991–1000 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I can tell from the reporting: * They exchanged various emails between 2012 and 2014 about Elon visiting the island * They made plans for Elon to visit the island * We don't know if Elon actually followed through on those plans and he denies it I think it's premature to say he didn't go, and the latest batches of emails directly contradict the claim he wasn't ever invited. See https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/3…
Unless I'm mistaken reading this, it looks like they never set a date and this this is the prior conversation to him trying to invite himself over and being told no. I don't see any plans in this article, just Epstein saying he'll send a heli and then never setting a date or making actual plans. I feel like if there's no evidence he went, Elon denies it, and Elon was a big supporter of releasing the files then it wou…
> “I will send heli for you,” Epstein responded, with Musk writing back, “Thanks.”
> In a follow-up email on Dec. 25, Musk said, “Actually, I could fly back early on the 3rd. We will be in St Bart’s.” He asked if he and Riley should head to the island the day before.
> CNBC hasn’t confirmed whether Musk ever visited the Island, though Musk has denied ever traveling there.
> Musk didn’t respond to a request for comment.
To me “I will send heli for you” does not mean "being told no".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At some point in the near future I see a day where our work laptops are nothing more than a full screen streaming video to a different computer that is housed in a country that has no data extradition treaties and is business friendly. Because that country and the businesses that support that are going to get RICH from such a service.
Sealand,!!!!!!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can your computer hold a database with trillions of tweets and sensitive user information? FFS
Are they after a database of trillions of tweets and sensitive user information? Is that all that could possibly progress the case?
Not sure what they're gonna prove with this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or “regulators don't understand the technology; short of turning it off entirely, there's nothing we can do to prevent it entirely, and the costs involved in attempting to reduce it are much greater than the likely fine, especially given that we're likely to receive such a fine anyway.”
Wouldn't surprise me, but they would have to be very incompetent to say that outside of attorney-client privledge convo. Otoh it is musk.
Seems like it's not a literal get-out-of-jail-free in france.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
fighter jets ARE a threat of violence, and it is widely understood and acknowledged. Again: the threat is so clear that you rarely have to execute on it.
>fighter jets ARE a threat of violence, and it is widely understood and acknowledged. That's not a credible threat because there's approximately 0% chance France would actually follow through with it. Not even Trump would resort to murder to get rid of his domestic adversaries. As we seen the fed, the best he could muster are some spurious prosecutions. France murdering someone would put them on par with Russia or In…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Not really, they put a shit ton of effort in to make sure you can't create any kind of nude/suggestive pictures of anyone. I imagine they have strict controls on making images of children, but I don't feel inclined to find out.