What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Admiral Yi]

What's the wilful misinterpretation? "There is a possible reason...if...they may need to know". How is that not speculation?

Musk does not have an official job in the US government. His "department" does not exist because of Congressional authority.

The NYT is reporting that they're getting clearance information on the most highly sensitive bits of the DoD. Musk has said that's a lie. The NYT is also reporting possible reasons Musk may need that clearance that he denies he has.

As I say get Musk's mate on the phone to say there's a possible reason he needs it. Get the White House to say "we want him to do this job" or the Pentagon to confirm he needs it. On or off the record all of that is responsible reporting. This is speculation in the NYT's ex cathedra voice.

Edit: Also I knowing nothing about grammar - but surely speculation is never stating things that are necessarily true? They might be true - that's what speculation means, no?

It's not speculation because it's a logical inference.  If A is true, then B is true.

[viper37]

Journalists aren't there to give "possible reasons" without any context of where that explanation has come from. That is speculation in factual reporting.

This is the same kind of willful misinterpretation that led me down the path of grim, unrelenting opposition to political correctness.

An "if" statement does not mean the dependent clause is true!!!!

Musk's actions at DOGE are unconstitutional as determined by the Federal court.

What purpose does he has at the Pentagon?  Was he nominated by Congress to review the expenses of the Pentagon?

[viper37]

Yeah, that article was full of unsubstabtaited speculation.  For instance, it claims that "If a foreign country were to learn how the United States planned to fight a war against them, it could reinforce its defenses and address its weaknesses, making the plans far less likely to succeed" without any attribution of this claim. 

Same for "Whatever the meeting will now be about, the planning reflected the extraordinary dual role played by Mr. Musk, who is both the world's wealthiest man and has been given broad authority by Mr. Trump." Speculation without attribution.

The NYT is now just Fox News North.

Yes.

The mere fact that this has leaked is a security breach in itself.

"Musk is meeting with Pentagon officials about TOP SECRET PLANS TO WAGE WAR ON CHINA.  THESE ARE TOP SECRET PLANS THAT CHINA MUST NOT KNOW ABOUT".

Total top secret stuff.

[Admiral Yi]

Musk's actions at DOGE are unconstitutional as determined by the Federal court.

What purpose does he has at the Pentagon?  Was he nominated by Congress to review the expenses of the Pentagon?

The original name of the kiwifruit was Chinese gooseberry.

[grumbler]

What's the wilful misinterpretation? "There is a possible reason...if...they may need to know". How is that not speculation?

Speculation is the proposal of an answer in the absence of relevant information. Analysis is the proposal of an answer based on relevant information. The NYT authors explain why they believe this is possible, using evidence. This is extremely common in news reporting.

I know that you do not argue that news organizations should only report the news and not analyze it.

[The Minsky Moment]

The NYT didn't try to make the case that Musk is a careful thinker about national security needs.  It posited a hypothetical, that one who is a careful thinker would need this information to make optimal choices.

But the NYT is not a philosophical journal.  The only reason to include such a hypothesis in a daily newspaper of record is if there is some reasonable likelihood it applies. And here it clearly does not.

[Tamas]

I so fucking hate this intellectually bankrupt Manichean attitude that anything your opponent does must be the purest, darkest evil.

Musk needs to understand what weapon spending he should allow the military to keep? Seriously?

[The Brain]

Dude can you think of a good reason why Elon Musk would be brought into a meeting discussing war plans against China?

Seriously. I can't think of a valid one.

This one is easy.  Donald Trump was legally elected president, and that's what he wants.

So you think there's a good reason for the US to ethnically cleanse Gaza and annex Canada?

[grumbler]

I so fucking hate this intellectually bankrupt Manichean attitude that anything your opponent does must be the purest, darkest evil.

Musk needs to understand what weapon spending he should allow the military to keep? Seriously?

Really?  That's the only alternative you see to "this intellectually bankrupt Manichean attitude that anything your opponent does must be the purest, darkest evil?"

[Norgy]

Well. TASS, or whatever WaPo is called now, writes the IRS predicts a 10 percent loss of revenue due to "turmoil".

Finally Americans can buy eggs again. 

[Admiral Yi]

So you think there's a good reason for the US to ethnically cleanse Gaza and annex Canada?

Are you asking me if I want to do those things, or are you asking something else?

[Razgovory]

One of the odder things that has been reported is that Trump is claiming he didn't sign the Enemy Aliens proclamation, and doesn't know who did.  Maybe it was Biden's autopen.

[The Brain]

So you think there's a good reason for the US to ethnically cleanse Gaza and annex Canada?

Are you asking me if I want to do those things, or are you asking something else?

I don't follow.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't follow.

Please clarify the meaning of your question.

[The Brain]

I don't follow.

Please clarify the meaning of your question.

Do you think that the democratically elected POTUS wanting to do A is a good reason why A should be done, for all A?