FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

So, Musk is submitting a report that will be presented to Congress?

Actually, it isn't worth it. Subject done from my part.

---

Of course. It's been well-reported that DOGE will prepare written recommendations for both executive and legislative action. If that were not the case, why would he need to threaten primary challenges?

---

Glad to hear the first, but fail to see how the 2nd is relevant. Musk threatened Congress on the passage of the CR, not any DOGE recommendations.
Which donors do all the time. Nothing remotely remarkable about what he did.

Keep in mind, my concern was ensuring the DOGE cuts were supported by data and have supported the ones that were reported. My concern in the fox calling the shots and everyone's response being "how can you question, it's Elon...". I am just as concerned over the politics of personality now as I was for Clinton and Obama, both had the same charisma the led to blind following.
DOGE will not be cutting anything. DOGE will identify opportunities for reforms & eliminations of things that will save money. Legislative & Executive will have to act on it. And I have no doubt Musk and other donors will be using those recommendations as a cudgel to get GOP votes in line. That is how sausage gets made in a free society. The left does it and the right does it, only the left has for several decades done it a lot better and the system is out of balance. I would submit the entry of Musk into the equation is a needed offset to the influences of the radical left and the swamp.

Someone talked to Elon, because he has stood down recently and with this vote coming up today he has been pretty quite, same with Trump. Encouraging.
Or, perhaps, he made his point....

Loved the "Childish" comment! There is a difference between the public challenging of the system and lobbying. True, they do get the same results, but the public challenging creates distrust and undermines systems. We do not need that.

The one thing I think we all agree, to paraphrase Churchill, is that our system has warts, but it is still better than the other systems. We do not need more January 6th demonstrations, I prefer the systems to work like they should.
If we can stop illegal immigration, balance the budget, and get the economy going, we have no reason to fear any more J6 deonstrations.

---

Did you hear that George Soros got a Presidential Medal of Freedom, essentially in exchange for electing Fani Willis-types of prosecutors all over the country to go soft on crime and hard on political opponents? Soros spent $1m in a Democrat primary in San Antonio Tx to unseat a Democrat incumbent DA (Nico LaHood) in favor of a wild-eyed progressive. He had no DOGE and almost no PR, but did more to destabilize the Republic than Donald Trump, by a country mile.

Musk is not a malign force. His efforts are restoring balance. He deserves kudos if he and others can whip GOP'ers into line to pass the agenda Trump was elected upon.

---

Soros is a piece of ****, I am not for any Meda to him


I am not putting value judgements on Musk, I actually like his ideas and think he is one of the better visionaries we have had. I work with innovation, I respect the hell out of Musk.

I have no issue with his statements of what he wants and what he thinks we should do. All of that is great, we need it.

I have issue with the "OR, I will...." That is a threat. I do not believe that a Nation can respond to that or allow it without degrading the bedrock of the Nation's authority and standing. Same with Jan 6th, demonstrate, march. Donald Jr and Guilianni speak. Don't break into the Capital and attack Capital Policemen. I am good with Trump pardoning anyone that was just there, specifically, if you did not go inside or plan violence, pardon. No issues. A Nation can't condone, give in or just turn its back on threats and violence. Simple as that.

---

Telling an elected official you're unhappy with them and will back an opponent if they don't change their policies is not a threat and it's certainly not violence. Happens all the time, all over the country, at all levels of government.

EX: I spent last weekend with profoundly wealthy friends, one of which is 3rd largest political donor in the state...dinner with Trump at MAL level donors. They just sold a very large working ranch (6-digits of acres) and downsized to a 3000ac showplace (where they will regularly entertain governors & senators & the like.) The new ranch manager explained how he was having a hard time burning brush piles & pastures, thanks to the new fire marshal being a real PITA, basically shutting down the transformation of the ranch from deer habitat to quail habitat. What the owner will do is call county-level elected officials, starting with the sheriff, and have discussions about fundraisers for their next election. In the course of those discussions, the issue of the unreasonable fire marshal will be discussed. Changes will be requested. If not.....

Happens ALL the time.
You know that.

---

We disagree on this. Sorry, Musk came across as a threat. You or I say that, it means little. Musk, Soros, Bezos, Allen, Gates, etc say that, it is a different meaning. I expect MAGA spoke to Trump about it. I noticed Musk has quieted down.

I expect Trump, or someone with a good sense of how to get things done in Wash, had a discussion with him. Johnson was elected Speaker. Trump says he wants a CR in April, more than enough time to negotiate. Trump seems to get it this time. He needs to focus on getting things done. I want to see the "Art of the Deal."

To his credit, he seems to be got it under control this time. I am encouraged.

---

No billionaire is ever under control of anybody other than themself.
Musk got what he wanted at this time = the party united behind Trump, Speaker elected, election certified, etc...

Musk is the furthest thing from a problem. He's been a uniformly positive influence thus far. He's not crossways with Maga at all. The recalcitrants in the Speaker election were not a Maga rebellion. Norman actually supported Nikki Haley in the 2024 primary.....

---

You know, someone cannot be a problem or be liked and still do a stupid act. It is not a binary choice. Musk screwed up threatening Congress before a vote, with great wealth and power comes great responsibility. Publicly threatening and then expecting everyone to sign off on it undermines our system. Billionaires can pull bonehead moves.
Except it worked. It guaranteed that a fight over the Speakership would not prevent Trump from being certified winner of the 2024 election.

Also, Musk doesn't HAVE to get everything he wants and still be good for the Nation. If we lose the ability to disagree, call out and discuss acts under the threat of being "cancelled" we are no better than the those that came before.
Why do you reflexively waive the strawmen about Musk? He hasn't asked for "everything." He's actually on record saying there is no need for tax subsidies for electric cars.

Listen or read Gorsuch's book, excellent view on our system of Government.

---

Why does it bug you that a donor on the right is making demands that will facilitate policies you like? You were an outspoken critic when Freedom Caucus members removed McCarthy and took the election of his replacement to 15 rounds. You do want to fix the problems on the southern border don't you? You do want to restore fiscal sanity, right?

---

I keep saying the same thing. I don't care if it is left or right, it is the expectation of public and official acceptance that it is alright to threaten elected officials. There is a separation between Legislative and Executive Branch for a reason. Musk is pseudo-Executive Branch threatening with his billions. That is not right. I do not know how many ways I can say it to you. It is not appropriate or acceptable to threaten elected officials and doubly so not for our media, public and institutions to approve of it. Pretty basic, not a left, right or subject matter issue.

---

Threaten in what way specifically? Losing office or loss of life or injury?

ATL Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

So, Musk is submitting a report that will be presented to Congress?

Actually, it isn't worth it. Subject done from my part.

---

Of course. It's been well-reported that DOGE will prepare written recommendations for both executive and legislative action. If that were not the case, why would he need to threaten primary challenges?

---

Glad to hear the first, but fail to see how the 2nd is relevant. Musk threatened Congress on the passage of the CR, not any DOGE recommendations.
Which donors do all the time. Nothing remotely remarkable about what he did.

Keep in mind, my concern was ensuring the DOGE cuts were supported by data and have supported the ones that were reported. My concern in the fox calling the shots and everyone's response being "how can you question, it's Elon...". I am just as concerned over the politics of personality now as I was for Clinton and Obama, both had the same charisma the led to blind following.
DOGE will not be cutting anything. DOGE will identify opportunities for reforms & eliminations of things that will save money. Legislative & Executive will have to act on it. And I have no doubt Musk and other donors will be using those recommendations as a cudgel to get GOP votes in line. That is how sausage gets made in a free society. The left does it and the right does it, only the left has for several decades done it a lot better and the system is out of balance. I would submit the entry of Musk into the equation is a needed offset to the influences of the radical left and the swamp.

Someone talked to Elon, because he has stood down recently and with this vote coming up today he has been pretty quite, same with Trump. Encouraging.
Or, perhaps, he made his point....

Loved the "Childish" comment! There is a difference between the public challenging of the system and lobbying. True, they do get the same results, but the public challenging creates distrust and undermines systems. We do not need that.

The one thing I think we all agree, to paraphrase Churchill, is that our system has warts, but it is still better than the other systems. We do not need more January 6th demonstrations, I prefer the systems to work like they should.
If we can stop illegal immigration, balance the budget, and get the economy going, we have no reason to fear any more J6 deonstrations.

---

Did you hear that George Soros got a Presidential Medal of Freedom, essentially in exchange for electing Fani Willis-types of prosecutors all over the country to go soft on crime and hard on political opponents? Soros spent $1m in a Democrat primary in San Antonio Tx to unseat a Democrat incumbent DA (Nico LaHood) in favor of a wild-eyed progressive. He had no DOGE and almost no PR, but did more to destabilize the Republic than Donald Trump, by a country mile.

Musk is not a malign force. His efforts are restoring balance. He deserves kudos if he and others can whip GOP'ers into line to pass the agenda Trump was elected upon.

---

Soros is a piece of ****, I am not for any Meda to him


I am not putting value judgements on Musk, I actually like his ideas and think he is one of the better visionaries we have had. I work with innovation, I respect the hell out of Musk.

I have no issue with his statements of what he wants and what he thinks we should do. All of that is great, we need it.

I have issue with the "OR, I will...." That is a threat. I do not believe that a Nation can respond to that or allow it without degrading the bedrock of the Nation's authority and standing. Same with Jan 6th, demonstrate, march. Donald Jr and Guilianni speak. Don't break into the Capital and attack Capital Policemen. I am good with Trump pardoning anyone that was just there, specifically, if you did not go inside or plan violence, pardon. No issues. A Nation can't condone, give in or just turn its back on threats and violence. Simple as that.

---

Telling an elected official you're unhappy with them and will back an opponent if they don't change their policies is not a threat and it's certainly not violence. Happens all the time, all over the country, at all levels of government.

EX: I spent last weekend with profoundly wealthy friends, one of which is 3rd largest political donor in the state...dinner with Trump at MAL level donors. They just sold a very large working ranch (6-digits of acres) and downsized to a 3000ac showplace (where they will regularly entertain governors & senators & the like.) The new ranch manager explained how he was having a hard time burning brush piles & pastures, thanks to the new fire marshal being a real PITA, basically shutting down the transformation of the ranch from deer habitat to quail habitat. What the owner will do is call county-level elected officials, starting with the sheriff, and have discussions about fundraisers for their next election. In the course of those discussions, the issue of the unreasonable fire marshal will be discussed. Changes will be requested. If not.....

Happens ALL the time.
You know that.

---

We disagree on this. Sorry, Musk came across as a threat. You or I say that, it means little. Musk, Soros, Bezos, Allen, Gates, etc say that, it is a different meaning. I expect MAGA spoke to Trump about it. I noticed Musk has quieted down.

I expect Trump, or someone with a good sense of how to get things done in Wash, had a discussion with him. Johnson was elected Speaker. Trump says he wants a CR in April, more than enough time to negotiate. Trump seems to get it this time. He needs to focus on getting things done. I want to see the "Art of the Deal."

To his credit, he seems to be got it under control this time. I am encouraged.

---

No billionaire is ever under control of anybody other than themself.
Musk got what he wanted at this time = the party united behind Trump, Speaker elected, election certified, etc...

Musk is the furthest thing from a problem. He's been a uniformly positive influence thus far. He's not crossways with Maga at all. The recalcitrants in the Speaker election were not a Maga rebellion. Norman actually supported Nikki Haley in the 2024 primary.....

---

You know, someone cannot be a problem or be liked and still do a stupid act. It is not a binary choice. Musk screwed up threatening Congress before a vote, with great wealth and power comes great responsibility. Publicly threatening and then expecting everyone to sign off on it undermines our system. Billionaires can pull bonehead moves.
Except it worked. It guaranteed that a fight over the Speakership would not prevent Trump from being certified winner of the 2024 election.

Also, Musk doesn't HAVE to get everything he wants and still be good for the Nation. If we lose the ability to disagree, call out and discuss acts under the threat of being "cancelled" we are no better than the those that came before.
Why do you reflexively waive the strawmen about Musk? He hasn't asked for "everything." He's actually on record saying there is no need for tax subsidies for electric cars.

Listen or read Gorsuch's book, excellent view on our system of Government.

---

Why does it bug you that a donor on the right is making demands that will facilitate policies you like? You were an outspoken critic when Freedom Caucus members removed McCarthy and took the election of his replacement to 15 rounds. You do want to fix the problems on the southern border don't you? You do want to restore fiscal sanity, right?

---

I keep saying the same thing. I don't care if it is left or right, it is the expectation of public and official acceptance that it is alright to threaten elected officials. There is a separation between Legislative and Executive Branch for a reason. Musk is pseudo-Executive Branch threatening with his billions. That is not right. I do not know how many ways I can say it to you. It is not appropriate or acceptable to threaten elected officials and doubly so not for our media, public and institutions to approve of it. Pretty basic, not a left, right or subject matter issue.

---

Threaten in what way specifically? Losing office or loss of life or injury?

---

Pick your way. Any of them. Any form of extortion is wrong and contrary to how the system is supposed to work. Being primaried. Physical harm. Financial ruin. Any of them.

If we start losing sight that the system is supposed to work a certain way and decide it is ok as long as we get what we want, the whole thing is shot. Congress is not supposed to be extorted into voting a certain way. Does it happen, of course, I am positive it does. Doing it publicly and everyone saying it is ok because he was right and got his way, undermines the system. That we cannot have.

In the Judiciary, just like lady justice is supposed to be blind, take off the blindfold and we are Putin's Russia or Xi's China. Does it happen, sure. But to watch it happen and condone it?

Idealistic? Naive? Yeah, but at the end of the day people have to defend what is right and be originalist in reading the Constitution. We have to strive to meet the original intent. Just like Biden should be prosecuted if he broke the law. Just like Soros is wrong. I like Musk, but he was wrong in doing what he did on X. It undermined the system, weakened the GOP (the only ones on their side) and gave the perception of extortion. You guys don't care, but someone has to if we are going to keep a Democratic Republic. Read Gorsuch's book, he explains the same thing better than I can...

A loon is someone that thinks letting China control the most critical trade route in the Western Hemisphere is smart.

Jr needs to turn off The View.

I imagine Trump's response would be something along the lines of… Don't threaten me with a good time

Canadian politicians are now threatening to take California, Washington and Oregon, promising them free healthcare if they join as a province of Canada https://t.co/kqF75SXPrf pic.twitter.com/lv9tSrgEqv

— HOT SPOT (@HotSpotHotSpot) January 7, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

I imagine Trump's response would be something along the lines of… Don't threaten me with a good time

Canadian politicians are now threatening to take California, Washington and Oregon, promising them free healthcare if they join as a province of Canada https://t.co/kqF75SXPrf pic.twitter.com/lv9tSrgEqv

— HOT SPOT (@HotSpotHotSpot) January 7, 2025

---

Funny offer, but the Canadian states would quickly be a drain on the US states. More like "come join Canada and help us pay for the rest of our countries Healthcare and programs".

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I imagine Trump's response would be something along the lines of… Don't threaten me with a good time

Canadian politicians are now threatening to take California, Washington and Oregon, promising them free healthcare if they join as a province of Canada https://t.co/kqF75SXPrf pic.twitter.com/lv9tSrgEqv

— HOT SPOT (@HotSpotHotSpot) January 7, 2025

---

Funny offer, but the Canadian states would quickly be a drain on the US states. More like "come join Canada and help us pay for the rest of our countries Healthcare and programs".

---

A few would be worth it

Alberta alone would be like bringing in another Texas (very worth while)

But yea…surprising many of the provinces are not doing great

GDP per capita of Canadian provinces (red) versus American states (blue). Canada largely poorer than the US by comparison with the exceptions of Alberta and Saskatchewan via @trevortombe pic.twitter.com/onq4MGE1vJ

— Jon Hartley (@Jon_Hartley_) July 17, 2023

FLBear5630 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

So, Musk is submitting a report that will be presented to Congress?

Actually, it isn't worth it. Subject done from my part.

---

Of course. It's been well-reported that DOGE will prepare written recommendations for both executive and legislative action. If that were not the case, why would he need to threaten primary challenges?

---

Glad to hear the first, but fail to see how the 2nd is relevant. Musk threatened Congress on the passage of the CR, not any DOGE recommendations.
Which donors do all the time. Nothing remotely remarkable about what he did.

Keep in mind, my concern was ensuring the DOGE cuts were supported by data and have supported the ones that were reported. My concern in the fox calling the shots and everyone's response being "how can you question, it's Elon...". I am just as concerned over the politics of personality now as I was for Clinton and Obama, both had the same charisma the led to blind following.
DOGE will not be cutting anything. DOGE will identify opportunities for reforms & eliminations of things that will save money. Legislative & Executive will have to act on it. And I have no doubt Musk and other donors will be using those recommendations as a cudgel to get GOP votes in line. That is how sausage gets made in a free society. The left does it and the right does it, only the left has for several decades done it a lot better and the system is out of balance. I would submit the entry of Musk into the equation is a needed offset to the influences of the radical left and the swamp.

Someone talked to Elon, because he has stood down recently and with this vote coming up today he has been pretty quite, same with Trump. Encouraging.
Or, perhaps, he made his point....

Loved the "Childish" comment! There is a difference between the public challenging of the system and lobbying. True, they do get the same results, but the public challenging creates distrust and undermines systems. We do not need that.

The one thing I think we all agree, to paraphrase Churchill, is that our system has warts, but it is still better than the other systems. We do not need more January 6th demonstrations, I prefer the systems to work like they should.
If we can stop illegal immigration, balance the budget, and get the economy going, we have no reason to fear any more J6 deonstrations.

---

Did you hear that George Soros got a Presidential Medal of Freedom, essentially in exchange for electing Fani Willis-types of prosecutors all over the country to go soft on crime and hard on political opponents? Soros spent $1m in a Democrat primary in San Antonio Tx to unseat a Democrat incumbent DA (Nico LaHood) in favor of a wild-eyed progressive. He had no DOGE and almost no PR, but did more to destabilize the Republic than Donald Trump, by a country mile.

Musk is not a malign force. His efforts are restoring balance. He deserves kudos if he and others can whip GOP'ers into line to pass the agenda Trump was elected upon.

---

Soros is a piece of ****, I am not for any Meda to him


I am not putting value judgements on Musk, I actually like his ideas and think he is one of the better visionaries we have had. I work with innovation, I respect the hell out of Musk.

I have no issue with his statements of what he wants and what he thinks we should do. All of that is great, we need it.

I have issue with the "OR, I will...." That is a threat. I do not believe that a Nation can respond to that or allow it without degrading the bedrock of the Nation's authority and standing. Same with Jan 6th, demonstrate, march. Donald Jr and Guilianni speak. Don't break into the Capital and attack Capital Policemen. I am good with Trump pardoning anyone that was just there, specifically, if you did not go inside or plan violence, pardon. No issues. A Nation can't condone, give in or just turn its back on threats and violence. Simple as that.

---

Telling an elected official you're unhappy with them and will back an opponent if they don't change their policies is not a threat and it's certainly not violence. Happens all the time, all over the country, at all levels of government.

EX: I spent last weekend with profoundly wealthy friends, one of which is 3rd largest political donor in the state...dinner with Trump at MAL level donors. They just sold a very large working ranch (6-digits of acres) and downsized to a 3000ac showplace (where they will regularly entertain governors & senators & the like.) The new ranch manager explained how he was having a hard time burning brush piles & pastures, thanks to the new fire marshal being a real PITA, basically shutting down the transformation of the ranch from deer habitat to quail habitat. What the owner will do is call county-level elected officials, starting with the sheriff, and have discussions about fundraisers for their next election. In the course of those discussions, the issue of the unreasonable fire marshal will be discussed. Changes will be requested. If not.....

Happens ALL the time.
You know that.

---

We disagree on this. Sorry, Musk came across as a threat. You or I say that, it means little. Musk, Soros, Bezos, Allen, Gates, etc say that, it is a different meaning. I expect MAGA spoke to Trump about it. I noticed Musk has quieted down.

I expect Trump, or someone with a good sense of how to get things done in Wash, had a discussion with him. Johnson was elected Speaker. Trump says he wants a CR in April, more than enough time to negotiate. Trump seems to get it this time. He needs to focus on getting things done. I want to see the "Art of the Deal."

To his credit, he seems to be got it under control this time. I am encouraged.

---

No billionaire is ever under control of anybody other than themself.
Musk got what he wanted at this time = the party united behind Trump, Speaker elected, election certified, etc...

Musk is the furthest thing from a problem. He's been a uniformly positive influence thus far. He's not crossways with Maga at all. The recalcitrants in the Speaker election were not a Maga rebellion. Norman actually supported Nikki Haley in the 2024 primary.....

---

You know, someone cannot be a problem or be liked and still do a stupid act. It is not a binary choice. Musk screwed up threatening Congress before a vote, with great wealth and power comes great responsibility. Publicly threatening and then expecting everyone to sign off on it undermines our system. Billionaires can pull bonehead moves.
Except it worked. It guaranteed that a fight over the Speakership would not prevent Trump from being certified winner of the 2024 election.

Also, Musk doesn't HAVE to get everything he wants and still be good for the Nation. If we lose the ability to disagree, call out and discuss acts under the threat of being "cancelled" we are no better than the those that came before.
Why do you reflexively waive the strawmen about Musk? He hasn't asked for "everything." He's actually on record saying there is no need for tax subsidies for electric cars.

Listen or read Gorsuch's book, excellent view on our system of Government.

---

Why does it bug you that a donor on the right is making demands that will facilitate policies you like? You were an outspoken critic when Freedom Caucus members removed McCarthy and took the election of his replacement to 15 rounds. You do want to fix the problems on the southern border don't you? You do want to restore fiscal sanity, right?

---

I keep saying the same thing. I don't care if it is left or right, it is the expectation of public and official acceptance that it is alright to threaten elected officials. There is a separation between Legislative and Executive Branch for a reason. Musk is pseudo-Executive Branch threatening with his billions. That is not right. I do not know how many ways I can say it to you. It is not appropriate or acceptable to threaten elected officials and doubly so not for our media, public and institutions to approve of it. Pretty basic, not a left, right or subject matter issue.

---

Threaten in what way specifically? Losing office or loss of life or injury?

---

Pick your way. Any of them. Any form of extortion is wrong and contrary to how the system is supposed to work. Being primaried. Physical harm. Financial ruin. Any of them.

If we start losing sight that the system is supposed to work a certain way and decide it is ok as long as we get what we want, the whole thing is shot. Congress is not supposed to be extorted into voting a certain way. Does it happen, of course, I am positive it does. Doing it publicly and everyone saying it is ok because he was right and got his way, undermines the system. That we cannot have.

In the Judiciary, just like lady justice is supposed to be blind, take off the blindfold and we are Putin's Russia or Xi's China. Does it happen, sure. But to watch it happen and condone it?

Idealistic? Naive? Yeah, but at the end of the day people have to defend what is right and be originalist in reading the Constitution. We have to strive to meet the original intent. Just like Biden should be prosecuted if he broke the law. Just like Soros is wrong. I like Musk, but he was wrong in doing what he did on X. It undermined the system, weakened the GOP (the only ones on their side) and gave the perception of extortion. You guys don't care, but someone has to if we are going to keep a Democratic Republic. Read Gorsuch's book, he explains the same thing better than I can...

---

We accept lobbying which is a form of bribery, and even extortion in your world if the threat of withholding is used as a disincentive to action something.

I have similar concerns, but I think you're overreacting. As I've said before, the players change, the game does not. I'm interested in changing the game, first and foremost by reducing the scope and power of the Executive Branch. Nothing else matters until that point.

KaiBear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

Greenland is vying for independence as it is. Given that every Greenlander will become millionaires if the US buys them, it's highly possible that the "nation" joins us willingly.

---

Greenland will not become a territory of the United States.

The entire concept is ludicrous.

Obviously Trump is creating a smokescreen here. For what purpose only God knows.

---

That's a very real possibility. I don't know how obvious it is and we don't really know how serious he is. Trump is like that. It's somewhat entertaining but also a bit scary. Trump still has an ego and is still capable of making big mistakes. Personally, I think Trump 47 will look different from the last time. I'm trying to be optimistic about what that means. Much depends on how and how well he deals with the fascists in America. They are evil and have far too much power which they regularly abuse and keep demonstrating over & over again. Example 3,657,931: wildfires in California.

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

So, Musk is submitting a report that will be presented to Congress?

Actually, it isn't worth it. Subject done from my part.

---

Of course. It's been well-reported that DOGE will prepare written recommendations for both executive and legislative action. If that were not the case, why would he need to threaten primary challenges?

---

Glad to hear the first, but fail to see how the 2nd is relevant. Musk threatened Congress on the passage of the CR, not any DOGE recommendations.
Which donors do all the time. Nothing remotely remarkable about what he did.

Keep in mind, my concern was ensuring the DOGE cuts were supported by data and have supported the ones that were reported. My concern in the fox calling the shots and everyone's response being "how can you question, it's Elon...". I am just as concerned over the politics of personality now as I was for Clinton and Obama, both had the same charisma the led to blind following.
DOGE will not be cutting anything. DOGE will identify opportunities for reforms & eliminations of things that will save money. Legislative & Executive will have to act on it. And I have no doubt Musk and other donors will be using those recommendations as a cudgel to get GOP votes in line. That is how sausage gets made in a free society. The left does it and the right does it, only the left has for several decades done it a lot better and the system is out of balance. I would submit the entry of Musk into the equation is a needed offset to the influences of the radical left and the swamp.

Someone talked to Elon, because he has stood down recently and with this vote coming up today he has been pretty quite, same with Trump. Encouraging.
Or, perhaps, he made his point....

Loved the "Childish" comment! There is a difference between the public challenging of the system and lobbying. True, they do get the same results, but the public challenging creates distrust and undermines systems. We do not need that.

The one thing I think we all agree, to paraphrase Churchill, is that our system has warts, but it is still better than the other systems. We do not need more January 6th demonstrations, I prefer the systems to work like they should.
If we can stop illegal immigration, balance the budget, and get the economy going, we have no reason to fear any more J6 deonstrations.

---

Did you hear that George Soros got a Presidential Medal of Freedom, essentially in exchange for electing Fani Willis-types of prosecutors all over the country to go soft on crime and hard on political opponents? Soros spent $1m in a Democrat primary in San Antonio Tx to unseat a Democrat incumbent DA (Nico LaHood) in favor of a wild-eyed progressive. He had no DOGE and almost no PR, but did more to destabilize the Republic than Donald Trump, by a country mile.

Musk is not a malign force. His efforts are restoring balance. He deserves kudos if he and others can whip GOP'ers into line to pass the agenda Trump was elected upon.

---

Soros is a piece of ****, I am not for any Meda to him


I am not putting value judgements on Musk, I actually like his ideas and think he is one of the better visionaries we have had. I work with innovation, I respect the hell out of Musk.

I have no issue with his statements of what he wants and what he thinks we should do. All of that is great, we need it.

I have issue with the "OR, I will...." That is a threat. I do not believe that a Nation can respond to that or allow it without degrading the bedrock of the Nation's authority and standing. Same with Jan 6th, demonstrate, march. Donald Jr and Guilianni speak. Don't break into the Capital and attack Capital Policemen. I am good with Trump pardoning anyone that was just there, specifically, if you did not go inside or plan violence, pardon. No issues. A Nation can't condone, give in or just turn its back on threats and violence. Simple as that.

---

Telling an elected official you're unhappy with them and will back an opponent if they don't change their policies is not a threat and it's certainly not violence. Happens all the time, all over the country, at all levels of government.

EX: I spent last weekend with profoundly wealthy friends, one of which is 3rd largest political donor in the state...dinner with Trump at MAL level donors. They just sold a very large working ranch (6-digits of acres) and downsized to a 3000ac showplace (where they will regularly entertain governors & senators & the like.) The new ranch manager explained how he was having a hard time burning brush piles & pastures, thanks to the new fire marshal being a real PITA, basically shutting down the transformation of the ranch from deer habitat to quail habitat. What the owner will do is call county-level elected officials, starting with the sheriff, and have discussions about fundraisers for their next election. In the course of those discussions, the issue of the unreasonable fire marshal will be discussed. Changes will be requested. If not.....

Happens ALL the time.
You know that.

---

We disagree on this. Sorry, Musk came across as a threat. You or I say that, it means little. Musk, Soros, Bezos, Allen, Gates, etc say that, it is a different meaning. I expect MAGA spoke to Trump about it. I noticed Musk has quieted down.

I expect Trump, or someone with a good sense of how to get things done in Wash, had a discussion with him. Johnson was elected Speaker. Trump says he wants a CR in April, more than enough time to negotiate. Trump seems to get it this time. He needs to focus on getting things done. I want to see the "Art of the Deal."

To his credit, he seems to be got it under control this time. I am encouraged.

---

No billionaire is ever under control of anybody other than themself.
Musk got what he wanted at this time = the party united behind Trump, Speaker elected, election certified, etc...

Musk is the furthest thing from a problem. He's been a uniformly positive influence thus far. He's not crossways with Maga at all. The recalcitrants in the Speaker election were not a Maga rebellion. Norman actually supported Nikki Haley in the 2024 primary.....

---

You know, someone cannot be a problem or be liked and still do a stupid act. It is not a binary choice. Musk screwed up threatening Congress before a vote, with great wealth and power comes great responsibility. Publicly threatening and then expecting everyone to sign off on it undermines our system. Billionaires can pull bonehead moves.
Except it worked. It guaranteed that a fight over the Speakership would not prevent Trump from being certified winner of the 2024 election.

Also, Musk doesn't HAVE to get everything he wants and still be good for the Nation. If we lose the ability to disagree, call out and discuss acts under the threat of being "cancelled" we are no better than the those that came before.
Why do you reflexively waive the strawmen about Musk? He hasn't asked for "everything." He's actually on record saying there is no need for tax subsidies for electric cars.

Listen or read Gorsuch's book, excellent view on our system of Government.

---

Why does it bug you that a donor on the right is making demands that will facilitate policies you like? You were an outspoken critic when Freedom Caucus members removed McCarthy and took the election of his replacement to 15 rounds. You do want to fix the problems on the southern border don't you? You do want to restore fiscal sanity, right?

---

I keep saying the same thing. I don't care if it is left or right, it is the expectation of public and official acceptance that it is alright to threaten elected officials.
Telling an elected official you will support an opponent if you don't like their voting record is not a threat. It's a citizen exercising a number of 1st Amendment protected liberties: free speech, freedom of assembly, redress of grievances.

There is a separation between Legislative and Executive Branch for a reason. Musk is pseudo-Executive Branch threatening with his billions.
LOL now you are making stuff up. Musk is not an Executive Branch official. He is a private citizen who has volunteered to serve gratis on a Presidential Commission to study federal spending and recommend reforms/cuts.

That is not right. I do not know how many ways I can say it to you. It is not appropriate or acceptable to threaten elected officials and doubly so not for our media, public and institutions to approve of it. Pretty basic, not a left, right or subject matter issue.
Pretty crazy take. "I don't like what Musk wants to do, so I'm going to call him a tyrant."

---

What you're doing here is not much different than all the Democrats running around last year calling Trump a Nazi, just because they don't like his policies.

There is literally nothing remarkable about what Musk has done. It happens all the time on both sides of the aisle.

Redbrickbear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I imagine Trump's response would be something along the lines of… Don't threaten me with a good time

Canadian politicians are now threatening to take California, Washington and Oregon, promising them free healthcare if they join as a province of Canada https://t.co/kqF75SXPrf pic.twitter.com/lv9tSrgEqv

— HOT SPOT (@HotSpotHotSpot) January 7, 2025

---

Funny offer, but the Canadian states would quickly be a drain on the US states. More like "come join Canada and help us pay for the rest of our countries Healthcare and programs".

---

A few would be worth it

Alberta alone would be like bringing in another Texas (very worth while)

But yea…surprising many of the provinces are not doing great

GDP per capita of Canadian provinces (red) versus American states (blue). Canada largely poorer than the US by comparison with the exceptions of Alberta and Saskatchewan via @trevortombe pic.twitter.com/onq4MGE1vJ

— Jon Hartley (@Jon_Hartley_) July 17, 2023

---

Alberta and Saskatchewan are non-negotiable. They are in or I'm opposed to the deal. The bird hunting there is superior.

whiterock said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

TinFoilHatPreacherBear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

I imagine Trump's response would be something along the lines of… Don't threaten me with a good time

Canadian politicians are now threatening to take California, Washington and Oregon, promising them free healthcare if they join as a province of Canada https://t.co/kqF75SXPrf pic.twitter.com/lv9tSrgEqv

— HOT SPOT (@HotSpotHotSpot) January 7, 2025

---

Funny offer, but the Canadian states would quickly be a drain on the US states. More like "come join Canada and help us pay for the rest of our countries Healthcare and programs".

---

A few would be worth it

Alberta alone would be like bringing in another Texas (very worth while)

But yea…surprising many of the provinces are not doing great

GDP per capita of Canadian provinces (red) versus American states (blue). Canada largely poorer than the US by comparison with the exceptions of Alberta and Saskatchewan via @trevortombe pic.twitter.com/onq4MGE1vJ

— Jon Hartley (@Jon_Hartley_) July 17, 2023

---

Alberta and Saskatchewan are non-negotiable. They are in or I'm opposed to the deal. The bird hunting there is superior.

---

Looking at the chart they should be the only ones in

Net economic contributors and conservative voters

Trump on Canada: We don't need their fuel or energy or oil and gas we don't need anything that they have. pic.twitter.com/8xLaIQq1Or

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 10, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

Trump on Canada: We don't need their fuel or energy or oil and gas we don't need anything that they have. pic.twitter.com/8xLaIQq1Or

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 10, 2025

---

Timber is the only thing I can think of and women in sweaters for winter at hockey games..

boognish_bear said:

---

Trump on Canada: We don't need their fuel or energy or oil and gas we don't need anything that they have. pic.twitter.com/8xLaIQq1Or

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 10, 2025

---

Not so.

The western US has an increasing need of Canadian fresh water.

BREAKING: Greenland’s leader, Múte Egede, said he is prepared to negotiate with Trump about the future of the Arctic territory, per NYP

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) January 11, 2025

boognish_bear said:

---

BREAKING: Greenland’s leader, Múte Egede, said he is prepared to negotiate with Trump about the future of the Arctic territory, per NYP

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) January 11, 2025

---

This makes sense, they will have a better shot at a real quality of life with the US than waiting for Putin to take it.

Here is a question, is Greenland part of the NATO Article 5? If Russia landed, would NATO do anything besides sanctions?

Running a little hot tonight
I can barely see the road

KaiBear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Trump on Canada: We don't need their fuel or energy or oil and gas we don't need anything that they have. pic.twitter.com/8xLaIQq1Or

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 10, 2025

---

Not so.

The western US has an increasing need of Canadian fresh water.

---

We've already agreed to give them the Left coast: Cali, Oregon & Washington.

boognish_bear said:

---

BREAKING:

The EU ”won’t tolerate" a takeover of Greenland by the US. France says Europe is a strong continent and won’t be intimidated. It’s warning Trump against threatening the bloc's "sovereign borders"

Source: Telegraph pic.twitter.com/hKPBniOhcV

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) January 8, 2025

---

I suspect this is the reaction that Trump was hoping for. By focusing on our sphere of influence in the Americas and demanding that Europe spend more on defense, he seems to be sending a message that NATO is no longer the cornerstone of our security. In that case he would have reason to create such rifts.

historian said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

Trump on Canada: We don't need their fuel or energy or oil and gas we don't need anything that they have. pic.twitter.com/8xLaIQq1Or

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 10, 2025

---

Not so.

The western US has an increasing need of Canadian fresh water.

---

We've already agreed to give them the Left coast: Cali, Oregon & Washington.

---

Nevada, Utah and Montana might want Canadian fresh water.

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

boognish_bear said:

---

BREAKING:

The EU ”won’t tolerate" a takeover of Greenland by the US. France says Europe is a strong continent and won’t be intimidated. It’s warning Trump against threatening the bloc's "sovereign borders"

Source: Telegraph pic.twitter.com/hKPBniOhcV

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) January 8, 2025

---

I suspect this is the reaction that Trump was hoping for. By focusing on our sphere of influence in the Americas and demanding that Europe spend more on defense, he seems to be sending a message that NATO is no longer the cornerstone of our security. In that case he would have reason to create such rifts.

---

he's pushing a win/win narrative. Either Denmark and/or EU must change its policies on Greenland to keep it in the Western Order, or the US will end up with it. That of course would be preferable to Greenland inking massive loan/development deals with China, which would give China a seat on the Arctic Council and easy bases for intel collection and military operations against the Atlantic trade routes that Nato depends upon for survival.

---

100% true.

China plays the "long game" (I hate that term, but it is used constantly.) the US needs to start making moves to block that game. All Long Games begin with decisions and ACTIONS in the present.

Good luck with that

JUST IN: 🇻🇪 Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro says he will invade Puerto Rico with Brazilian troops and liberate them from the United States.

"The freedom of Puerto Rico is pending and we will achieve it with Brazilian troops." pic.twitter.com/CCFq2K1h5s

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) January 13, 2025

Deal may be starting to take form. Greenland will declare independence and then sign major trade/investment deals with USA.

I would imagine deals will involve some kind of protectorate agreement, which would keep Greenland within the Nato umbrella.

Right now, Greenland belongs to Denmark. After independence, Greenland belongs to the highest bidder. Good call by Trump to step up and make sure we are the highest bidder.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/greenland-is-ready-to-cooperate-with-trump-premier-says/ar-BB1romyn

whiterock said:

---

Deal may be starting to take form. Greenland will declare independence and then sign major trade/investment deals with USA.

I would imagine deals will involve some kind of protectorate agreement, which would keep Greenland within the Nato umbrella.

Right now, Greenland belongs to Denmark. After independence, Greenland belongs to the highest bidder. Good call by Trump to step up and make sure we are the highest bidder.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/greenland-is-ready-to-cooperate-with-trump-premier-says/ar-BB1romyn

---

We need to make sure we stay that way. Don't want China squeezing their way in, they do that alot.

That's the main issue with the Panama Canal.

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Deal may be starting to take form. Greenland will declare independence and then sign major trade/investment deals with USA.

I would imagine deals will involve some kind of protectorate agreement, which would keep Greenland within the Nato umbrella.

Right now, Greenland belongs to Denmark. After independence, Greenland belongs to the highest bidder. Good call by Trump to step up and make sure we are the highest bidder.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/greenland-is-ready-to-cooperate-with-trump-premier-says/ar-BB1romyn

---

We need to make sure we stay that way. Don't want China squeezing their way in, they do that alot.

---

Speaking of china squeezing their way in... can we undo all of their real estate purchases in the usa plz?

Married A Horn said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Deal may be starting to take form. Greenland will declare independence and then sign major trade/investment deals with USA.

I would imagine deals will involve some kind of protectorate agreement, which would keep Greenland within the Nato umbrella.

Right now, Greenland belongs to Denmark. After independence, Greenland belongs to the highest bidder. Good call by Trump to step up and make sure we are the highest bidder.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/greenland-is-ready-to-cooperate-with-trump-premier-says/ar-BB1romyn

---

We need to make sure we stay that way. Don't want China squeezing their way in, they do that alot.

---

Speaking of china squeezing their way in... can we undo all of their real estate purchases in the usa plz?

---

I 2nd that motion...

… especially farmland or anything near a military base.