Let's talk about Elon Musk

[Pete]

I mean, go look up Rex Tillerson. Sure he rough ridin' hated Trump and probably worked to wrangle Trump a little bit but that dude is a rough ridin' monster. If ever you were gonna call a former CEO a monster I mean he is the face of big oil.

It’s not like the restraints around Trump and the first administration really gave two shits about civil liberties or anything like that .

[CHONGS]

Prophet Song is probably much closer to what might actually come.

But one should read up on the words of Curtis Yarvin (aka mencius moldbug) and Peter Thiel (to begin with) to understand Musk's motivations.

[Pete]

It’s all gonna be rough ridin' fine guys. I know because I didn’t think it was gonna be fine last time and it was.

[sonofdaxjones]

No wonder Vindy was part of the “bank run”

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1887282174321152095?s=46&t=-jwPwnR3rKHM9sk9hA7h8g


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bucket]

And since he is not a genius, I don’t feel the need to automatically reject everything he does for fear that it is part of his master genius plan of evil .

It alarms me that we would hand the keys to the government to someone with questionable motives.

I really am trying to be authentic here and not be snarky or sarcastic, but you really need to read more history, my man

From my POV, this is unprecedented. What would you compare it to? Authoritarian governments, sure. Has this ended well?

Since it’s unprecedented, there’s nothing to compare it to

Are we talking about two different things? I'm talking about a government randomly giving total access to an unelected official. You seem to be discussing the comeuppance of political ideology.

[Pete]

And since he is not a genius, I don’t feel the need to automatically reject everything he does for fear that it is part of his master genius plan of evil .

It alarms me that we would hand the keys to the government to someone with questionable motives.

I really am trying to be authentic here and not be snarky or sarcastic, but you really need to read more history, my man

From my POV, this is unprecedented. What would you compare it to? Authoritarian governments, sure. Has this ended well?

Since it’s unprecedented, there’s nothing to compare it to

Are we talking about two different things? I'm talking about a government randomly giving total access to an unelected official. You seem to be discussing the comeuppance of political ideology.

Look man you said something was unprecedented. I’m just saying that if that’s the case, there’s nothing to compare it to because it’s unprecedented.

[wetwillie]

And since he is not a genius, I don’t feel the need to automatically reject everything he does for fear that it is part of his master genius plan of evil .

It alarms me that we would hand the keys to the government to someone with questionable motives.

I really am trying to be authentic here and not be snarky or sarcastic, but you really need to read more history, my man

From my POV, this is unprecedented. What would you compare it to? Authoritarian governments, sure. Has this ended well?

Since it’s unprecedented, there’s nothing to compare it to

Are we talking about two different things? I'm talking about a government randomly giving total access to an unelected official. You seem to be discussing the comeuppance of political ideology.

Was Bessent elected?

[Pete]

No wonder Vindy was part of the “bank run”

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1887282174321152095?s=46&t=-jwPwnR3rKHM9sk9hA7h8g


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Grok:

To assess the likelihood of the accuracy of the tweet by Michael Shellenberger regarding USAID and CIA involvement in Trump's 2019 impeachment, let's break down the elements and evaluate them step by step:

1. **Source Credibility**:
   - **Michael Shellenberger** is known for his work as an environmental writer and commentator. While he has made controversial statements in the past, his credibility in political analysis or investigative journalism might be less established than in his primary field of environmental issues. However, his involvement in this specific narrative could suggest access to certain information or resources.

2. **Content Analysis**:
   - **USAID's Role**: The tweet claims that USAID, known primarily for its development aid, is actually a significant player in regime change operations globally, with a budget of $40 billion. While USAID does engage in activities that could be interpreted as promoting democracy or governance reform, which might be seen as regime change in some contexts, the claim of it being a central driver of such operations is contentious. Historical evidence shows USAID has been involved in political activities abroad, like in Cuba with the "Cuban Twitter" project, but the extent and intent of these operations are debated.

   - **CIA Involvement**: The assertion of CIA involvement in domestic political actions like Trump's impeachment is significant. The CIA is legally restricted from engaging in domestic operations, which makes this claim particularly bold. However, the history of intelligence agencies overstepping their bounds exists, though usually, these are exposed through official investigations or leaks, not social media posts.

   - **Impeachment Context**: Trump's impeachment was centered around allegations of abuse of power regarding Ukraine, not directly involving USAID or the CIA in the public narrative. The whistleblower, who was a CIA analyst, reported concerns about Trump's actions, but this was within the realm of Trump's direct interactions with foreign leaders, not through agencies like USAID or CIA orchestrating events.

3. **Corroborating Evidence**:
   - The tweet references reporting by Drop Site News and mentions a documentary by German broadcaster NDR, suggesting external validation. However, without direct access to these sources, their credibility and the thoroughness of their investigations are hard to assess. Additionally, the claim of USAID and CIA's role in Trump's impeachment isn't widely reported in mainstream media or official investigations.

4. **Legal and Political Implications**:
   - If true, the involvement of USAID and CIA in domestic political manipulation would be highly illegal and would constitute a major scandal. Such actions would likely lead to significant political fallout, investigations, and possibly legal consequences. The absence of such outcomes raises questions about the veracity of these claims.

5. **Public and Expert Reaction**:
   - The replies to the tweet show a range of reactions from skepticism to support, but none provide substantive evidence or expert analysis to validate or refute the claims. Public reaction alone isn't a reliable indicator of accuracy.

6. **Historical Precedent**:
   - While there are historical precedents of intelligence agencies like the CIA engaging in covert operations abroad, domestic interference, especially in something as high-profile as a presidential impeachment, would be unprecedented in modern times without significant evidence or leaks.

**Conclusion**:
Given the analysis:
- **Low to Moderate Likelihood of Accuracy**: The claims made in the tweet are extraordinary and would require substantial evidence which has not been publicly presented or widely acknowledged. The involvement of USAID in regime change operations abroad is plausible to some extent, but the direct involvement of both USAID and the CIA in the impeachment process of a sitting US president stretches credibility without concrete evidence. The lack of official investigations or mainstream media coverage supporting these claims leans towards skepticism. However, in the realm of political intrigue, where information can be tightly controlled or obscured, one cannot dismiss the possibility entirely, but the burden of proof remains high.

[bucket]

And since he is not a genius, I don’t feel the need to automatically reject everything he does for fear that it is part of his master genius plan of evil .

It alarms me that we would hand the keys to the government to someone with questionable motives.

I really am trying to be authentic here and not be snarky or sarcastic, but you really need to read more history, my man

From my POV, this is unprecedented. What would you compare it to? Authoritarian governments, sure. Has this ended well?

Since it’s unprecedented, there’s nothing to compare it to

Are we talking about two different things? I'm talking about a government randomly giving total access to an unelected official. You seem to be discussing the comeuppance of political ideology.

Was Bessent elected?

No but unelected was a poor choice of words. I mean gaining access through established procedures and protocols.

[star seed 7]

Also for the record I don't think Elon has a master genius plan, but he's shown to be an absolute dumb crap so I'd like him away from government. He also appears to be extremely petty and vindictive, so I'd like him to be away from anything that allows him to use the government for petty and vindictive purposes. Yes, other people in the government are petty vindictive dumbshits.

The guy named his government office after a meme (for the lulz! Haha I'm so hip!), I have no idea how people take him seriously.

[Pete]

We’re gonna find out pretty soon whether or not doge is legal. my guess is that the courts are gonna find that doge is legal.

[Pete]

Also for the record I don't think Elon has a master genius plan, but he's shown to be an absolute dumb crap so I'd like him away from government. He also appears to be extremely petty and vindictive, so I'd like him to be away from anything that allows him to use the government for petty and vindictive purposes. Yes, other people in the government are petty vindictive dumbshits.

The guy named his government office after a meme (for the lulz! Haha I'm so hip!), I have no idea how people take him seriously.

I like you and you know that I like you.

But am I understanding you correctly when you say that you wanna make sure that petty and vindictive people are not in Washington ?

[star seed 7]

Also for the record I don't think Elon has a master genius plan, but he's shown to be an absolute dumb crap so I'd like him away from government. He also appears to be extremely petty and vindictive, so I'd like him to be away from anything that allows him to use the government for petty and vindictive purposes. Yes, other people in the government are petty vindictive dumbshits.

The guy named his government office after a meme (for the lulz! Haha I'm so hip!), I have no idea how people take him seriously.

I like you and you know that I like you.

But am I understanding you correctly when you say that you wanna make sure that petty and vindictive people are not in Washington ?

You're free to reread the post because I even added a sentence because I knew that would be your response.

[bucket]

Every single demographic has a better civil liberties situation right now than they have ever had in this country.

Not since January 20th

[Pete]

I am not engaging in hyperbole when I say that I think over 80% of politicians and probably closer to 90 or 95% are vindictive and petty and narcissistic and just awful.

[Pete]

The staffers for politicians might actually be worse. They get none of the benefits, the glory the fame, and in anonymity, they toil away at actually executing the horse crap

[star seed 7]

I'm going to naively disagree. I'd say it's closer to 20%, but I think we have a pretty differing view of humanity in general.

[sonofdaxjones]

No wonder Vindy was part of the “bank run”

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1887282174321152095?s=46&t=-jwPwnR3rKHM9sk9hA7h8g


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Grok:

To assess the likelihood of the accuracy of the tweet by Michael Shellenberger regarding USAID and CIA involvement in Trump's 2019 impeachment, let's break down the elements and evaluate them step by step:

1. **Source Credibility**:
   - **Michael Shellenberger** is known for his work as an environmental writer and commentator. While he has made controversial statements in the past, his credibility in political analysis or investigative journalism might be less established than in his primary field of environmental issues. However, his involvement in this specific narrative could suggest access to certain information or resources.

2. **Content Analysis**:
   - **USAID's Role**: The tweet claims that USAID, known primarily for its development aid, is actually a significant player in regime change operations globally, with a budget of $40 billion. While USAID does engage in activities that could be interpreted as promoting democracy or governance reform, which might be seen as regime change in some contexts, the claim of it being a central driver of such operations is contentious. Historical evidence shows USAID has been involved in political activities abroad, like in Cuba with the "Cuban Twitter" project, but the extent and intent of these operations are debated.

   - **CIA Involvement**: The assertion of CIA involvement in domestic political actions like Trump's impeachment is significant. The CIA is legally restricted from engaging in domestic operations, which makes this claim particularly bold. However, the history of intelligence agencies overstepping their bounds exists, though usually, these are exposed through official investigations or leaks, not social media posts.

   - **Impeachment Context**: Trump's impeachment was centered around allegations of abuse of power regarding Ukraine, not directly involving USAID or the CIA in the public narrative. The whistleblower, who was a CIA analyst, reported concerns about Trump's actions, but this was within the realm of Trump's direct interactions with foreign leaders, not through agencies like USAID or CIA orchestrating events.

3. **Corroborating Evidence**:
   - The tweet references reporting by Drop Site News and mentions a documentary by German broadcaster NDR, suggesting external validation. However, without direct access to these sources, their credibility and the thoroughness of their investigations are hard to assess. Additionally, the claim of USAID and CIA's role in Trump's impeachment isn't widely reported in mainstream media or official investigations.

4. **Legal and Political Implications**:
   - If true, the involvement of USAID and CIA in domestic political manipulation would be highly illegal and would constitute a major scandal. Such actions would likely lead to significant political fallout, investigations, and possibly legal consequences. The absence of such outcomes raises questions about the veracity of these claims.

5. **Public and Expert Reaction**:
   - The replies to the tweet show a range of reactions from skepticism to support, but none provide substantive evidence or expert analysis to validate or refute the claims. Public reaction alone isn't a reliable indicator of accuracy.

6. **Historical Precedent**:
   - While there are historical precedents of intelligence agencies like the CIA engaging in covert operations abroad, domestic interference, especially in something as high-profile as a presidential impeachment, would be unprecedented in modern times without significant evidence or leaks.

**Conclusion**:
Given the analysis:
- **Low to Moderate Likelihood of Accuracy**: The claims made in the tweet are extraordinary and would require substantial evidence which has not been publicly presented or widely acknowledged. The involvement of USAID in regime change operations abroad is plausible to some extent, but the direct involvement of both USAID and the CIA in the impeachment process of a sitting US president stretches credibility without concrete evidence. The lack of official investigations or mainstream media coverage supporting these claims leans towards skepticism. However, in the realm of political intrigue, where information can be tightly controlled or obscured, one cannot dismiss the possibility entirely, but the burden of proof remains high.

Oh Pete.

Come on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pete]

No wonder Vindy was part of the “bank run”

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1887282174321152095?s=46&t=-jwPwnR3rKHM9sk9hA7h8g


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Grok:

To assess the likelihood of the accuracy of the tweet by Michael Shellenberger regarding USAID and CIA involvement in Trump's 2019 impeachment, let's break down the elements and evaluate them step by step:

1. **Source Credibility**:
   - **Michael Shellenberger** is known for his work as an environmental writer and commentator. While he has made controversial statements in the past, his credibility in political analysis or investigative journalism might be less established than in his primary field of environmental issues. However, his involvement in this specific narrative could suggest access to certain information or resources.

2. **Content Analysis**:
   - **USAID's Role**: The tweet claims that USAID, known primarily for its development aid, is actually a significant player in regime change operations globally, with a budget of $40 billion. While USAID does engage in activities that could be interpreted as promoting democracy or governance reform, which might be seen as regime change in some contexts, the claim of it being a central driver of such operations is contentious. Historical evidence shows USAID has been involved in political activities abroad, like in Cuba with the "Cuban Twitter" project, but the extent and intent of these operations are debated.

   - **CIA Involvement**: The assertion of CIA involvement in domestic political actions like Trump's impeachment is significant. The CIA is legally restricted from engaging in domestic operations, which makes this claim particularly bold. However, the history of intelligence agencies overstepping their bounds exists, though usually, these are exposed through official investigations or leaks, not social media posts.

   - **Impeachment Context**: Trump's impeachment was centered around allegations of abuse of power regarding Ukraine, not directly involving USAID or the CIA in the public narrative. The whistleblower, who was a CIA analyst, reported concerns about Trump's actions, but this was within the realm of Trump's direct interactions with foreign leaders, not through agencies like USAID or CIA orchestrating events.

3. **Corroborating Evidence**:
   - The tweet references reporting by Drop Site News and mentions a documentary by German broadcaster NDR, suggesting external validation. However, without direct access to these sources, their credibility and the thoroughness of their investigations are hard to assess. Additionally, the claim of USAID and CIA's role in Trump's impeachment isn't widely reported in mainstream media or official investigations.

4. **Legal and Political Implications**:
   - If true, the involvement of USAID and CIA in domestic political manipulation would be highly illegal and would constitute a major scandal. Such actions would likely lead to significant political fallout, investigations, and possibly legal consequences. The absence of such outcomes raises questions about the veracity of these claims.

5. **Public and Expert Reaction**:
   - The replies to the tweet show a range of reactions from skepticism to support, but none provide substantive evidence or expert analysis to validate or refute the claims. Public reaction alone isn't a reliable indicator of accuracy.

6. **Historical Precedent**:
   - While there are historical precedents of intelligence agencies like the CIA engaging in covert operations abroad, domestic interference, especially in something as high-profile as a presidential impeachment, would be unprecedented in modern times without significant evidence or leaks.

**Conclusion**:
Given the analysis:
- **Low to Moderate Likelihood of Accuracy**: The claims made in the tweet are extraordinary and would require substantial evidence which has not been publicly presented or widely acknowledged. The involvement of USAID in regime change operations abroad is plausible to some extent, but the direct involvement of both USAID and the CIA in the impeachment process of a sitting US president stretches credibility without concrete evidence. The lack of official investigations or mainstream media coverage supporting these claims leans towards skepticism. However, in the realm of political intrigue, where information can be tightly controlled or obscured, one cannot dismiss the possibility entirely, but the burden of proof remains high.

Oh Pete.

Come on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dude, I used Grok!

[sonofdaxjones]

I do give them credit. They’re amazing at the shell game that ultimately pumps millions into their pockets.

The GOAT


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pete]

I'm going to naively disagree. I'd say it's closer to 20%, but I think we have a pretty differing view of humanity in general.

Well for sure 50% of them think that about the other 50% of them, or said differently 100% of them think that 50% of them at least are walking pieces of crap. So at a minimum, I think we should trust their own judgment. Let’s just agree on 50%.

[sonofdaxjones]

No wonder Vindy was part of the “bank run”

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1887282174321152095?s=46&t=-jwPwnR3rKHM9sk9hA7h8g


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Grok:

To assess the likelihood of the accuracy of the tweet by Michael Shellenberger regarding USAID and CIA involvement in Trump's 2019 impeachment, let's break down the elements and evaluate them step by step:

1. **Source Credibility**:
   - **Michael Shellenberger** is known for his work as an environmental writer and commentator. While he has made controversial statements in the past, his credibility in political analysis or investigative journalism might be less established than in his primary field of environmental issues. However, his involvement in this specific narrative could suggest access to certain information or resources.

2. **Content Analysis**:
   - **USAID's Role**: The tweet claims that USAID, known primarily for its development aid, is actually a significant player in regime change operations globally, with a budget of $40 billion. While USAID does engage in activities that could be interpreted as promoting democracy or governance reform, which might be seen as regime change in some contexts, the claim of it being a central driver of such operations is contentious. Historical evidence shows USAID has been involved in political activities abroad, like in Cuba with the "Cuban Twitter" project, but the extent and intent of these operations are debated.

   - **CIA Involvement**: The assertion of CIA involvement in domestic political actions like Trump's impeachment is significant. The CIA is legally restricted from engaging in domestic operations, which makes this claim particularly bold. However, the history of intelligence agencies overstepping their bounds exists, though usually, these are exposed through official investigations or leaks, not social media posts.

   - **Impeachment Context**: Trump's impeachment was centered around allegations of abuse of power regarding Ukraine, not directly involving USAID or the CIA in the public narrative. The whistleblower, who was a CIA analyst, reported concerns about Trump's actions, but this was within the realm of Trump's direct interactions with foreign leaders, not through agencies like USAID or CIA orchestrating events.

3. **Corroborating Evidence**:
   - The tweet references reporting by Drop Site News and mentions a documentary by German broadcaster NDR, suggesting external validation. However, without direct access to these sources, their credibility and the thoroughness of their investigations are hard to assess. Additionally, the claim of USAID and CIA's role in Trump's impeachment isn't widely reported in mainstream media or official investigations.

4. **Legal and Political Implications**:
   - If true, the involvement of USAID and CIA in domestic political manipulation would be highly illegal and would constitute a major scandal. Such actions would likely lead to significant political fallout, investigations, and possibly legal consequences. The absence of such outcomes raises questions about the veracity of these claims.

5. **Public and Expert Reaction**:
   - The replies to the tweet show a range of reactions from skepticism to support, but none provide substantive evidence or expert analysis to validate or refute the claims. Public reaction alone isn't a reliable indicator of accuracy.

6. **Historical Precedent**:
   - While there are historical precedents of intelligence agencies like the CIA engaging in covert operations abroad, domestic interference, especially in something as high-profile as a presidential impeachment, would be unprecedented in modern times without significant evidence or leaks.

**Conclusion**:
Given the analysis:
- **Low to Moderate Likelihood of Accuracy**: The claims made in the tweet are extraordinary and would require substantial evidence which has not been publicly presented or widely acknowledged. The involvement of USAID in regime change operations abroad is plausible to some extent, but the direct involvement of both USAID and the CIA in the impeachment process of a sitting US president stretches credibility without concrete evidence. The lack of official investigations or mainstream media coverage supporting these claims leans towards skepticism. However, in the realm of political intrigue, where information can be tightly controlled or obscured, one cannot dismiss the possibility entirely, but the burden of proof remains high.

Oh Pete.

Come on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dude, I used Grok!

I don’t care - we are not at Terminator level (yet) so AI is still taking its marching orders from humans (kinda)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pete]

No wonder Vindy was part of the “bank run”

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1887282174321152095?s=46&t=-jwPwnR3rKHM9sk9hA7h8g


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Grok:

To assess the likelihood of the accuracy of the tweet by Michael Shellenberger regarding USAID and CIA involvement in Trump's 2019 impeachment, let's break down the elements and evaluate them step by step:

1. **Source Credibility**:
   - **Michael Shellenberger** is known for his work as an environmental writer and commentator. While he has made controversial statements in the past, his credibility in political analysis or investigative journalism might be less established than in his primary field of environmental issues. However, his involvement in this specific narrative could suggest access to certain information or resources.

2. **Content Analysis**:
   - **USAID's Role**: The tweet claims that USAID, known primarily for its development aid, is actually a significant player in regime change operations globally, with a budget of $40 billion. While USAID does engage in activities that could be interpreted as promoting democracy or governance reform, which might be seen as regime change in some contexts, the claim of it being a central driver of such operations is contentious. Historical evidence shows USAID has been involved in political activities abroad, like in Cuba with the "Cuban Twitter" project, but the extent and intent of these operations are debated.

   - **CIA Involvement**: The assertion of CIA involvement in domestic political actions like Trump's impeachment is significant. The CIA is legally restricted from engaging in domestic operations, which makes this claim particularly bold. However, the history of intelligence agencies overstepping their bounds exists, though usually, these are exposed through official investigations or leaks, not social media posts.

   - **Impeachment Context**: Trump's impeachment was centered around allegations of abuse of power regarding Ukraine, not directly involving USAID or the CIA in the public narrative. The whistleblower, who was a CIA analyst, reported concerns about Trump's actions, but this was within the realm of Trump's direct interactions with foreign leaders, not through agencies like USAID or CIA orchestrating events.

3. **Corroborating Evidence**:
   - The tweet references reporting by Drop Site News and mentions a documentary by German broadcaster NDR, suggesting external validation. However, without direct access to these sources, their credibility and the thoroughness of their investigations are hard to assess. Additionally, the claim of USAID and CIA's role in Trump's impeachment isn't widely reported in mainstream media or official investigations.

4. **Legal and Political Implications**:
   - If true, the involvement of USAID and CIA in domestic political manipulation would be highly illegal and would constitute a major scandal. Such actions would likely lead to significant political fallout, investigations, and possibly legal consequences. The absence of such outcomes raises questions about the veracity of these claims.

5. **Public and Expert Reaction**:
   - The replies to the tweet show a range of reactions from skepticism to support, but none provide substantive evidence or expert analysis to validate or refute the claims. Public reaction alone isn't a reliable indicator of accuracy.

6. **Historical Precedent**:
   - While there are historical precedents of intelligence agencies like the CIA engaging in covert operations abroad, domestic interference, especially in something as high-profile as a presidential impeachment, would be unprecedented in modern times without significant evidence or leaks.

**Conclusion**:
Given the analysis:
- **Low to Moderate Likelihood of Accuracy**: The claims made in the tweet are extraordinary and would require substantial evidence which has not been publicly presented or widely acknowledged. The involvement of USAID in regime change operations abroad is plausible to some extent, but the direct involvement of both USAID and the CIA in the impeachment process of a sitting US president stretches credibility without concrete evidence. The lack of official investigations or mainstream media coverage supporting these claims leans towards skepticism. However, in the realm of political intrigue, where information can be tightly controlled or obscured, one cannot dismiss the possibility entirely, but the burden of proof remains high.

Oh Pete.

Come on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dude, I used Grok!

I don’t care - we are not at Terminator level (yet) so AI is still taking its marching orders from humans (kinda)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, that human is Elon

[Rage Against the McKee]

I honestly don't think the United States survives 4 years of this.

What does non survival look like

No longer operating under the constitution.

[star seed 7]

I think it will all come down to if scotus and Republicans allow him to be nominated in 28. Good luck everyone, glad I'll be gone before then.