to Musk the way he does to Putin, so either he sees Musk as his boss or Musk has some sort of dirt on him (again just like Putin) that gives him no choice
I've seen conspiracy theories that it's the other way around and Musk sucking up to Trump, because Trump will have the power to pardon. Which could be related to the SEC investigations, and the prospect of the Empire of X imploding in a way that could make Enron & Theranos look like a bounced cheque. Or Musk having to deconflict himself in the same way Dick Cheney didn't might give Musk some plausible deniability as he'd stepped aside before the implosion, so it wasn't his fault.
Yes the pardon power is a big one too and if Musk knows he's broken the law at some point or would be willing to do so if he had a pardon in hand it could be the other way around.
I'm sure regardless of who holds MORE power in the relationship it is a two way street. Trump gives Musk direct access to the power of the government, and Musk has nearly unlimited wealth with which to bribe Trump (since no one is enforcing the emoluments clause, and Trump having his own cryptocoin provides a simple route for bribery that's effectively "legal" because who is to say Musk buying a Trump coin for $1 billion is bribery...maybe it was just a bad investment)
I still think that there's a sort of Pauli exclusion principle for overinflated egos, and the two can't stay in the same close orbit for very long before things fall apart.
I still think that there's a sort of Pauli exclusion principle for overinflated egos, and the two can't stay in the same close orbit for very long before things fall apart.
Yep. But Trump has never been shy about firing people. Also the ThunderF00t video got me thinking about egos with the 'DOGE' poster. Robert Downey Jnr modeled Tony Stark on Musk. The DOGE poster looks like Musk is trying to model himself on RDJ. Plus it made the point that DOGE kinda duplicates the US Government Accounting Office, so maybe Trump should dodge DOGE and just give the GAO more resources and powers to hold other Federal agencies to account.
just give the GAO more resources and powers to hold other Federal agencies to account
Congress has the power of the purse, not the president, so they can't cut legitimately allocated spending. To the extent they find actual "waste, fraud and abuse" sure they can address that by prosecuting the people who are defrauding the government. But republicans have consistently stood against giving the IRS more resources to go after tax cheats, even though they return over $3 for every $1 they spend.
I doubt even the most dyed in the wool MAGA supporter truly believes that Trump wants to stop people from defrauding the government if they're "his people". Most of the PPP fraud (amounting to hundreds of billions) was by republican donors - and in at least one case republican members of the house, and the republican congress has thrown up multiple roadblocks against the Biden administration trying to claw back those funds. Very much doubt Trump's GAO is going to continue to go after on his side, and the rest would be able to get the government off their back with a bribe via buying Trump coins or whatever.
What Musk wants to do with DOGE isn't eliminate waste and fraud, he wants to recommend cuts to legit programs that he doesn't like. Which is basically everything except for corporate welfare which he has benefited from to the tune of many billions. So goodbye aid to the poor, Musk doesn't care about them. Cuts to social security and medicare? Will sound great to him, he doesn't need it. Trump likes having him there because he can take all the attacks, he can push and threaten republicans to approve the cuts, and if it gets on his desk Trump will sign it while disclaiming responsibility for the wildly unpopular cuts it will contain.
Congress has the power of the purse, not the president, so they can't cut legitimately allocated spending.
I'm not suggesting the GAO's budget is cut, I'm suggesting it should perhaps have more funding and resources so it can hold Federal government to account. DoD hasn't been able to reconcile their budget for nearly a decade, yet somehow manages to find billions to give to Ukraine.. I mean US defence contractors. Or just the billions that have been poured into Ukraine with no accountability.
But republicans have consistently stood against giving the IRS more resources to go after tax cheats, even though they return over $3 for every $1 they spend.
But why bother when Biden can just give tax cheats a blanket immunity from prosecution, along with a get out of jail free card for any crimes committed since 2014? Perhaps a more efficient solution would be to simplify the tax code so there are fewer ways to cheat? Wouldn't that be more.. efficient? But that's just right-thinking, ie wanting a smaller, more efficient and less expensive government.
Then there could be other things to investigate. So the DoJ's Inspector General just released another report into Jan 6th. It found that the FBI had 23 CI's inside and outside the Capitol that somehow managed to evade prosecution, despite being involved in the 'insurrection'. Which also means FBI Director Wray lied to Congress, or was.. flexible with the truth when he claimed there were no FBI agents at the protests. That may explain the mysterious Mr Epps, who was on video inciting protestors, but escaped prosecution. It doesn't explain why, if the CI's were providing actionable intelligence, the FBI, Pelosi, the Capitol Police failed to act. Or why Trump's offer of NG resources was approved. Wray has tendered his resignation, but not sure if Kesh Patel can reject that and fire him instead, or just prosecute him for perjury and maybe offences under the Hatch Act. But then Biden has floated the idea that his helpers might also get Hunter-style get out of jail free cards.
Or the Fed just announced another set of revised employment figures that basically reversed Biden's claim of increases in employment. Funny how that happened in an election year.
Nah it's because Elon isn't on the verge of bankruptcy unlike capt tangerine, has a social network that *some* people inexplicably continue to use and he who pays the piper calls the tune.....
Musk might be.. But it's hard to tell given the X web is mostly private, apart from TSLA. So X has accumulated an unknown amount of debt, and most of the businesses probably aren't profitable. So take Starlink for example. It's spent an enormous amount of money on satellite launches and ground infrastructure, and a relatively small amount of revenue from subscriptions. But a lot of that debt (and Musk's personal net worth) is based on TSLA stock, and a lot of that would have been pledged as security against loans.
That could then lead to the dreaded margin calls, if TSLA's stock price swings the wrong way. Or possibly if Musk can't get his ludicrous pay/bonus deal approved & doesn't get new stock. Musk is weird like that given his X's can & do move the market and change his fortunes by a few billion either way.. But if that's intentional, risks the wrath of the SEC, courts and the kind of stuff that got Ebbers and Enron into a lot of trouble. But there's also the rumored SpacX IPO which would give Musk and other investors the chance to cash out. And reveal more info about SpacX's current and projected financials.
ThunderF00t just dropped a video sorta about this-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0uFO6BjWSs
Making much about the $3bn in taxpayer's money that's been spent on HLS, and boots on the Mun are long overdue. Which is kind of interesting when put into context. So progress on Starship and HLS has so far cost less than one year's tax payer funding of the Bbc. Which is one of those spending priority things for goverments to ponder, ie the UK could scrap the Bbc and start a space race with Musk. Are stories like "Robbie Williams on why he's played by a chimp in new film" more important than say, planting the Union flag on the Moon, along with figuring out how to make a decent cup of tea in space?
"So progress on Starship and HLS has so far cost less than one year's tax payer funding of the Bbc."
Yes, but the Beeb has delivered product. Some good, some not so good, but it's not a complete trainwreck.
SpaceX might be able to spin off Starlink if it can be said to make a profit with a straight face and taking into account that launches will be at retail price, not cost. To take the entirety of SpaceX public would mean meeting SEC regulations and financial disclosures. It would also mean shareholders having a say about trips to Mars, etc.
SpaceX might be able to spin off Starlink if it can be said to make a profit
I think that unlikely, especially as Starlink's already launching replacements for the older birds that have fallen from the sky, and so far, all Starship has managed to launch is a banana.
"I think that unlikely, especially as Starlink's already launching replacements for the older birds that have fallen from the sky, and so far, all Starship has managed to launch is a banana."
It doesn't take a lot of math to rough out where Starlink might be as a business and what they have to bring to break even. The quoted build out of satellites is 42,000 with an expected 5 year lifespan. Ignoring premature deaths, that's a replacement cadence of 24 sats per day. The Falcon 9 has space and performance for around 20 Starlink sats which means launches have to run a bit over 1 per day. The Falcon 9 heavy can lift more weight, but it's volume that's the real pinch point. If there was any question of why Elon is pushing so hard on Starship, there ya go. He needs something that can take the volume and mass and be able to be reused to make the Starlink project a goer. Nobody else is clamoring for a 100t lift vehicle that can launch a dozen times or more per year. Once every 5 years, maybe. With a twice per decade need, reuse doesn't make any financial sense.
Musk cries whenever anything gets in his way. He thinks he's entitled to do anything and everything the way he wants it, regardless of the law. If he wouldn't violate securities regulations all the time the SEC would leave him alone.
He wants wants wants like a spoiled brat. I wish he'd just get his ass to Mars already.
Actually no.
I mostly followed Musk for SpaceX and that has been very impressive*. People had long suspected cost models for new rockets were broken. He proved it.
I didn't have a Twitter account but since the takeover and his whining about his plane being tracked he does start to come across as the a bit of an overbearing man-child.
I really do think his child's transition (or rather his complete inability to handle it) sent him right off the deep end into his SEL quest against the "Woke mind virus." "Dark" MAGA indeed. :-(
Sad and dangerous.
*Not without the substantial assistance of Gwynn Shotwell, formerly of Detroit and Microcosm launch vehicles.
Sure, cos angry woke / democrats / anyone with another point of view never vent their spleen on X ever? Give it a rest.
You got to chuckle him making so many people whinge into their keyboards like on this thread.
None of this SEC spat has any impact to anyone on this thread, but how many want to type little angry toxic remarks into the computers.
You should log into Bluecry, you can join in the shared toxicity. How liberating. How fun.
Grok AI bot of a snail wearing a suit that he [Musk] said was the result of his asking it to "draw a picture of Gary Gensler."
A whole adminstration that ought to spend the next fifty months on the naughty step.
From the archives of "being careful of what you ask for," requesting Grok to generate an image of Musk might visualise Space Karen as an overbearing, oversized and overfed garden slug* with a Tesla T as a (forked) tongue.
* which is essentially an exceedingly thin skinned snail sans suit.
There's an entire timeline of transformation, though it reads very much like a catalogue of things money can't buy. If money is really all you have on your side, that must be quite frustrating.
You are right that shaming someone for things they have no control over is bad taste. With Musk there is, however, obviously still the entire series of gender affirming treatment (from hair to jawline) he went through to look the way he does now. That is a choice and that is open to ridicule. That Musk is so thin-skinned makes that all the more appealing.
Perhaps it would better if Leftists simply went away from this (previously) TECHNICAL website with their juvenile diatribe.
Elon Musk is like a Red Rag to a leftist & I simply wish they would send to > /dev/null their juvenile diatribe *or* be constructive for once.
Perhaps they are jealous that Elon will get to Mars whilst they are stuck in their Mums basement !
Ho ho.
Leon has a new pal in Nigel Farage. The "Man of the paypal" as British readers like to think of him.
It must be so nice for a man who makes so much use of it for anonymous donations to his company "Party"* to be able to thank the man who made it all possible.
Although Richard "Obi" Tice is nominally in charge of licking it into shape. I'm sure a man who was so close to the CofE's John Smyth will know all about effective discipline. Without leaving any lasting marks.
For me, day one was the way he treated Vernon Unsworth. When the "Funding secured" tweet was followed by a complete lack of supporting evidence I started digging. Everywhere I looked told the same disappointing story: x.com/paypal, SolarCity, Full Self Driving... I was amazed Musk had not got into serious trouble for securities fraud. Since then, he went thoroughly and consistently down hill to the point that I am no longer disappointed. My expectations are too low for that to happen any more.
Musk's petulant whining about the trivial wrist slaps he gets from the SEC are a strong trigger. If he had any sort of case against the SEC it would be presented in court filings. Posting on X means he needs validation from his supporters and knows he is not going to get it anywhere else.
The good news is that if Musk does get all the 'useless regulations' removed he will be able to operate X as a bank. Please please sign up to the Register with a fake name and tell us when you have given him control of all your money. If you remain anonymous us Leftists will not know if we are laughing at the right coward.
Feels weird to meet someone else a fan of thinking.
I went down the rabbithole on Musk after the "pedoguy" incident trying to find shit on the diver as well and came to the same conclusion on Musk. Too bad the surface level meme politics have overriden any actual thinking on whether this guy is a piece of shit.
The term you're looking for is democrats
The FOCF is not that of a conventional politician of any political persuasion but an autocrat.
A petulant, spiteful, greedy, stupid, thin-skinned and infinitely manipulable ("There eating the dogs," except no they weren't) wannabe "Strong man" who for several reasons has become the "leader" of the most powerful democracy on the planet and whose "Supreme" Court wants to make him a King in all but name.
Anyone who believes in a system not governed by the whims of one person and carried out by people personally loyal to that person and neither the country nor the constitution would be worried about the situation. "Leftist" or "Rightist" is rather an obsolete view IMHO. The real divide is between the democrats and the authoritarians, and both groups can be found on both sides of the aisle.
And BTW the loss of human rights in the US that started with the "Termination" of Roe V Wade will go a lot further. That will have serious implications for privacy and IT security, which is very much on-topic for this site as well.
from Trumps good books by cozying up to the President of Argentina where most of the population are living in poverty. Much like South Africa from the Apartheid era.
He is not shy and retiring. I for one will be happy when we never hear from him again once he had enough money to buy a whole country and become El Presidente for life.
Trump will get tired of him and my betting is that it will be before Easter 2025.
now if Trump was to... Get stuck a Mar-a-largo when the sea rise floods it, I would be happy.
Ooops.
Looks like a whole bunch of folks are going to have to beef up their storm windows, fit one way valves in their toilets outflow and the phrase "Airlock vestibule" will need to be taken rather more seriously in future.
Remember the FOCF does not believe in human driven climate change. The number of Cat 5 storms FLA has experienced in the last 20 years is just a "Statistical anomaly"
The number of Cat 5 storms FLA has experienced in the last 20 years is just a "Statistical anomaly"
So.. Do you actually have any evidence for any increase in either frequency or intensity that could be linked to CO2? No? Didn't think so. And by evidence, I mean actual data? Not stuff like the media (or other idiots) claiming the 'FOCF' is a 'convicted felon' or 'rapist'? That bit of fake news just cost ABC $15m.
(And in another astounding example of fake news, CNN found a Syrian 'prisoner' allegedly locked in a cell who had almost as good a manicure as CNN's chief correspondent. I hadn't realised CNN was where Mark 'Biter' Thompson had ended up, but perhaps explains a lot.)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
