Trump’s niece says Musk now ‘owns’ ex-president: ‘He’s always been up for sale’ - eviltoast

Trump has promised Musk major role in overseeing government spending in any future Trump administration

Donald Trump’s estranged niece is accusing the former president of having a “new owner” because of his increasingly close relationship with tech billionaire Elon Musk.

“Donald Trump has always been for sale,” Mary Trump wrote in a Substack post on Saturday.

“Given this decades-long pattern, it’s not surprising that the world’s richest fascist, South African jumping bean Elon Musk, would also be interested in purchasing a few shares in a man who is willing to sell whatever he can get his hands on —whether it’s steaks or American national security — because he values money more than anything,” she added.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I meant obviously while he was in office for the 2020 election. Just because it’s too late now doesn’t mean it’s a good idea for the future.

    Potentially letting a political rival decide who is compromised is obviously not a good idea no matter who is in charge to make that decision.

    • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well someone is already deciding based on the ability to get a security clearance. And if being “Don citizen” and not able to get a security clearance at all, how should that person be allowed an office that needs a Top Secret clearance level?

      Also it shouldn’t be up to Trump, or anyone he appoints (or that any president appoints).

      • legion02@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        There’s no such thing as an impartial procews that includes humans. Biases will come out either consciously or subconsciously.

      • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        So the question becomes who should that person be and how should they be assigned/appointed to that position and who has authority over them if they become corrupted?

        Ultimately, that has to come down to the Executive (under the President), Legislative (confirmed like judges and subject to filibuster and the whole legislative process), maybe the Judiciary if you can find a way to wrangle that, which would put them under the authority of the Supreme Court, or appointed by direct election (which would 99% likely mean it just swings whichever way the President swings anyway).

        That is the way our government works and none of these solve the problem of politicizing who gets clearances and who doesn’t.

        Traditionally, this is under the authority of the President and he doesn’t ever get involved because why the fuck should he? But just like the Postmaster bullshit with DeJoy, the President can decide he’s going to take direct control (by firing the old person and appointing someone amenable to his wishes).

        The only protection we have is for the American people to look at their own candidate and say, “No, he’s up to some bullshit and I will not support that.” And far too many of us simply won’t do that. Yeah, that skews right which means Republicans get away with more shit than Democrats do.

        There is not a political solution to human nature.