←back to thread

607 points givemeethekeys | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.361s | source
Show context
sgnelson ◴[] No.44992267[source]
Everyone is talking about "bailouts" and "owning a company that the government funds."

This isn't about that at all. This is about the breakdown of the rule of law, a unitary executive bypassing all other branches of government and demanding a private enterprise give itself over to the government.

If you don't think there was an "or else" as part of this deal, you're largely mistaken. If you don't think that there will be other questionalbe demands placed on Intel in the future from this government, you are largely mistaken.

But y'all go ahead and can keep arguing over whether we should "get something back" from this deal. Because that's really going to maker ameraica graet agian.

replies(10): >>44992439 #>>44992508 #>>44992511 #>>44992539 #>>44992891 #>>44993105 #>>44993195 #>>44993865 #>>44993953 #>>44995597 #
1. smt88 ◴[] No.44992511[source]
Trump was explicit about the "or else" part. He said publicly that Intel did it because "[the CEO] wanted to keep his job," a reference to Trump's earlier pressure for him to be fired due to his vulnerability to pressure from the CCP.