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/

  • czech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Why/ how? There is an application process and disqualifying criteria for a security clearance. The suggestion is that if you can’t pass that process you should not be let in on any confidential information.

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      You think it is simple because Trump is so obviously not a good faith actor, but let’s pretend he gets elected again (possibility). He declared everyone against him (not just Dems) enemies of the state and ineligible to hold office. This reminds me of Russia, oh wait he would like that.

      Unfortunately our democracy hinges on whether or not we can convince our fellow citizens that freedom matters and to over vote. Winning by 51% isn’t enough. In order to make effective change, the Dems would need to win and get a supermajority in the house and Senate. And THEN DECIDE to give up power to change our government to a STAR vote or ranked choice style. Some form of representation democracy so that our politians would have to negotiate properly. Citizens United needs to go along with the part of the judicial that was installed because of the fascist movement of the heritage foundation.

      I just doubt this will happen. It is possible, but I’m not sure how. The left never has enough resources to play the decades long game. They(conservatives) were manipulating the media in the early 1900 to stop progressive movements. They delayed Teddy Roosevelt getting into office. After he did get in and people saw how effective and popular progressive movements were, they decide to work against it. They still are. They just bought all the media empires now, so it is easier.

    • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      The people ultimately in charge of that work serve at the pleasure of the President. He could simply fire people until someone does what he wants. Same thing he did with the Justice department. It also could be as simple as an executive order, but I really don’t know that much about that level of the process.

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Sadly, it doesn’t work that way. The President has absolute authority over the process. In fact, someone can fail the security check and be refused security clearance and the president can wave his hand and give that person full clearance. How do I know? It’s been done.

      The sources say the CIA has not granted Kushner clearance to review SCI material. That would mean Kushner lacks access to key intelligence unless President Donald Trump decides to override the rules, which is the president’s’ prerogative.

      Which, by the way, he did. Intelligence agencies said Kushner should not have any level of clearance but Trump gave him clearance to everything.

    • And a lot of the criteria are determined by regulation IIRC.

      Meaning that the president can order the agencies to update the regulations, and say that in addition to communist party membership being disqualifying, Democrat party membership is now also disqualifying. (More likely a more plausible sounding reason would be picked but the result would be the same - exploiting a loophole to prevent your opponents from running against you.)