AcidicBasicGlitch

I've heard he and his dad have a very complicated relationship. So, I'm not sure if this was a legitimate but misguided attempt to help his son, or a an excellent WASPy passive aggressive move to add fuel to the uncontrollable inferno that continues to burn away at whatever scraps of a positive public image Elon was hoping to maintain. Either way, bravo 👏

"there’s at least a little bit of room for understanding why, after being raised in that environment, Elon would be a little fucked up."

also why he brags "my tombstone will say never went to therapy," oblivious people will walk by that tombstone and think, "yeah, checks out."

Thank you for your reply!

Again, I am sorry if my understanding is way off base. So the house of Lords are all elected, and and peers are selected by elected members?

How much sway do individual peers currently have?

I'm not sure if a good U.S. comparison (if one exists) to peers needing to be vetted would be similar to U.S. lobbyists or if peers have more direct roles in law making, similar positions that individuals in the U.S. are nominated for (such as Kratsios' OSTP nomination), which then has to be approved by the Senate.

In the case of U.S. nominees for executive positions, they are supposed to be vetted by bipartisan committees of elected senators that will not pass them on to be nominated by the entire Senate if they are not fit to serve those positions. It's supposed to act like a safeguard, because once fitness is approved by those committees, it would basically take an act of God (for some reason) to keep the main Senate vote from approving the nomination. While I think it's a good thing those committees exist, they also fail horribly to do what they're actually supposed to do.

This U.S. election in particular has shown us what a joke that entire process is, and not only resulted in approval of Kratsios' nomination by a Senate committee which s supposed to make decisions for U.S. science (only 4 of 13 Democrats bothered to object to his fitness), it has also resulted in several other individuals being approved who are clearly unfit for their roles. Such as RFK Jr., who is famous for his anti-vax and anti-science rhetoric, being approved by another committee for our secretary of health and human services. In that case, the committee decision came down to the vote of one Republican senator who is also a physician, and has publicly stated he is very pro vaccination and hoped to never have to witness another parent lose a child to a preventable disease. Yet for some reason, he voted to approve his fitness to serve.

I have no idea why, but we now have measles outbreaks in parts of the country which have resulted the death of at least one child. Here is an article about that same Senators displeasure with new vaccination policy in his own state. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/16/louisiana-vaccines-rfk-jr

Either way, in those two cases, I can see how the positions are a great thing to have, but only when the people who are elected to the positions actually do their jobs. Instead what we have is basically theatre that, as you correctly put it, just further undermines credibility of the entire government.

Hi all, Hope this is ok for me to post here, apologies if not. I'm in the U.S. and recently joined Lemmy looking for a place to have uncensored discussions about U.S. and global issues.

I am curious to hear how U.K.ers feel about this proposed law. It seems like an attempt to create some additional checks and balances and avoid unchecked power by the Prime Minister.

Watching executive power currently being used as a weapon to destroy any chance of public opinion pumping the breaks on insane policy makes this seem like a good idea, but I also know legal process and politics are very different in the U.K., so I would love to hear U.K. thoughts and opinions about this. If there is a better place for me to post this, I will delete it and move it there.

The reason this article caught my attention, is the mention of the former special adviser to David Davis, and his opposition to the bill.

I'll be honest, before last month, I didn't know who David Davis was, but have taken an interest in his connection to U.S. politics and the Trump administration.

Davis is the father-in-law of Michael Kratsios, Trump’s Science Advisor nominee and Director of Office of Science and Technology Policy. Kratsios is also a former employee of Peter Theil, and is focused on AI policy.

Given the UK-US refusal to join other countries signing an AI declaration, (which included agreeing to join other countries in defending against a cyber attack by another nation like oh idk…Russia), I find the connection between Davis and Kratsios very suspicious. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8edn0n58gwo

I also know that Musk is planning on opening an xAI branch in the UK, and I have been screaming into the void for months trying to warn people in the U.S. about his xAI data centers. I'm not sure how much news coverage this has received in the U.K., but there's been hardly any focused coverage of all of the shady things surrounding xAI in the U.S.

I hope voters in the U.K. are aware of all of these things, if only for the sake of staying informed. Let me know if you would like to discuss any of this stuff, or know of a community that would be better to start a discussion about this.

Thanks!

Yeah there is a big list of people he might choose from, but I just feel like there has been such an obvious attempt lately to steer public attention towards Fauci and the NIH. I haven't heard Hilary's name mentioned in a while. I think the first will be a recipient of more recent public attention to test the waters. If the public doesn't push back on it then he starts going after anyone he wants. This is why it's never a good idea to encourage people to be quiet and keep their heads down when their head aren't on the chopping block (yet).

They are pushing some very questionable and some outright incorrect theories as fact, so that when the "hammer of justice" comes down on Fauci, the public isn't just expecting it, they're cheering it.

https://heartland.org/publications/85800/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/3353058/experts-anthony-fauci-have-themselves-to-blame-for-distrust-of-institutions/

And then this one 🙄 jfc: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/faith-freedom-self-reliance/3350311/coordinated-plan-to-hide-governments-transgender-mice/

Nah, unless some things change very quickly, he will want to make retaliation against famous political enemies very public

Falling out of windows will be reserved for lesser known journalists, citizens, and even Republican law makers that dare to speak out against any of his policies.

I imagine famous political enemies at best night experience something like Putin's wet dream from The 3rd empire novel:

"representatives of the American elite: President [George] Bush III and former presidents Bill Clinton, Bush Junior, and Hillary Clinton; current and former members of the cabinet, the House, and the Senate; bankers and industrialists; newspaper commentators and television anchors; famous attorneys and top models; pop singers and Hollywood actresses. All of them passed through Red Square in shackles and with nameplates around their necks. … The Russian government was letting its own citizens and the whole world know that Russia had fought with and vanquished not only the American army but the American civilization."

Here is a snapshot of an Atlantic article from a few years ago about the novel. It seems to quite literally be Putin's playbook sprinkled with some fanfiction about his deepest hopes and desires. The person that wrote the article is a professor in the U.S. that fled Russia and has been trying and failing to warn people about this book for years.

https://archive.is/CSBaa

There could be several people Trump has in mind for the first political enemy to be arrested, but my money would be on Anthony Fauci. They have been setting this guy up in a very elaborate way for years, but especially since last summer.

Below is a comment I made about the autopen pardon claim, but I'm just pasting it here so that more people can be aware of some facts before Trump starts making more bs claims to justify his bs policies:

Not sure if he has already said anything about the Fauci pardon, but almost certainly will be making the argument against him too.

I wrote about it a little in the post I made and plan to update with more information in a longer follow up post.

So Biden’s pardon to Fauci is backdated to 2014, the year the NIH issued pause on funding for gain of function (GOF) research. The pause was only meant to apply to research that increased the contagion or virulence of a pathogen with enhanced pandemic potential (ePPP).

From the time the notice was issued, many scientists were worried about the use of the term GOF because most virology and vaccine research involves what is by definition GOF research. Any modification of genetic material during an experiment could meet the definition of GOF. Whether it is traditional vaccine research where genetic alteration is used to increase yields for vaccine strains or even steps of genetic modification for mRNA vaccines which don’t require an inactive or weak pathogen to create a vaccine.

Anyway, this past summer during House Oversight COVID-19 Select Subcommitee Hearings into the NIH funding for the EcoHealth Alliance collaboration with Wuhan Institute of Virology, the subcommitee asked the deputy director of the NIH this question:

Rep Lesko: “Dr. Tabak, did NIH fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through EcoHealth?” Dr. Tabak: “It depends on your definition of gain-of-function research. If you’re speaking about the generic term, yes, we did…the generic term is research that goes on in many, many labs around the country. It is not regulated. And the reason it’s not regulated is it poses no threat or harm to anybody.” https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-nih-repeatedly-refutes-ecohealth-alliance-president-dr-peter-daszaks-testimony-tabak-testimony-reveals-federal-grant-procedures-in-need-of-serious-reform/

The Subcommitee claims this contradicts previous testimony given by Anthony Fauci. It seems pretty clear Fauci was referring to GOF as it was used in the 2014 NIH pause and Tabak was using it regarding the broad definition. However, the conclusion of many is that Fauci willingly misled the American public when he said the NIH does not support GOF research.

Biden has never acknowledged this is what the pardon was about, but it would be quite the coincidence if the 2014 backdate had nothing to do with this.

And of course the Heritage Foundation has jumped on to the we need to end dangerous GOF funding train https://www.heritage.org/public-health/commentary/president-trump-should-reinstate-president-obamas-moratorium-risky

Out of a concern for public safety of course.

Thanks!

Thank you!

Also just need to add that I am so glad I started using lemmy. Without it, the death rattle of publicly available information and the internet would probably have been enough to make me give up any will to fight against the Broligarchy.

Finding so many people that have been way ahead of the game for years has motivated me to keep going even when you have to give up what's familiar and learn new ways around censorship

Thank you!

And then when the billionaires are supposed to fight they just don't because Elon musk loves to run his mouth but knows even mark Zuckerberg could kick his ass

"Officially" he was a board member until 2020 when he left to avoid being investigated for a sexual harassment scandal

Unofficially there seems to be some indication he is still involved with decision making. Good thing rich people aren't able to use loopholes to buy press and hide their business interactions and finances. Otherwise we might be trapped in the lamest version of a cyberpunk dystopian nightmare.

https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/bill-gates-still-backstage-manages-microsoft