fodor

I don't think he's going to run to Russia. The moment he does, he all of his US companies will be seized. So if he wants to go, he's going to need to find a way to very quickly liquidate everything without the federal government noticing. But you can be sure that the spy agencies are watching him. He's already too powerful for comfort, and it's their job to spy on people like him.

The federal government lawyers have said in court that Elon Musk was not the leader of that organization. Therefore, the fact that he said he has departed from Washington would not affect that organization.

Of course we know that he was leading it, and the president has said as much, and the above claims are all being contested in court by quoting the president. But anyway, if you want the official answer, now you have it.

But the official answer also changes over time. Because if Musk was not the leader of that group, then many of the actions that he claimed to take and many of the actions that people attributed to him would now be actions of a private individual, which would expose him to massive civil liability. Therefore, we can be sure that the government's lawyers will continue to change their story about when and where and how he worked for the government.

Definitions are important, but you don't get to unilaterally choose them. Depending on the person you're talking to, sometimes it's more effective to ask them to define the terms first, or to ask them which dictionary they prefer.

So depending on the situation, it might be more beneficial to bring in the quotes from various Israeli leaders about how they're trying to get Palestinians gone, and how they're happy with Palestinian death, and then bring in those graphs that show the numbers of the dead, and ask whether they think that's acceptable.

Another way to think about it is that sometimes questions of definition can distract us from questions of morality, and if the person that you're trying to talk to is running away from the issue. By doing so, you can reasonably adjust your focus back to the facts.

Remember, Trump wanted this. Don't blame Elon Musk when you should be blaming all of them together, and especially the president who had control.

Exactly. Reverse DNS lookup matters in some situations.

That's true but it doesn't solve the problem now.

I like your general idea, but when you speak in broad terms and make claims that the election wasn't rigged, when we have specific examples of ways that it was, nobody believes you except people who already did.

You could have said that nobody tampered with voting machines. I don't think that's true, because we have some specific evidence that people did, but we don't have any large-scale evidence. So it's quite possible that voting machine tampering was irrelevant.

What's more relevant is things like disenfranchising voters after the election happened, and mailbox burning, and rules that prevent felons from voting, all of which benefit the Republicans. And gerrymandering of course. Those things all happened, and some of them were very large-scale. I think most people would say those count as rigging the election. So if you're not talking about that, you need to be more specific.

If Musk actually does go to Russia, then I think any of his American investments will be up for grabs. That would be quite entertaining.

Yes, very publicly, but remember that they lie about everything anyway. So it's not like the world is a better place because two pieces of s*** are insulting each other in front of the world. They could fight today and work together next week if they think it'll get them more power and money, because that's all they live for.

I think what you mean to say is that we should be pressuring public officials to try to bust up Google's monopoly on many things. And we are doing that, and it is showing some progress. But there is much more work to be done.

YouTube took down the video because of its own policies, not because of copyright law. So we should be blaming YouTube.

I think it's easy to see exactly why if you consider how YouTube treats small content creators. If I post a video and companies claim copyright on it, the video gets demonetized and I might lose my account. I can respond and contest the claim and maybe I can win but I still lost money in the meantime, and perhaps more significantly, the companies that made their copyright claims will never face a consequence for attempting to burn my channel. In other words, if I get things wrong a few times I'll lose my channel and my income source, but if they get things wrong a million times, they face zero consequence.

And you might be inclined to blame the media companies. But again, this is YouTube doing what YouTube wants to do of its own volition, and not something that's required by law. If YouTube valued small-scale content creators and end users, it would create different policies.

Of course what you wrote is not what it actually says in the Bill of Rights.