Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember this blog post coming across HN when it was posted: https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2025/07/07/support/ It's a good story, but what I'm remembering and is relevant here is this: > At some point, I realized that if I wrote a wiki page and documented the things that we were willing to support, I could wait about six months and then it would be like it had always been there. Authoritarians and fascists recognize…
I am trivializing the LOC Constitution page thing and nothing you can say is going to make me stop, because the conspiracy theory behind it doesn't make any sense. By continuing to defend it, you're making my point for me about this Intel story (where malfeasance would make sense!). But we're going around in circles and should probably just let this go.
>Eh. Without getting anywhere near the merits of this particular fracas, the federal government has gotten deeply involved in critiquing the management of companies like Lockheed and Boeing, both for national security reasons and because of the importance of those companies to the economy. Easy to see Intel fitting into that mold in 2025.
Which was you saying "this Intel thing is NBD and basically the same as a bunch of past things presidents have done."
That's the original false equivalency I called you out on. And which you now disagree with apparently, because now you think the Intel thing is potential malfeasance? I don't think you really know what your position is anymore.