Oct 20 (Reuters) - Biden Administration officials are discussing whether the United States should subject some of Elon Musk's ventures to national review including the deal for Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) and SpaceX's Starlink satellite network, Bloomberg News reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter.
The SpaceX chief in recent times has taken to Twitter to announce proposals to end Russia's war in Ukraine, and also said SpaceX cannot indefinitely fund its Starlink internet service in Ukraine. He later backed down and said he would continue to bear the costs of the service.
The discussions to review Musk's ventures are at an early stage, sources told Bloomberg, adding that officials in the U.S. government are weighing what tools, if any, are available that would allow the federal government to review Musk's ventures.
One possibility is through the law governing the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which is under the U.S. Department of Treasury, to review Musk's ventures, the report added.
The group includes Saudi Arabian investor Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and Binance, which was founded in Shanghai.
Fancypants wrote: ↑Oct 23rd, '22, 20:18
If they are taking a look at Elon, what about a review of the Biden family conglomerate?
Tsk, tsk Fancypants. That's whatsaboutism and is major no no according to dead weight or squeezey (it's hard to tell the difference between these two).
Fancypants wrote: ↑Oct 23rd, '22, 20:18
If they are taking a look at Elon, what about a review of the Biden family conglomerate?
Tsk, tsk Fancypants. That's whatsaboutism and is major no no according to dead weight or squeezey (it's hard to tell the difference between these two).
I find it comical how you are unabashed and even celebratory about your ignorance and contempt of things like basic logic.
To get back to facts, and address Fancy's completely irrelevant post, the Dept of Justice has been investigating Hunter Biden for some time now and that investigation continues as far as I know. So they are doing it, and didn't Trump have four years to investigate? How come his people didn't find this vast criminal enterprise? In any case, what does any of this have to do with Elon?
Fancypants wrote: ↑Oct 23rd, '22, 20:18
If they are taking a look at Elon, what about a review of the Biden family conglomerate?
Tsk, tsk Fancypants. That's whatsaboutism and is major no no according to dead weight or squeezey (it's hard to tell the difference between these two).
I find it comical how you are unabashed and even celebratory about your ignorance and contempt of things like basic logic.
To get back to facts, and address Fancy's completely irrelevant post, the Dept of Justice has been investigating Hunter Biden for some time now and that investigation continues as far as I know. So they are doing it, and didn't Trump have four years to investigate? How come his people didn't find this vast criminal enterprise? In any case, what does any of this have to do with Elon?
They may have been claiming to "investigate" Hunter and clan but we all know the kid gloves and cover up the DOJ and others have given to date. How about a pre dawn raid by the FBI Tactical Unit for the First Son?
Fancypants wrote: ↑Oct 23rd, '22, 20:18
If they are taking a look at Elon, what about a review of the Biden family conglomerate?
Tsk, tsk Fancypants. That's whatsaboutism and is major no no according to dead weight or squeezey (it's hard to tell the difference between these two).
I find it comical how you are unabashed and even celebratory about your ignorance and contempt of things like basic logic.
To get back to facts, and address Fancy's completely irrelevant post, the Dept of Justice has been investigating Hunter Biden for some time now and that investigation continues as far as I know. So they are doing it, and didn't Trump have four years to investigate? How come his people didn't find this vast criminal enterprise? In any case, what does any of this have to do with Elon?
Yes, Trump could have directed the DOJ to investigate his political opponent's son during his term. It's not like Trump was being accused and investigated for everything under the sun at the time. And of course the FBI wasnt dirty or anything. But yeah, I'm ignorant.
Fancypants wrote: ↑Oct 24th, '22, 20:25
They may have been claiming to "investigate" Hunter and clan but we all know the kid gloves and cover up the DOJ and others have given to date.
We do? What do you base this on? It was Trump's DOJ that began the investigation that is still ongoing today. The same AG who appointed Durham said the Biden investigation was "being handled responsibly and professionally currently within the department..." https://www.npr.org/2020/12/21/94878725 ... fraud-clai
throbster wrote: ↑Oct 24th, '22, 20:52It's not like Trump was being accused and investigated for everything under the sun at the time. And of course the FBI wasnt dirty or anything.
These excuses sound like "the dog ate my homework" and "the teacher gave me a bad grade because she doesn't like me." Trump was in charge. He could have cleaned up the FBI. FFS he replaced the head of the FBI and multiple people at DOJ. Isn't the more likely explanation here that the FBI/DOJ isn't corrupt, but there just isn't that much evidence to work with?
Seems like this article only reinforces the points I was trying to make. Did you read it? It suggests that the DOJ is supposed to be free from political influence, has policies to make sure that is true, but that the President has a "constitutional obligation to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed’. Sounds to me like an argument that the FBI/DOJ is in fact not corrupt, but that if they were, Trump had the responsibility to fix it.
Of course we know that Trump tried many times to influence the DOJ. He fired Sessions because he was unhappy that Sessions recused himself as an interested party in the Russia investigation. He fired the head of the FBI over that same investigation and appointed Wray in his stead. He directed Barr to appoint Durham. He directed Barr to appoint a special investigator to investigate Biden, which Barr declined to do, saying the in-house investigation was being handled professionally. He told Barr to investigate his bullsh!t election fraud claims, which Barr declined to do, citing lack of evidence of fraud. Then he fired Barr.
