Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 147 posts

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#61

Post by xyzzyz »

Jtsummers wrote: post #43
rayiner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> If the President gets elected promising to fire executive branch employees, then his doing so is literally democratic. But it may not be legal , which is determined by the Constitution and laws set by Congress. People who are also elected democratically. Behaving in a manner counter to those laws is also fundamentally undemocratic, the President and the Executive are bound by those laws set by the representatives o…

Sorry, can you be more specific as to what law is being broken? You imply that this is illegal, but you don’t say how exactly.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#62

Post by xyzzyz »

mcphage wrote: post #53
rayiner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> If the President gets elected promising to fire executive branch employees, then his doing so is literally democratic. You seem to think the President can do whatever he wants, in constrained by laws. Which may be true in this case, but because the laws aren’t being followed, not because they don’t exist.

Sorry, which law is being broken here? Can you be specific?

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#63

Post by sundaeofshock »

rayiner wrote: post #46
watwut wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't trust them with democracy. They want fascism and destruction of democracy. The mandate is to destruct and damage.

[flagged]

Lovely sentiment except the guy is breaking laws left and right. This is a hostile takeover of the government.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#64

Post by krapp »

EA-3167 wrote: post #8
mrits wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I think most "small government" people change their tune when they find out that "big government" was behind their Medicare/Social Security payouts, their industry subsidies, and all of the things that keep them from dying on the job. The gap between the ideology and the reality is deep enough to fall into forever.

>The gap between the ideology and the reality is deep enough to fall into forever.

Kind of like people describing DEI as "anti-white racism" despite the most common beneficiaries of DEI being white women.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#65

Post by Jtsummers »

xyzzyz wrote: post #61
Jtsummers wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the President gets elected promising to fire executive branch employees, then his doing so is literally democratic. But it may not be legal , which is determined by the Constitution and laws set by Congress. People who are also elected democratically. Behaving in a manner counter to those laws is also fundamentally undemocratic, the President and the Executive are bound by those laws set by the representatives o…

Sorry, can you be more specific as to what law is being broken? You imply that this is illegal, but you don’t say how exactly.

> Sorry, can you be more specific as to what law is being broken?

At least in the case of the IG firings, he failed to comply with the 30 day notice required by law.

My point is actually broader than just the firings and dismissals. The elected President is not an elected autocrat. He doesn't get to do what he wants because "his doing so is literally democratic". He gets to act in a way that complies with the democratically set laws.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#66

Post by fundad »

tbatchelli wrote: post #22

[flagged]

As you see in the replies a well-funded anti-tax movement has been radicalizing a lot of the country against their own government.

They love to see this dissolution of constitutional government. While they claim smaller government is better for the economy, they really care most about ending constitutional government and couldn't care less about the impact to the economy.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#67

Post by nozzlegear »

jdgoesmarching wrote: post #51

Why is this flagged? This seems like a pretty damn important tech story.

I wonder if the flagging/flame war detector is too aggressive for stories like this that blend the worlds of tech and politics. From my bystander PoV, it seems like the majority of interesting news stories like this one get flagged and killed despite a somewhat normal discussion in the comments. I know people want to pretend that politics don't belong on their tech/startup forum, but that's just ignoring the reality of how intertwined the two are at this point.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#68

Post by kcplate »

tootie wrote: post #50
kcplate wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trump and Musk's actions are very explicitly against the law. So sue them. Take action, make your case. All you have here on HN is an opinion which may or may not be accurate.

That's incredibly glib and pedantic. I do not have the resources and probably not the standing to bring a suit. And given that any punishment will be immediately pardoned makes it moot. State Attorney's General have successfully paused Trump's abuse of impoundment as well his end to birthright citizenship. Musk is likely committing some form of criminal trespass, but who can arrest him? Trump's own FBI? He's been fir…

You are making accusations with certainty and this implies that you have special legal knowledge or evidence that could be used to at a bare minimum to stop the behavior. There will be no shortages of lawyers available to you willing to use your special knowledge or evidence to bring suit. So why wouldn’t you pursue it if you care about it passionately?

> I do not have the resources and probably not the standing to bring a suit.

Oh, ok. Well never mind then.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#69

Post by skissane »

Jtsummers wrote: post #43
rayiner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> If the President gets elected promising to fire executive branch employees, then his doing so is literally democratic. But it may not be legal , which is determined by the Constitution and laws set by Congress. People who are also elected democratically. Behaving in a manner counter to those laws is also fundamentally undemocratic, the President and the Executive are bound by those laws set by the representatives o…

> But it may not be legal, which is determined by the Constitution and laws set by Congress. People who are also elected democratically. Behaving in a manner counter to those laws is also fundamentally undemocratic, the President and the Executive are bound by those laws set by the representatives of the people.

The word "may" is important here. Ultimately, the Supreme Court will interpret the laws and the Constitution and decide whether this Presidential action is legal or not. Until they do, its (il)legality a matter of possibility, opinion and conjecture, not established fact.

And, given the ideological leanings of the current SCOTUS majority, it is entirely possible that they'll uphold this Presidential action, and either interpret away any apparent statutory violations, or rule those statutes unconstitutional in this respect. In which case, the answer will ultimately be, that it was legal all along.

Re: Musk aides lock government workers out of computer systems at US agency

#70

Post by skissane »

pragmatic wrote: post #52
rayiner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That's not how this works. We are a country of laws. The president is not a constitutional monarch.

> The president is not a constitutional monarch.

Not everyone agrees on that: "Great Britain is a republic with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king" (The Knoxville Journal, 9 February 1896)

Post reply on HN