Posted on 09/10/2023 1:29:18 PM PDT by McGruff
Secretary of State Antony Blinken twice declined to criticize Elon Musk after the SpaceX founder said he refused to help the Ukrainian government access his Starlink internet service in order to attack Russia.
Blinken was pressed by CNN’s Jake Tapper to comment on details in a new book confirmed by Musk, including that he refused the Ukrainian government’s requests to activate Starlink, a satellite internet service run by SpaceX, in Crimea so it could launch a submarine drone attack against Russian naval forces.
Tapper asked Blinken whether Musk should face repercussions after he "effectively sabotaged a military operation by Ukraine, a U.S. ally, against Russia, an aggressor country that invaded a U.S. ally."
...
"I don't know that you can't speak to it, you won't speak to it," Tapper fired back. "Musk says he was reportedly afraid that Russia would retaliate with nuclear weapons. Musk says that's based on his private discussions he had with senior Russian officials. Are you concerned that Musk is apparently conducting his own diplomatic outreach to the Russian government? Really, none of this concerns you?"
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
MSM is definitely attacking Musk.
Blinken is a nebbish, but he’s a prudent nebbish. Any request from “Ukraine” would obviously have been initiated from the US (the Biden government), and I think Blinken doesn’t want to go there.
“Secretary of State Antony Blinken twice declined to criticize Elon Musk after the SpaceX founder said he refused to help the Ukrainian government access his Starlink internet service in order to attack Russia.”
OBVIOUSLY Blinken was told to be VERY CAREFUL regarding Musk, given that Musk can respond as he pleases and reach virtually every American, since he now owns Twitter (to the consternation of the Ukraine Cheerleaders).
Does Ukraine have a contract with Starlink/Musk, which would show Musk to be reneging? No? I didn’t think so.
Is Ukraine even paying Musk for such service? No? I didn’t think so.
Musk has indicated he doesn’t want his creations used to make war. We all need to respect such a position, not act as if Musk is welching on his responsibilities.
And Tapper has deemed Ukraine a “US ally.” I’m not sure whether “ally” is an official term in inter-government communication, but the US is sending a lot of money to kill Russians.
Lots of crap being thrown at Musk. By MSM and the deep state cartel.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they arrest him later.
Good points.
The government is so conditioned to the fact that big tech is aligned with them and vice versa. Some may refer to this relationship as fascism. They wouldn’t be wrong. Musk is putting up a pretty good impression that he’s not all-in on fascism…maybe he’s holding out for more money/power or he’s sincere. I’m just not sure yet.
This is a very strange story.
On the one hand we have the Regime clearly going after SpaceX with the EEOC not hiring refugees etc. And then the FAA putting on all kinds of restrictions due to “flight safety” etc.
And now we have Blinken given a softball pitch to go after Musk, but he doesn’t do it. ???
Just hard to see the Neocons being able to convince Musk to start World War 3. If the Neocons want to lose Western cities, they’ll have to deal with the fallout (no pun intended).
But the Neocons certainly do risk ANGERING Musk, and if angered, Musk just might do something like prevent Twitter from censoring non-Neocon/Globalist viewpoints and thereby endangering the entire Western Fascist Order.
I just think for the State Dept, that SpaceX and what happens there is more important than Twitter.
Remember, most people are not on Twitter. It is where the Cathedral, the Show, the Bureau, the Factory and the Castle talk to each other and learn what the “current thing” is. They are annoyed that the dissident right is allowed on there. But it doesn’t really reach normies in the way that tv, radio and Facebook does.
His staff clearly told Blinken not to slam Musk when he easily could have.
So I don’t know...
You might be underestimating Twitter. While I agree with you that it’s a bunch of Twitter junkies screaming back and forth at each other, I do remember the 2016 campaign and how the media felt they needed to ‘discredit’ whatever Trump posted, immediately.
The media, obviously, feared the effect that Trump posting on Twitter would have, so that leads me to believe that there’s more to Twitter’s effect than, perhaps, they want us to know.
You might be right but I think Twitter is a media obsession because they are all on there.
Also, if it were really that important, they could have blocked Musk getting it in the first place.
SpaceX is real. In case of war it is the USA only current satellite launch capability.
“You might be right but I think Twitter is a media obsession because they are all on there.”
I was thinking of Jan 6th and the insane effort to impeach Trump. Seemed very strange, first because Trump didn’t do anything wrong, and second, because Trump would be gone in 2 weeks anyway. So why?
One of the last of the many BRILLIANT observations by Rush was that the Democrats had a HUGE FEAR of Trump re-emerging and being a threat to them - even though we were all being led to believe that Trump lost, wouldn’t accept losing, started a riot - so the country was through with him. But if so, why bother with the huge effort to impeach him?
Rush couldn’t quite put his finger on it, but I think the fear was that the Democrats knew that Trump was the ONLY Republican able to reach into their base (the Democrat base) and pull large numbers of those voters over to him...and that certainly is the case for Trump.
So, with Twitter, I think they fear the same with Musk as Twitter also reaches deep into their their base, and thus the Dems are DESPERATELY trying to figure out a way to neutralize him (and thus take control of Twitter) before it’s too late and we end up having a referendum on the Democrats...which will not go well for them, obviously.
Whoa there! Sabotage? Is this guy a complete nutcase? (Yes, he is.) Musk chose not to become an active party in a war that does not concern him in any way whatsoever. Again, sabotage?
This Tapper guy should be in the loony bin.
“I think they fear the same with Musk as Twitter also reaches deep into their base,..”
i guess my difference is that Twitter reaches Democrat elites. I don’t think it reaches the Democrat base voters.
Twitter is mostly an upper income PMC and college student venue. I think of it as being like the younger viewers of NPR or the PBS Newhour audience.
Democrat PMCs and elites are particularly annoyed at having to see conservative messaging, especially the dissident right. They are used to leftist safe spaces where they have the power to exclude this stuff.
Anecdotally, for every 10 co-workers/acquaintences I know who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020, NINE of them voted for Obama in 2008 and/or 2012. This 90% are between the ages of 30-60, are blue collar factory labor, white or hispanic. Some also are (or were) receptive to DeSantis.
If it wasn’t for Trump, they would probably still be voting Democrat as they have nothing but contempt for the Romney and McCain GOPe types. So yes, Trump and MAGA is definitely a mortal threat to the democrat party and their former hold on the working class.
I’ve been voting Republican for years, but not out of any love for the slop that gets served up, but more as a choice of the lesser of two evils. Trump is the first president I actually FOR (as opposed to voting against the democrat).
Know who your enemy is. Don’t waste ammunition on those not the real enemy.
That is advice multiple sides could consider.
“Anecdotally, for every 10 co-workers/acquaintences I know who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020, NINE of them voted for Obama in 2008 and/or 2012. This 90% are between the ages of 30-60, are blue collar factory labor, white or hispanic. Some also are (or were) receptive to DeSantis.”
Matches what I see on The Donald - where Trump was picking up Bernie voters, a lot of them, who felt screwed over by Skunk Cabbage in 2016. No way would ANY other Republican candidate get those votes.
The answer is in the papers by "legal scholars" to apply the 14th amendment to throw Trump off the ballot. Here's an example:
And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted over- throw of the 2020 presidential election. https://akhilamar.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/The-Sweep-and-Force-of-Section-Three.pdf
Here's why they say Trump is covered under section 3 even though he has not been convicted of anything:
The Senate’s vote to convict Trump of this charge, while falling short of the two-thirds majority required by the Constitution’s impeachment process, constituted a substantial majority (57 to 43) of the Senate endorsing the House’s charge and characterization. Majorities of both houses of Congress thus determined—at least twice—that January 6th was an insurrection; and in the impeachment proceedings majorities of both houses determined that Trump was responsible for having incited that insurrection
That's it. They are basing their "conviction" of Trump of insurrection by a partisan vote (plus a few R squibs). That was the plan all along as noted back then by many observers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.