Elon Musk

1. 61

   Willowarborposted 3 weeks ago

   This has got to be illegal... Maga folks are so interested in voter fraud but not this type of fraud, right? Buying votes?   
   
   https://x.com/krassenstein/status/1907449158287372512

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      These actions have raised legal and ethical concerns. Wisconsin's Democratic attorney general filed a lawsuit seeking to block Musk from distributing the $1 million payments, arguing that offering money to voters could violate bribery statutes. However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear the case, allowing Musk to proceed with the payments. ​
      AP News
      
      In summary, Elon Musk did endorse and financially support a specific candidate.

      replyreport
2. 84

   tsmogposted 12 days ago

   A new strategy: Move the goal posts. Why?
   
   Musk Slashes DOGE Savings Forecast By 85% published at right wing Daily Caller (Apr 11, 2025)
   https://dailycaller.com/2025/04/11/elon … 0-billion/
   
   "Elon Musk announced Thursday that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is now targeting $150 billion in federal savings for fiscal year 2026 — dramatically scaling back earlier claims of slashing as much as $2 trillion.
   
   Musk initially projected DOGE would deliver $2 trillion in savings by targeting government waste, fraud and abuse. That figure was halved to $1 trillion earlier this year, but Musk walked it back again at Thursday’s Cabinet meeting, saying the revised $150 billion projection will “result in better services for the American people” and ensure federal spending “in a way that is sensible and fair and good.”
   
   Watch the 2+ hour Trump cabinet meeting with Musk midway in the article. Watch the 30+ minute Live Now from Fox video at the end of the article with Musk and some of his team members.

   replyreport
3. 84

   tsmogposted 8 days ago

   Take a break from tariffs, deportation, and government cuts
   
   ELON MUSK’S MOTHERS
   From right wing Daily Caller newsletter, so is a copy paste. Pour that cup of coffee to get a little something to stimulate an intellectual(?) perspective on the richest man in the world and a creative genius.
   
   ELON MUSK’S MOTHERS
   
   What, if any, virtue is there in Elon Musk’s crusade to repopulate … his living room? The country? The human race?
   
   Specifically I’m referring to his having 14 children with four women. The number has been widely reported and in an article today for the WSJ, “multiple sources” say the publicly known number is actually well short of the “real number.”
   
   WSJ refers to the known women almost diminutively as his “harem” or possessively as his “mothers,” even while making the case that his sperm slinging – and I mean that literally, he’s actually been giving certain people samples – is part of a deeper pathology around declining birth rates.
   
   That pathology is also well known in public. Musk has talked about it dozens of times in high profile venues. He believes that not only the West is in danger of decline, but humanity altogether, if the right people stop having babies.
   
   He’s highly specific about that last part. It needs to be the right people. Smart people, successful people. He isn’t just dumping sperm samples on street corners in Baltimore, there is at least some standard Musk adheres to prior to shooting his shots, which WSJ also outlines.
   
   None of this gets to the heart of the matter, though, at least for conservatives. The real meat of the current debate is nearly identical to the disconnect liberals were hoping to exploit between evangelicals and Donald Trump almost a decade ago.
   
   How do conservatives square their traditional family and Christian values with Musk’s semi-unmoored progeny?
   
   The answer to that question is pretty simple and they would know why the contradiction is not a sticking point for conservatives or Christians if they bothered really talking to any of them.
   
   It’s become almost a trope at this point, especially with regards to the gay community, but put simply: Reject the sin, not the soul.
   
   Musk can correct his ways any time he wants to, at risk of sounding cliche, come to Jesus.
   
   The beauty of Christ and Christianity is in redemption. Of course, liberals would call that a copout and demand a more vociferous denunciation. Even though, “Yeah that’s bad, totally agree, he should be a better father” is perfectly in line with what anyone would expect a normal person, yes even a Christian, to say. Nevertheless, they want more.
   
   What they really want is already obvious to you, Dear Reader.
   
   It’s for that outcry on the right to become so loud that Trump simply has to part ways with Musk. As far as motivations go, this much could barely be described as ulterior. Onlookers in public can see the real goal.
   
   So that’s definitely not going to happen.
   
   But the original question was “what virtue” is there in Musk’s cultivation of a “harem” of mothers?
   
   The virtue, as I see it, is that in a sea of misdirection, outright lies, and thinly veiled motives, Musk is at least authentic. His talk about repopulation isn’t just talk. It’s action. (It’s also arguably some highly effective action.)
   
   Musk is unvarnished and direct and he does exactly what he says he’s going to do. He, in fact, often exceeds what he says he’s going to do.
   
   We live in a world where doublespeak has become a dominant matter of discourse, where euphemism and rebranding and spin is always, 100 percent of the time, part of the equation when it comes to engaging with the public.
   
   Not even the media’s focus on Musk’s disconnect with conservative values is explicitly stated. Can’t they just be honest? They want him out. They want his efforts to cut government waste stymied. They want to drive a wedge between him and public support in order to protect their beloved bureaucracy.
   
   They also think you are all too stupid to see those true motives.
   
   (Never mind us rapidly identifying the dissonance between a media generally working to denigrate the nuclear family suddenly being super concerned about Musk’s very un-nuclear families – what happened to strong independent women who don’t need a man, eh?)
   
   When it comes to public trust, as shifts in the media landscape have shown more recently, authenticity is now the most compelling currency. You can be wrong, but for the love of God be honest. Be yourself. And, for God’s sake, stop lying.
   
   Why, aside from the worldview on sin and forgiveness, would conservatives view any of this with a silver lining?
   
   As we triage threats to public good, consenting, conservative, politically aware adults are unlikely to place Musk’s scattered brood above, say, the deep state. A subversive, unelected, anonymous hydra working as hard to strangle the will of the people as it is to fund transgender puppet shows in the third world.
   
   Which one is more likely to rapidly deconstruct western values, Musk’s promiscuity or USAID subverting foreign elections?
   
   It’s also garnish on the plate when I say that Americans historically love a flawed hero. Even the highly hyperbolized (fictionalized?) alcoholism of Ulysses S. Grant only deepened America’s fondness for the man.
   
   He’ll save the nation despite his flaws! Heck, even priests drink, am I right?
   
   So it goes with Elon’s mothers. He’s a man who acts on his beliefs and achieves greatness despite his inadequacies. He’s human and distinctly not a part of the soulless Washington borg.
   
   He’s also done a pretty good job battling that borg.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      GA Andersonposted 8 days agoin reply to this

      That was a nice break. A bit of morning confirmation bias for us Darwinists.
      
      "Sperm slinging" brought a chuckle. Musk must see it as a 'good seed' vs 'bad seed' thing. His are probably wearing tiny white hats.
      
      His legal arrangements with the mothers would be interesting. To me, the issue sounds like a win-win for everyone.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 84

         tsmogposted 8 days agoin reply to this

         hmmm . . .
         
         A lot could be unpackaged I imagine.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            GA Andersonposted 7 days agoin reply to this

            Okay . . .
            
            GA ;-)

            replyreport
            1. 84

               tsmogposted 3 days agoin reply to this

               Yup, a simple recognition can bring a smile :-)
               
               Nothing nefarious at all. Along that line of thought, okay . . .

               replyreport
      2. 71

         Ken Burgessposted 8 days agoin reply to this

         The line between Genuis and Insanity is a very thin line...
         
         If women want to have his kids... nothing wrong with that... 
         
         I think he can afford it... wonder if he plans on taking them to Mars with him?

         replyreport
         1. 85

            GA Andersonposted 7 days agoin reply to this

            Now there's a train of thought: The Musk clan, pioneers of Mars.
            
            He probably needs 15 years or so until some of the kids can fill their anticipated spots. It'll probably take that long to build the colony infrastructure. With all the different mothers, colony inbreeding probably isn't a worry.
            
            Lil X seems to be the favorite, so he'll probably go first.
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Ken Burgessposted 43 hours agoin reply to this

               There is a reason he has Tesla building the world's most advanced AI as well as robots.
               
               It doesn't take a brainiac to figure out that we can't colonize Mars... Without first sending the materials and robots to build a place where humans can survive.
               
               Probably his reason for the boring company he has as well.
               
               One plan is to dig deep into the ground...requiring expertise in tunnel making. Necessary to protect from radiation....Mars does not offer much in the way of protection for life.

               replyreport
               1. 85

                  GA Andersonposted 34 hours agoin reply to this

                  I had the same thought about The Boring Company. A moon base would probably be the first 'test bed' for intelligent robots and boring machines. I think it has the same radiation issues as Mars.
                  
                  Tie in his energy storage assets and autonomous robotics; he has the foundation needed for everything else.
                  
                  GA

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     Ken Burgessposted 9 hours agoin reply to this

                     Agreed, it is rather obvious when you think about it, why he has chosen the fields to delve into that he has... otherwise the boring company doesn't make all that much sense, not from an investment/return standpoint.
                     
                     The foray into X (formerly Twitter) was a sidestep... but one I think he felt necessary for reasons outside of his goals of sustainable/renewable energy and his Mission to Mars.
                     
                     It may seem logical to you or I that the Moon would be a logical first step...
                     Elon's mind doesn't work like that... he envisions the goal and how to achieve it... and anything... anything he can cut out of the process to getting it accomplished will be discarded.
                     
                     That would be the moon... to Musk's mind it is an unnecessary and wasteful step... wasteful of time and resources... he could care less about the moon and will bypass it.  And he could care less about what the government, any government, would like to do regarding the moon.
                     
                     Just IMO... I don't know the guy personally or anything.

                     replyreport
                     1. 85

                        GA Andersonposted 8 hours agoin reply to this

                        Your Musk/Mars thought works. Several companies seem to already be working on 'moon base' stuff. From your perspective, it makes sense for him to focus on Mars and let others work on support facilities on the moon. They'll still be using SpaceX (primarily) for their moon efforts.
                        
                        And, there is the plus of Musk not being entangled in the political fights that are sure to come over moon assets and positions. A win-win for him.
                        
                        There's another train of thought; Musk focuses on Mars, and the world fights for control of supplying his colony.
                        
                        Think of it as a prequel to The Expanse.
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
                        1. 71

                           Ken Burgessposted 43 seconds agoin reply to this

                           Yeah ...it's possible that as he grew in power and began expanding on his ideas for being a two planet species...
                           
                           As he moved into the realm of possibility of achieving such a goal.  It became obvious the biggest threat to it was a government targeting those efforts...
                           
                           Thereby forcing his foray into politics a byproduct of buying Twitter?
                           
                           Or is he so insightful that the purchase of twitter was his first calculated effort against that threat?

                           replyreport
               2. 81

                  Credence2posted 33 hours agoin reply to this

                  I am more anxious than most to see a successful colonization of Mars, but lets sort the wheat from the chaff, shall we?
                  
                  As for now, we have not even returned to the moon in over 50 years, colonization and exploration being far less involved technically due to its proximity to the earth. Space helmets and hard hats don’t mix well. A successful lunar colony should be our first goal, let’s walk before we run.
                  
                  They talk about a 7-8 month transit time, there are no shuttles from earth for resupplies as for ISS. Supply ships could be sent to Mars or placed in Martian orbit, but from here the technology involved would be daunting.
                  
                  Current chemical based propulsion systems are woefully inadequate for interplanetary travel where human beings are the cargo. While there are alternatives on the drawing board, theory will have to become practical application. How long will that take?
                  
                  Robots and materials that will make a habitable environment there without human intervention, we are not there yet.
                  
                  It would be smarter to build the craft in space and not have to lift so much out from Earths gravitational well. Are we able to do this? Not now.
                  
                  My intuition continues to warn me that Musk is a man of hot air. This is not Star Trek. I would be lucky to see a man on Mars within my lifetime, mid century. And I will bet your bottom dollar that any real colonization ability will, if we don’t destroy ourselves first,  be beyond Musk’s lifetime.

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     Ken Burgessposted 31 hours agoin reply to this

                     You don't understand Musk if you think he could be interested/diverted to the Moon.
                     
                     He has expressed his reasoning plainly and I tend to agree, but that aside, he makes the impossible happen... and if his goal is Mars then that is what he will set out for, or die in the attempt, as they say... he has no interest in the Moon, and he has a time limit on his goals of it being within his lifetime.

                     replyreport
4. 81

   Credence2posted 8 days ago

   I have said for a considerable time that Musk is a turd. He is proving it, the richest man on earth is nothing but a pimp. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Prostitution at its highest levels? A stud and genetic purity service that can compete with any of the programs conducted by the Nazis. But, I forget he is from South Africa, how much racism and resentment is a part of his formula? He must have bought off the press so that this incredible story stays under wraps for so long?
   
   He is an amoral goof from every angle. It proves that in America there is not necessarily a correlation between wealthy and “smart”

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Ken Burgessposted 8 days agoin reply to this

      You really are a becoming a consistently cantankerous commentator...
      
      Might want to find another hobby to fit into your schedule, lighten your grumpy mood a bit... or maybe I'm just reading your comments in the wrong light   ~shrug~

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Credence2posted 7 days agoin reply to this

         Sometimes that is what it takes, strong to last long…….
         
         Think about it, you don’t find anything odd about someone like this given the keys and trusted to run it all?
         
         He can do me a favor and go Mars and stay there, in his genius he will figure out how to create a colony on a planet with a virtually non existent atmosphere.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Ken Burgessposted 43 hours agoin reply to this

            Oh yeah, I trust a corrupt warmongering bureaucracy and politicians that have made their families wealthy selling out Americans and starting endless wars to tell the truth...
            
            Yeah ... like I have said before, no reason to debate really, anyone that still listens to MSNBC or CNN or their equivalent ilk in print that doesn't have a gag reflex from having the urge to puke isn't someone to debate or discuss things with.
            
            Those poor souls are just regurgitating the mindless propaganda they are fed daily.

            replyreport
            1. 87

               Sharlee01posted 34 hours agoin reply to this

               Ken, Just my view ---   Absolutely agree with you. There’s a deep psychological element at play here. What you're describing is a combination of confirmation bias and groupthink, but it goes even deeper. People who consume legacy outlets like MSNBC or CNN aren’t necessarily after the truth,  they’re after a dopamine hit of validation. It’s a psychological comfort food. I honestly think they’ve become dependent on the emotional stimulation that comes from hearing their beliefs echoed back to them.
               
               These networks don’t just report, they curate narratives that reinforce a preexisting worldview. That reinforcement isn’t just reassuring, it becomes a sort of psychological security blanket.
               
               Over time, this evolves into identity-protective cognition—where any fact or perspective that challenges their group identity is instinctively rejected. Not because it’s false, but because accepting it would cause too much internal conflict. That’s why you can put obvious corruption, war profiteering, or blatant bias in front of them, and they’ll either tune it out or rationalize it away.

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  tsmogposted 32 hours agoin reply to this

                  Interjection with a slight bit of wandering . . .
                  
                  A lot to ponder with what was proposed especially considering 'Identity' and the 'Self'. A lot to unpack with that. First, that leads to belief systems that begin to form pre-teen years and then is always being confirmed or challenged. There are several theories from Freud with Id, Ego, and the SuperEgo to symbolic interactionism of George Herbert Meade for the Identity/Self. Briefly, he says the self is defined through social interactions. I often ponder with that view if one does not interact then is identity/Self lacking or is the interaction taking place with the environment as an entity. And, then, what about God with prayer, meditation, and lifestyle. In the back of my mind is, say, a hermit or a monk.
                  
                  Anyway . . .
                  
                  To be true, always true
                  
                  
                  
                  As you said each of those media sources with their bias has an audience seeking group think and confirmation bias. The range is far right to far left.
                  
                  And, today, a growing and thriving form of media is podcasts.
                  
                  Top Political Podcasts You Need to Listen to in 2025 by CallHub (Jan 31, 2025) They list their top 11. There are other sources with their recommendations.
                  https://callhub.io/blog/political-campa … -podcasts/

                  replyreport
                  1. 87

                     Sharlee01posted 30 hours agoin reply to this

                     That’s a really thoughtful and enriching interjection. Thank you for sharing it. I truly appreciate this kind of comment; it offers real insight and food for thought. You’ve opened up a deeper layer to the conversation by tying in identity and self through both psychological and sociological lenses.
                     
                     I think you're absolutely right that our sense of self is shaped (and sometimes reshaped) through interactions, not just with people but also with ideas, nature, and, as you brought up so insightfully, with God through prayer or meditation.
                     
                     Your mention of the hermit or monk really struck a chord. It reminds me that solitude doesn't necessarily mean the absence of interaction; it just transforms the kind. A monk in silent contemplation may not be engaging in social exchange, but there’s a profound dialogue happening, internally, spiritually, even symbolically with the world.
                     
                     I also appreciate how you noted that belief systems begin forming early but are always being confirmed or challenged. That process never truly stops, and your comment shines a light on how essential that continuous engagement is, whether it's with others, with ourselves, or with something greater.
                     
                     This kind of reflective wandering adds so much depth. Thanks again for taking the time to share it.

                     replyreport
                     1. 84

                        tsmogposted 9 hours agoin reply to this

                        I am happy something was obtained from my wandering. It's time for my 8am walk now.

                        replyreport
                        1. 87

                           Sharlee01posted 8 hours agoin reply to this

                           I’ll be honest—I really enjoy your walks and the threads you post. They’re thought-provoking and refreshingly real, not the usual run-of-the-mill stuff. Always challenging, always worth reflecting on. Always worth taking time to reply.

                           replyreport
                           1. 84

                              tsmogposted 7 hours agoin reply to this

                              Back . . .
                              
                              Thanks for sharing. Appreciated! :-)

                              replyreport
               2. 71

                  Ken Burgessposted 31 hours agoin reply to this

                  These networks don’t just report, they curate narratives that reinforce a preexisting worldview. That reinforcement isn’t just reassuring, it becomes a sort of psychological security blanket.
                  
                  Spot on... exactly the problem...
                  
                  That it is being done deliberately by those that have ulterior motives, those who are using the angst they create by the divide and dissent they foster, is truly diabolical... it will be interesting to see who wins this "war of realities"... but as I have said, the team that can divert America from disaster is in place... we will not be getting anyone coming along better in our lifetimes to try...
                  
                  Whether you have succumbed to the hatred that has been fostered by those who control the propaganda sources or not... if the Trump team fails in its efforts to save ship America... we (all of us on HubPages) will suffer economic hardships undreamt of for it.
                  
                  Interesting poll on just who is most susceptible to MSM... no surprise really:
                  https://thepostmillennial.com/boomer-di … om-approve

                  replyreport
                  1. 87

                     Sharlee01posted 30 hours agoin reply to this

                     Ken,   Absolutely agree with your insight, it’s not just the information itself, but how it’s framed, selected, and repeated that shapes public perception. The psychological "security blanket" is a powerful metaphor, and it really captures how people cling to the narratives that affirm their sense of identity, especially in uncertain times.
                     
                     What you said about the divide being deliberately fostered for political or ideological gain is, sadly, spot on too. A clear example of this manipulation can be seen in how different networks covered the 2020 riots versus the January 6th events, each side emphasizing or minimizing based on the political story they wanted to push. The goal isn’t clarity, it’s control through division.
                     
                     As for your point about the Trump team being perhaps the last line of defense, there’s a very real sense among many that the stakes have never been higher. Whether one agrees with all of Trump’s approaches or not, the argument can be made that he and his team are uniquely qualified and willing to take on entrenched systems that others won’t even touch.
                     
                     If that effort fails, in my view, we will see ripple effects—especially from unchecked spending, open-border policies, and a weak energy strategy, that could be devastating. It’s not fearmongering to say so; it’s a real concern many are echoing.

                     replyreport
            2. 81

               Credence2posted 33 hours agoin reply to this

               You have never really convinced me that your sources do not have its own biases. You folks attack the preponderance of mainstream media. Even Trump does the same. So, why should I give Trump or your sources any more credibility than my own. why should I dismiss stories and positions held by 90 percent of the media and cling to 10 percent reporting otherwise.

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  Ken Burgessposted 31 hours agoin reply to this

                  First... is the acceptance that what we had WAS corrupt... or run by corrupt individuals that had learned how to abuse the system and enrich themselves and their friends at the expense of the American people.
                  
                  Once we accept that our government... which was spending trillions more every year than it takes in is BROKEN and in need of serious fixing... then we have to accept what tools we have available to get that job done.
                  
                  Tackling the very large, very corrupt, federal government is no small task. It is a serious challenge that few could stomach even attempting, the resistance to it is... obviously... enormous.
                  
                  So I, and everyone else, should consider who it is that has stepped up and try to fix the mess... drain the swamp... whatever you like to call it...
                  
                  Trump aside... we have Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr., Marco Rubio (his family background from Cuba), and Elon Musk have all sacrificed to step forward and try to do what is best for America...
                  
                  Perhaps I see this far more clearly because I ingest almost 0% of American media sources (left or right) but very much recognize how they have become propaganda outlets for an effort by Global Elites to disenfranchise the American people and strip them of their sanity, their freedoms and their rights.
                  
                  Its like being a drug addict... you need your fix of Salon and CNN to give you that dose of confirmation bias...
                  
                  Well I disconnected from that many years ago... the last remaining "fix" I get now is to occasionally visit HubPages and "debate" things with people like yourself, whom used to challenge my perspectives and make me consider their own.

                  replyreport
                  1. 84

                     tsmogposted 31 hours agoin reply to this

                     "Perhaps I see this far more clearly because I ingest almost 0% of American media sources (left or right)"
                     
                     Just curious . . . where  do your sources get their information from? I know you just don't make things up out of thin air. You arrive at your thought processes from information from somewhere. Do you openly accept your sources as true or do you "Trust, but verify" as quoted by Reagan?
                     
                     Frankly, I don't trust any type of media source including all of those links you post. If I am interested in what you posted and curiosity hits me I seek to verify it after listening/watching it.

                     replyreport
                     1. 71

                        Ken Burgessposted 30 hours agoin reply to this

                        I like to think I trust but verify... when all pistons are firing... which is not always the case I admit... wear and tear on the mind...
                        
                        Anyways... just for instance... I like to listen to Victor Hansen's snippets, he does 8 minute or so video posts on topics of interest:
                        
                        Advice for Ivy League Universities: Take the Trump Deal, Before It’s Too Late | Victor Davis Hanson
                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix5Bq23gCMg
                        
                        And when it is of something of particular interest I will go use what sources I can find to delve deeper... just not our MSM sources... perhaps government websites, perhaps foreign websites.
                        
                        Years back when I was researching what happened in Benghazi I had to rely on all non-American websites to piece together what really happened, combined with my own background and sources, I figured out what was really occurring... those are the types of lies fostered on the American people that really bothered me back then...
                        
                        Now, not so much, because I don't tune in at all to what they are saying on CNN or FOX so I don't get dragged into the gutter over what are really nonsense issues meant for consumer consumption... not meant to enlighten or elaborate on the real issues.
                        
                        Mostly I am trying to pull out of the political discussion all together... with the exceptional forays here on HP... my stress level - blood pressure... is much better off when I do so.
                        
                        The team Trump has assembled will fix the problems... stop the ship from leaking/sinking so to speak, or they will not, and we are all going down with the ship... that is my simplistic take on what is going on... no reason for me to fight to expose truth anymore... they will succeed or they will not.

                        replyreport
                        1. 73

                           Kathleen Cochranposted 28 hours agoin reply to this

                           " I was researching what happened in Benghazi I had to rely on all non-American websites to piece together what really happened, combined with my own background and sources, I figured out what was really occurring."
                           
                           These years later, based on your findings, I'd be curious to know what you figured out. That's probably too "off topic" to go into here.
                           
                           I'm probably interested because the commanding general of AfriCOM at the time is a personal friend.

                           replyreport
                           1. 71

                              Ken Burgessposted 8 hours agoin reply to this

                              I wrote an article about it way back then... with plenty of information and a decent timeline of events tying it all together...
                              
                              That article no longer exists but it had been posted many years ago here...
                              
                              Anyways... we were using the Muslim Brotherhood to traffic Gaddafi's cache of surface to air missiles and anti-armor weapons to the American backed insurgents trying to overthrow Assad in Syria...

                              replyreport
                        2. 84

                           tsmogposted 9 hours agoin reply to this

                           Thanks for the reply. Good luck.

                           replyreport
5. 84

   tsmogposted 3 days ago

   Rumor has it . . .
   
   "Despite his sweeping claims about cutting trillions in waste and exposing government fraud, Elon Musk has yet to testify under oath before Congress about any of it. No documentation, no independent audits, just curated tweets and grand declarations. The only real revelations have come from those brave enough to speak out from inside the system he claims to be fixing.
   
   This week, a federal cloud administrator named Daniel Berulis stepped forward and testified to something chilling: Musk’s DOGE team showed up at the National Labor Relations Board and demanded “god-tier” access to its internal systems. Not just admin rights, total control. Once inside, they disabled security tools, deleted activity logs, and began pulling enormous volumes of data out of the agency. Then came something no one expected: login attempts from a Russian IP address, with valid credentials.
   
   Think about that. Sensitive information about labor organizing, corporate misconduct, and worker protections, all flowing through a system with compromised oversight, led by a man whose companies are under active investigation by the same agency. The richest man in the world, claiming neutrality while his operatives infiltrate the very institutions tasked with holding him accountable.
   
   And at the exact moment this story breaks wide, Musk is on social media ranting about how “almost every major left-leaning NGO is funded by the government.” It’s not just deflection, it’s a blueprint. Discredit the watchdogs. Attack civil society. Then raid the infrastructure behind the scenes. The goal isn’t efficiency, rather it is domination.
   
   What Musk doesn’t say, of course, is that right-wing NGOs are funded by the government too often at far higher levels. From faith-based crisis pregnancy centers to charter school lobbying groups, from border policy contractors to "pro-family" international aid agencies, government money has long flowed to conservative causes. But those aren't being targeted. Only the groups that challenge billionaires, defend workers, or organize for democratic accountability.
   
   And that brings us back to the Russian IP. Why would someone in Russia be trying to access a U.S. government server with the right password after DOGE engineers had already stripped out the safeguards? Was it opportunism? A known backdoor? Or something darker?
   
   Let’s not forget: Anonymous previously uncovered that Musk’s domain X.com was at one time hosted on servers located in Russia. This isn't ancient history or vague paranoia. This is a billionaire with deep financial, political, and technological reach who has already routed global communications infrastructure through adversarial territory. When you connect the dots, X.com’s Russian hosting, DOGE’s federal access, deleted logs, and credentialed Russian login attempts, you don’t get a tech visionary. You get a national security threat hiding behind memes and market-speak.
   
   The Trump administration, long accused of being sympathetic to Putin, has enabled a massive breach of federal security.
   
   And then arrives . . .
   
   A whistleblower's disclosure details how DOGE may have taken sensitive labor data by NPR/kpbs (Apr 15, 2025)
   https://www.npr.org/2025/04/15/nx-s1-53 … x-security
   
   The article is a deep dive and very, very long. If venturing to read it have a pot of coffee, maybe. Interesting giving pause.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 3 days agoin reply to this

      I mean, who actually reads this kind of nonsense? I could barely make it past the title—seriously, the word "MAY" should be a red flag that you're about to dive into a mix of wild conjecture, conspiracy theories, and outright slander. LOL.  "A whistleblower's disclosure details how DOGE may have taken sensitive labor data"
      
      This reads like the kind of gossip an old lady would exchange over the clothesline. It was painful to get through, but it certainly explains why so many people today have such messed-up mindsets. But hey, the beauty of free speech is that I can share my opinion on the article, right?
      
      This reads like the kind of gossip an old lady would exchange over the clothesline. It was painful to get through, but it certainly explains why so many people today have such messed-up mindsets. But hey, the beauty of free speech is that I can share my opinion on the article, right?
      
      The article presents itself as a bold exposé, but it quickly veers into the realm of speculation and bias. The claim that Elon Musk’s DOGE team somehow infiltrated the National Labor Relations Board to steal sensitive labor data is introduced with all the gravitas of a thriller, yet the evidence provided is far from convincing. Instead of concrete facts or independent verification, we’re treated to a parade of dramatic phrases like "chilling" and "something darker," which seem designed more to stir emotions than to inform. The narrative leaps from one unfounded connection to another, making the bold assumption that Musk is somehow pulling strings behind the scenes without offering any real proof. The article also casually links Musk’s past use of Russian servers to some shadowy plot involving Russian IPs attempting to access U.S. government servers. Of course, this is all presented with little more than a raised eyebrow and a lot of question marks. The suggestion that Musk’s actions are a national security threat is a nice touch, but unfortunately, the article doesn’t quite deliver the necessary facts to back up such a dramatic claim. It seems the goal here isn’t to report facts but to connect dots in the most sensational way possible, all while ignoring the simpler possibility that maybe, just maybe, there’s more to the story than a conspiracy theory waiting to be proven.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         tsmogposted 3 days agoin reply to this

         Enjoyed reading your creative expose. Nice! Your better at it than most. Kudos! Have fun, fun, fun . . .

         replyreport
         1. 87

            Sharlee01posted 3 days agoin reply to this

            Hey! Thanks--- it got my blood boiling the AM--- and on top of coffee-- need I say.

            replyreport
      2. 61

         Willowarborposted 3 days agoin reply to this

         This is whistleblower information though. So we respect some whistleblowers but not others?   At the very least, the accusations deserve investigation.

         replyreport
         1. 87

            Sharlee01posted 3 days agoin reply to this

            Honestly, it’s laughable. Not that long ago, high-ranking IRS whistleblowers came forward, put their names and faces out there, testified before Congress, and what did the left-leaning media do? They tore them apart. Yet now, we're supposed to trust every dramatic headline based on some anonymous “senior official”? Come on. In my view, if the left media cites an anonymous source, it’s probably not true. It’s rare they ever have a real, named human being backing the claim. Like I said—laughable. But hey, that’s just my opinion.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Willowarborposted 3 days agoin reply to this

               I don't think there's anything wrong with confidential sources. It is an accepted part of journalism.  Doesn't mean the information is not truthful.  Thankfully in  the US, journalists generally have a qualified right to protect the identities of their sources.  Even more important in today's environment that sources require protection from reprisal.   I'm sure you've heard Lisa Murkowski's recent statement  about quieting one's voice because "retaliation is real".

               replyreport
   2. 71

      Ken Burgessposted 2 days agoin reply to this

      LMFAO.... thanks for the laugh... still some things worth reading...
      
      Yeah, Musk the big bad boogeyman... without whom the corrupt Biden government couldn't have pursued their war against Russia with any real effect... it is unfortunate he chose to allow Starlink to give the Ukrainian effort what they needed to keep from being completely wiped from the battlefield by Russia.
      
      The same guy who proved how corrupt the government was exposing the Twitter files, the lies of our 51 highest ranking Intel Officials who signed off that the Hunter Laptop was a Russian conspiracy...
      
      Oh my goodness... and now they are exposing that Musk himself is a Russian puppet!!! Is there anyone who waves an American flag who isn't a Russian conspirator these days???
      
      Think of all the rockets they allow this man to launch... hundreds every year!!! With our most Top Secret military satellites being part of that!!
      
      Every satellite they have relied on him getting into space has probably been corrupted with Russian viruses that steal all their information!!!
      
      Oh my goodness... its an NPR article... the very NPR the Trump Administration no longer wants to fund with taxpayer dollars as all it spews is anti-American and anti-Patriotic dribble that only a brainwashed Progressive zealot could stomach to listen to... or read.

      replyreport
   3. 84

      tsmogposted 2 days agoin reply to this

      NLRB whistleblower claims Musk’s DOGE potentially caused significant security breach published at PBS News Hour (Apr 16, 2025) Watch video interview with Daniel Berulis, National Labor Relations Board Whistle-Blower or read the transcript.
      https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/nlrb- … ity-breach

      replyreport
6. 61

   Willowarborposted 2 days ago

   Steve Rattner on the Doge "savings"
   https://youtu.be/4ST6Qid-a-g?si=NYEfTbidmqO5GS9a
   
   Musk has cut somewhere between 0% and 3% of what he promised and most of what was cut was not waste or fraud or abuse, but simply expenditures Musk did not personally favor for partisan reasons...
   
   Doge is the biggest program failure in the history of American government.

   replyreport
7. 69

   IslandBitesposted 2 days ago

   An official whistleblower disclosure shared with Congress and other federal overseers... a whistleblower in the IT department of the NLRB, who disclosed his concerns to Congress and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel in a detailed report.
   
   The whistleblower's account is corroborated by internal documentation and was reviewed by 11 technical experts across other government agencies and the private sector.
   
   The whistleblower's disclosure to Congress and other federal overseers includes forensic data and records of conversations with colleagues that provide evidence of DOGE's access and activities.
   
   Yup. Sooo laughable.
   
   Also, sooo anonymous.
   
   "said the whistleblower, Daniel Berulis."

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Willowarborposted 2 days agoin reply to this

      Thank you!!
      
      "A federal employee who described the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) actions within the federal government has said he was stalked and threatened by an unknown person while he was compiling his disclosure on the department.
      
      Berulis' lawyer, Andrew P. Bakaj from Whistleblower Aid, disclosed: "While my client and my team were preparing this disclosure, someone physically taped a threatening note to Mr. Berulis' home door with photographs—taken via a drone—of him walking in his neighborhood.
      
      "The threatening note made clear reference to this very disclosure he was preparing for you, as the proper oversight authority. While we do not know specifically who did this, we can only speculate that it involved someone with the ability to access NLRB systems."
      
      No wonder these people would like to remain anonymous.  As Lisa Murkowski said..."retaliation is real".
      
      https://www.newsweek.com/doge-whistlebl … rm-2061087

      replyreport
   2. 86

      Miebakagh57posted 2 days agoin reply to this

      Daniel Berulis? It has not sent me laughing. Is  America laughable?

      replyreport
8. 87

   Sharlee01posted 2 days ago

   Bottom line: there are some serious allegations here, especially with the Russia angle, but without more evidence, it’s hard to say whether this is a legit scandal or just sloppy implementation of a government project. Either way, it deserves a deeper investigation.
   
   As of now, there doesn’t seem to be any public indication that Daniel Berulis has taken his claims to Congress or any official legislative body. Based on the interview, he went straight to the media with his concerns.
   
   Typically, whistleblowers do have the option to report concerns to Congress, especially when it involves potential national security issues or governmental misconduct. However, whether Berulis has chosen that route or if he plans to hasn’t been mentioned in any of the reports.
   
   It would be interesting to see if he decides to take this further by contacting lawmakers or requesting an official investigation. If the allegations are serious, it could lead to Congressional hearings or further scrutiny of the situation.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Willowarborposted 2 days agoin reply to this

      Are  Republicans going to even bother taking it up?  Looks like not... Turning the other way.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         Sharlee01posted 2 days agoin reply to this

         Why ask me? I have no idea if the Congress will take it up --- as I stated in my comment--- Bottom line: there are some serious allegations here, especially with the Russia angle, but without more evidence, it’s hard to say whether this is a legit scandal or just sloppy implementation of a government project. Either way, it deserves a deeper investigation.
         
           I have now found a couple of articles that indicate  "The specialist, Daniel Berulis, made the allegations in a sworn declaration submitted to members of Congress and to a federal whistleblower office, asking them to investigate what he called a cybersecurity breach. His lawyer said that Berulis had also been targeted with a threatening note and photographs showing him near where he lives. The declaration was first reported by NPR, and NBC News has not independently verified the allegations. "
         
         I feel it should be investigated by Congress.

         replyreport
   2. 86

      Miebakagh57posted 22 hours agoin reply to this

      Agreed.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         Sharlee01posted 22 hours agoin reply to this

         Hi Friend,
         
         I'll admit that over the past few years, I've grown a bit jaded when it comes to whistleblowers. The political noise, media spin, and conflicting agendas have made it hard to separate courage from opportunism. That said, I still firmly believe that when someone steps forward with serious claims, they deserve to be heard—and more importantly, those claims must be examined with real scrutiny and verified by evidence, not dismissed out of hand or accepted blindly.
         
         Truth shouldn't depend on who's speaking, but on what can be proven. In times like these, discernment is everything.

         replyreport
         1. 86

            Miebakagh57posted 22 hours agoin reply to this

            Again, I completedly agreed with you.

            replyreport
9. 69

   IslandBitesposted 2 days ago

   But according to an official whistleblower disclosure shared with Congress and other federal overseers...
   
   The specialist, Daniel Berulis, made the allegations in a sworn declaration submitted to members of Congress and to a federal whistleblower office, asking them to investigate what he called a cybersecurity breach...
   
   From the first article, it was stated he made the report to Congress.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 2 days agoin reply to this

      Thank you for the correction. I did not catch it in the article I read.

      replyreport
10. 81

    Credence2posted 2 days ago

    My friend Esoteric has obtained this information for your perusal. it looks like Musk’s indiscriminate chain saw has been, as usual, callously applied. This is not the look of a great nation.
    
    DID YOU KNOW THAT - that upwards of 40,000 people have died worldwide BECAUSE of Donald Trump's executive order barring aid through USAID.
    
    You heard right! Trump is already killing people just like he did during Covid.
    
    
    
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St … hatgpt.com

    replyreport
    1. 71

       Ken Burgessposted 44 hours agoin reply to this

       What a load of crud... Wikigarbage... Intels source of misinformation.
       
       Globalist elites just love the dupes who buy into all this anti Trump and anti American garbage.
       https://youtube.com/shorts/gtLowjkUR54? … 3jbCcf-Vuf

       replyreport
       1. 81

          Credence2posted 34 hours agoin reply to this

          Look, Ken, Trump in his despotic behavior gives us plenty of reasons not to be associated with him. Being anti-Trump is not being anti-American.

          replyreport