Elon Musk

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Russell T Davies: gay society in ‘greatest danger I’ve ever seen’ after Trump win

      by

      Russell T Davies has said gay society is in the “greatest danger I have ever seen”, since the election of Donald Trump as US president in November.Speaking to the Guardian at the Gaydio Pride awards in Manchester on Friday, the Doctor Who screenwriter said the rise in hostility was not limited to the US but “is here [in the UK] now”.“As a gay man, I feel like a wave of anger, and violence, and resentment is heading towards us on a vast scale,” he said.“I’ve literally seen a difference in the way I’m spoken to as a gay man since that November election, and that’s a few months of weaponising hate speech, and the hate speech creeps into the real world.”“I’m not being alarmist,” he added. “I’m 61 years old. I know gay society very, very well, and I think we’re in the greatest danger I have ever seen.”Since his inauguration, Trump has ended policies giving LGBTQ+ Americans protection from discrimination. He has also restricted access to gender-affirming healthcare, said the US would only recognise two sexes, and barred transgender people from enlisting in the military.Davies also used his keynote speech at the awards ceremony, which rewards the efforts made to improve the lives of LGBTQ+ people in the UK, to criticise Trump, and the president’s ally Elon Musk.“I think times are darkening beyond all measure and beyond anything I have seen in my lifetime,” he told the audience, which included the singers Louise Redknapp and Katy B, and the Traitors contestants Leanne Quigley and Minah Shannon.Davies said he had turned 18 and left home in 1981, adding: “And that is exactly the year that rumours and whispers of a strange new virus came along, which came to haunt our community and to test us in so many ways.”“The joyous thing about this is that we fought back,” he said. The community “militarised, campaigned, marched and demanded the medicine”.He added: “We demanded the science. We demanded the access.”When he wrote the TV series Queer As Folk in the late 1990s, he said, it was part of a movement, with writers “fomenting ideas” and putting gay and lesbian characters on screen.Had he been asked to imagine then what life for LGBTQ+ people would be like in 2025, “I want to say it’s going to be all rainbows,” he said, “skipping down the street hand-in-hand, equality, equality, equality.”But the peril the gay community now faced, he said, was even greater than that in the 1980s.“The threat from America, it’s like something at The Lord of the Rings. It’s like an evil rising in the west, and it is evil,” Davies said.“We’ve had bad prime ministers and we’ve had bad presidents before. What we’ve never had is a billionaire tech baron openly hating his trans daughter,” he added.Musk, the de facto head of the “department of government efficiency”, bought the social networking site Twitter, which he renamed X. A study by the University of California, Berkeley found hate speech on the platform rose by 50% in the months after it was bought by the billionaire.“We have never had this in the history of the world,” Davies said. “It is terrifying because he and the people like him are in control of the facts, they’re in control of information, they’re in control of what people think, and that is what we’re now facing.”But Davies said the gay community would do “what we always do in times of peril, we gather at night”, and would once again come together, and fight against this latest wave of hostility and oppression.“What we will do in Elon Musk’s world, that we’re heading towards, is what artists have always done,” he told the Guardian, “which is to meet in cellars, and plot, and sing, and compose, and paint, and make speeches, and march.”“If we have to be those rebels in basements yet again,” he added, “which is when art thrives, then that’s what we’ll become.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Farage reportedly met Cummings for ‘friendly chat about the general scene’

      by

      Nigel Farage has reportedly met Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s adviser turned nemesis, after the Vote Leave founder suggested voters should back Reform UK at the local elections.Cummings, who was once a sworn enemy of Farage during the EU referendum as he battled to keep control of the leave campaign, is reported to have met the Reform leader to discuss Whitehall changes, which allies said was the strongest sign yet that Farage was taking seriously the idea of becoming prime minister.Cummings and Farage were at odds for years in the run-up to the referendum and during Cummings’s time at No 10, with Farage calling him a “horrible, nasty little man”. Cummings’s Vote Leave won the official campaign designation during the referendum.According to the Sunday Times, the pair met recently for a “friendly chat about the general scene” including subjects such as US politics, Donald Trump and Elon Musk, as well as “how No 10 and the Cabinet Office really work, about the catastrophe of the Tory party and about what Reform has to do to replace the Tories”. A Reform spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.Cummings was said to be in advanced talks to launch his own new party – the Start-Up party – but in February he posted on X that he believed voters should now back Reform UK.Asked by one X user on Sunday who he would vote for at the next general election, Cummings wrote: “Dunno yet but obviously everyone should vote Reform this spring … No downsides, just upsides.”In a post on his Substack, Cummings claimed Britain needed a significant political realignment including a merger of the Conservatives with Reform. He wrote: “Shove out Kemi [Badenoch] ASAP, take over Tories, get Trump/Elon to facilitate a merger with Reform, tip in a third force of elite talent and mass energy so voters see an essentially new political force whose essence is a decisive break with 1992-2024 … break the coalition supporting [Keir] Starmer, take over No 10, do regime change.”Farage’s party is on course for a number of gains at the local elections in May, including potentially winning control of eight local councils, according to Electoral Calculus.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionNevertheless, Reform has been in turmoil for the past fortnight due to a significant rift between Farage and Rupert Lowe, one of his former MPs who has been thrown out of the party in a battle over bullying allegations and referred to the police. Lowe had criticised Farage in a Daily Mail interview and since claimed he had been censored by the party on immigration issues. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Michael Lewis and John Lanchester: ‘Trump is a trust-destroying machine’

      by

      In late 2023, as the US presidential election was heaving into view, the author Michael Lewis called up six writers he admired – five Americans and one Briton – and asked if they’d like to contribute to an urgent new series he was putting together for the Washington Post. At the time, Lewis was hearing talk that if Donald Trump got back into power, his administration would unleash a programme of cuts that would rip the federal government to shreds. Lewis decided to launch a pre-emptive strike. The series, entitled Who Is Government?, would appear in the weeks running up to the election. Its purpose, Lewis explains over a Zoom call from his book-lined study in Berkeley, California, “was to inoculate the federal workforce against really mindless attacks”. It would do this by valorising public service and, as he puts it, “jarring the stereotype people had in their heads about civil servants”.Other writers might shrink away from the notion that they could restrain a US president with a handful of essays, but Lewis has an outsized sway. Author of such mega-bestsellers as Liar’s Poker and Flash Boys, he has a knack for writing about arcane concepts in business, finance and economics in ways that don’t just enlighten the uninitiated but whip along with the pace of an airport thriller. Hollywood loves him: Moneyball, The Blind Side and The Big Short all got turned into hit movies crammed with A-listers. So when Lewis speaks out about the forces shaping our world, even if it concerns something as seemingly unsexy as the federal government, people tend to listen.View image in fullscreenThe British writer John Lanchester, who contributed a standout piece to the series, got a glimpse of Lewis’s appeal when they first met in 2014. It was behind the stage at the London School of Economics. Lanchester had agreed to interview Lewis about Flash Boys, which plumbs the murky world of high-frequency trading. “Not only was the venue sold out,” Lanchester recalls, “but they’d had to add on another room at the theatre for people to watch, and that was sold out too. I remember thinking: ‘There’s a tube strike on, it’s absolutely pissing down, nobody’s going to come.’ But not a bit of it. The place was packed.”Lanchester is no slouch himself when it comes to turning knotty financial matters into page-turners. An acclaimed novelist (The Debt to Pleasure, Capital) who used to review restaurants for the Guardian, in 2010 he published a book about the financial crash – Whoops!: Why Everyone Owes Everyone and No One Can Pay – that gave a sweeping overview of the global economy while mercilessly skewering its absurdities. Now he regularly takes his filleting knife to topics ranging from Brexit to cryptocurrencies for the London Review of Books.View image in fullscreenSince their 2014 meeting, the pair have become good friends, with an odd-couple dynamic that’s entertaining to witness. Lewis is hyper-engaged and talks in a confident New Orleans drawl about the iniquities of Trump and Elon Musk; Lanchester, joining us from his kitchen in London, seems more mild-mannered at first but his easy-going demeanour hides a biting wit. They clearly enjoy each other’s work and company. “I make a point of inviting him for dinner whenever I’m in London,” says Lewis, “and I try to get him over here whenever I can. And of course I looped him into this series …”Who Is Government? isn’t Lewis’s first foray into the workings of the US civil service. In 2017, soon after Trump got in for the first time, Lewis had an insight into just how unprepared the new president was to take over the US government’s various branches. “The Obama administration had spent six months preparing a series of briefings for the transition,” he recalls, “but then Trump won and he just didn’t show up. So I decided to fly to Washington and find out what went on inside the government.” He wrote up his findings in three articles for Vanity Fair, later gathering them into the 2018 bestselling book The Fifth Risk. Among the people he spoke to who’d been neglected by the Trump team were officials tending the US nuclear arsenal.View image in fullscreenAs the 2024 election approached, amid warnings that Trump might do much worse than neglect the civil service if he got back into power, Lewis decided to revisit the government’s inner workings. Joining him for the ride this time was Dave Eggers, who reported on a team of scientists probing for extraterrestrial life from Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California. In turn, Geraldine Brooks profiled online sleuths at the Internal Revenue Service who uncover evidence of cybercrime and child sexual abuse in the darker regions of the net, and W Kamau Bell wrote touchingly about his Black goddaughter’s work as a paralegal at the justice department.For his part, Lewis tracked down a mining engineer at the labour department named Christopher Mark, whose research had helped prevent fatal roof falls in underground mines. He also wrote about Heather Stone, a rare-diseases expert at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), who had saved lives by fast-tracking authorisation for an experimental drug to treat potentially lethal balamuthia infections.Lanchester, meanwhile, opted to write not about a person but a number – the consumer price index, a fiendishly complex statistic that acts as the main official measure of inflation. The lack of a human protagonist doesn’t make the piece any less absorbing, and Lanchester has fun uncovering the staggering amount of data on seemingly insignificant matters (such as the average length of the adult bedbug or the average annual income for a nuclear medicine technologist in Albany, New York) that the federal government hoovers up every year.View image in fullscreenThe overall effect of the series, just published as a book –Who Is Government?: The Untold Story of Public Service – is to transform civil servants from faceless bureaucrats into selfless superheroes. It’s a cracking read but sadly, contrary to Lewis’s hopes, it did nothing to prevent the flurry of devastating cuts that Trump and Musk, via his “department of government efficiency” (Doge), have inflicted on the government over the past couple of months. Of the 3 million-plus federal workers, it’s estimated that more than 20,000 have already been fired. Many of the subjects of the book are at risk of losing their jobs.“Maybe we’re in early stages in the war, but it’s amazing how little effect the series has had,” Lewis says ruefully. “Not only have I not heard a peep from Doge, but I haven’t had any sense that they were worried about what I might write. Though I did send Elon Musk an email asking if I can move in and watch what he was doing. He didn’t respond.”Musk isn’t the only tech billionaire behaving erratically. From conception to publication, the Washington Post series had the full support of the newspaper’s owner. “Jeff Bezos was very excited to be covering the government in any way you could,” says Lewis. “Every piece, he’d call [then opinion editor] David Shipley, and Shipley would call me, saying: ‘Bezos loves this thing.’ But things have changed.” The day before our conversation, in a move widely interpreted as a knee-bend to Trump, Bezos announced that the newspaper’s opinion section would now be dedicated to supporting “personal liberties and free markets”. Shipley resigned before the announcement.Now Lewis and Lanchester are looking back at a collection of essays conceived in a more hopeful time and wondering what will become of the departments they wrote about – and the country that relies on them. They are not optimistic. Over the course of our 90-minute conversation towards the end of last month, they talked about the motivation behind Trump and Musk’s war on the civil service, its probable effects on the US and the lessons the UK should be taking.You say in the intro to Who Is Government? that “the sort of people who become civil servants tend not to want or seek attention”. Was it hard to find interesting people to write about?ML: It took about a nanosecond. And I think there’s a reason for that: there are just a lot of great subjects [in the federal government], and the minute they face existential risk, they become really interesting. They’re weird and different. They’re not interested in money, for a start. They’ve got some purpose in their lives.Was the entire series written before Trump’s re-election?ML: All except for the last piece [about rare diseases expert Heather Stone], which was conceived before, but I didn’t write it until after. What I’m doing now is getting all the writers to go back to their characters to ask what’s happening to them. Both my characters look like they’re about to be fired. Heather has been told that the whole enterprise of dealing with infectious disease is going to be axed from the FDA. And [mining engineer] Chris Mark texted me the other day to say: “They’ve cut our purchasing authority and they want us to hand in our credit cards.” So if they’re not gone, most of our characters are disabled. It’s like watching a toddler loose inside of a nuclear reactor pushing buttons.You two are watching from afar. Are you watching the end of our democracy? Or are you watching some kind of false jeopardy situation?
      JL: Well, we had an exchange over email about this, and I’ve been thinking about what you said, Michael, that we’ll probably muddle through but we are playing Russian roulette with democracy. That image lodged in my head. And the thing that is deeply shocking and surprising is that nobody seems to give a shit about [the government cuts].The cuts are being made in the name of efficiency but it looks more like an ideological purge. Is that how you see it?ML: I don’t think it’s one person’s will being exerted; it’s a combination of Trump, Musk and Russell Vought, who’s now the director of the office of management and budget. He was the architect of that Project 2025 book and he’s a Christian nationalist-slash-libertarian, whatever that is. Trump is the easiest to grok. He’s a trust-destroying machine. He needs chaos where nobody trusts anybody and then there’s a weird level playing field, and he excels in that environment.My simple view of Musk is that he’s like an addict. He’s addicted to the attention, the drama – he’s stuck his finger in the social media socket and his brain is fried. He’s probably got cheerleaders, his little Silicon Valley crowd, telling him he’s doing a great thing, but most of them don’t know anything about it or the consequences. Vought’s the only one, I think, with a clear vision, but it’s a weird vision – really drastically minimum government. Those are the threads I see of what’s going on, and the backdrop is that they can do anything and the polls don’t move – people here don’t seem to care.But isn’t it only a matter of time before people do start to care… once the effects of the cuts kick in?ML: The pessimistic response is that, when things go wrong, there’ll be a war of narratives. The Trump narrative will inevitably say something like: “These bureaucrats screwed it up,” and it creates even more mistrust in the thing that you actually need to repair. I do think we’re going to muddle through. But I don’t think Trump’s ever going to get blamed in the ways he ought to. And whoever comes and fixes it is never going to get the credit they should.JL: When you look at the historical analogies to this kind of collective delusion, it’s quite hard to think of a way of recovering from losing a sense of an agreed consensus reality. The only historical examples I can think of is, basically, you lose a catastrophic war. You know, the Germans lose and they wake up and they have a reckoning with their past. But that’s historically quite rare and hard to imagine … But maybe that’s too dark. Maybe what happens is specific impacts arise from specific programmes being cut that make people think: “Oh, actually, that’s not such a great idea.”A clip just circulated of Musk talking about the US Agency for International Development (USAid) and he said something like: “Oh yeah, we made a couple little mistakes, like we briefly cut Ebola prevention there for just a second, then we brought it back again.”And then I saw someone who ran the USAid Ebola response during one of the outbreaks saying: “That’s flatly not true [that Musk restored the Ebola response].” Musk talks loudly about fraud and theft in government, but these things aren’t fraud and theft – they’re just programmes they don’t like. In fact I haven’t actually seen anything that you could with a straight face categorise as fraud – have you, Michael?ML: There’s almost no worse place to be trying to engage in fraud or theft than the US government, because there are so many eyes on you. When you take a federal employee out to lunch, they won’t let you pay for their sandwich – they’re so terrified. In fact it’s far easier to engage in fraud and theft in a Wall Street bank or a Silicon Valley startup, and there’s probably much more waste too.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHas either of you met Musk?ML: I have not. I have lots of one degree of separations. Walter Isaacson, who wrote Musk’s biography, is an old friend. I basically watched him do that project – I followed it blow by blow.JL: Isaacson basically lived with Musk for, what, nine months, and there’s not a single commentary on politics at any point in the whole book. In 2022, Musk was still a Democrat. It’s just utterly bizarre. And I think part of the frenzy and vehemence comes from an extraordinary naivety about [government]. He actually doesn’t know anything about it, and he didn’t care about it until about 10 minutes ago.One thing that strikes me about Doge is how adversarial it is without it having to be. You could run a project like this, unleashing a roomful of 20-year-olds on the systems of government, without saying that everyone who works in federal government is a criminal. You could just ask: “How could the systems be made to work better?” Because $7tn [the approximate annual budget of the federal government] is quite a lot of money to spend and it’d be astonishing if there wasn’t some waste in there. But you could do it without making people frightened.And it worries me, because lots of things that happen in the US come back over the Atlantic. It happened with Reagan and Thatcher. It happened with Clinton providing the template for New Labour. So I suspect a version of this is going to come back over here.What lessons should the UK be taking from this? JL: Well, that’s one of them. If we were going to do what they call a zero-based review of government spending, let’s do it without framing them as the enemy, because it’s deeply unhelpful. Also, I wouldn’t be astonished if this attack on DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion in companies and organisations] came over. I think we should brace for impact on that one.For your essay, John, why did you decide to write about a number instead of a human being?JL: It’s partly intellectual vanity, but I really like the challenge in writing about structures and systems. We’re hardwired to like stories about people, but a lot of the most important stories in the world don’t have individual people as their central character. We’re very resistant to the idea that we don’t have agency as individuals.Your writing on economics arose from the research you did for your novel Capital, didn’t it?JL: Yeah, that’s right. I’d been following the financial crisis and ended up knowing a lot about it, so I wrote a nonfiction book [Whoops!] in order to quarantine that information, because one of the problems with research from the fiction point of view is that you end up having to use it. It’s very difficult to research a topic and then say: “You know what, that doesn’t really belong in the book.” But finance is difficult to dramatise because of the level of detail involved. It’s kind of anti-erotic in fiction to just explain things.Michael, in the other direction, have you ever come upon a story that didn’t quite work as reportage and you wished you had a novelist’s toolkit to turn it into fiction?ML: No, but I have had moments where I thought: “This story is not mine because I’m just not equipped to write it.” And I wrote one of them – a book about Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, the two Israeli psychologists [2016’s The Undoing Project]. I had that story land in my lap, with privileged access, and I spent eight years arguing with myself [about whether] I was the person to do it. I was sure that someone else better equipped – a subject-matter specialist – would come along and write the book. Then the people I had interviewed started dying off and I realised that no one was.JL: With quite a lot of these stories, the subject-matter expert is precisely the person who can’t tell the story.ML: That’s right. They don’t have the childlike wonder about it all. They don’t ask the simple questions. because they’re too deep in it … But no, I’ve never been frustrated by my lack of novelistic flair, and I never had a strong desire to write a novel. My literary frustration is all in screenwriting. I’ve had a very successful career as a failed screenwriter. I’ve been paid over and over to do these things, and they never got made.The world of screenwriting is a profound mystery, because you see all the shit they make. What’s the process? You’re turning down these things and making that? I worked on an adaptation of my last novel, The Wall, but then Apple said: “Really sorry, we have a competing project.” The competing project was called Extrapolations and I’ll give you a cash prize if you can get through a single episode. They spent tens and tens of millions on it. And it’s off-the-scale, unbelievably, face-meltingly bad.One problem for writers now is that there’s just such a blizzard of extraordinary news. How do you get a foothold and decide what to write about?JL: Perhaps this is more a matter of temperament than anything else, but I’m feeling that I have to step back a bit until it’s clear what the shape of it is, because my hunch would be some form of horrific implosion and the wheels falling off and chaos ensuing. But I thought that last time that Trump was president.ML: I’m going to Washington for much of April, and I have a character in mind, but I want to test it. It’s kind of a dark, funny book that I want to write, and I’ve got to see if this character can sustain that. Generally, I’m with John in that I like to wait and see. I feel like my role in the war is sniper. Don’t give away your position. You’re going to get one shot at this. Wait until you get the clean shot and take it. But I don’t think we’re far away from having the clean shot.JL: Given that you were on to [the possibility of Trump getting re-elected and gutting the federal government] when we spoke 18 months ago, Michael, are you surprised by how this has played out? Is it basically what you imagined, or is it weirder, more extreme?ML: I’d never have predicted this. I know Trump said that he could go out on Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and the supporters would still be with him …JL: I believe that.ML: But I didn’t think he’d do what he’s doing materially to his own base. I mean, two days ago he partially gutted the veterans’ healthcare system. This is the healthcare system in a lot of the rural US. That’s his base. And who would have predicted the alliance with Musk? Not me. I would have thought they’d have a falling out after three days, that there just isn’t enough oxygen in the room for both of them. If you’re looking for the simplest explanation for what’s going on, if Trump was a Russian asset, I don’t know if he’d behave any differently from how he’s behaving. I’m not saying he is, but it isn’t the behaviour of someone who is maximising his political future – it’s someone who’s maximising the damage to society. And why would you do that? He was supposed to get rid of illegal immigrants, stop inflation, cut taxes, whatever. But [gutting the civil service] has become the central feature of his administration. I just didn’t think he cared that much about it.View image in fullscreenWhich is the real Bezos; the one who was supportive of this series celebrating public service or the one who’s now dedicating the Washington Post’s opinion pages to championing free markets?ML: I feel some sympathy towards Bezos. I really like him, personally. He’s fun to talk to. He seems to be basically sane. He’s not obviously megalomaniacal or even that self-absorbed. He’s really interested in the world around him. He makes sense on a lot of subjects. So I think the real Bezos is not a bad guy.But he’s done a bad thing. And it’s curious why. You would think, if you had $200bn, that you’d have some fuck-you money. I mean, how much do you have to have to be able to live by your principles? There’s some curve that bends, and at some point, when you have so much money, you’re back to being as vulnerable as someone who has almost nothing. He’s behaving like someone who has nothing, like he’s just scared of Trump. I think if you were with him and watching every step, you’d be watching an interesting psychological process where he’s persuaded himself that what he’s doing is good. He’s rationalised his behaviour, but his behaviour is really appalling.JL: How fucking craven do you have to be, if you can lose 99% of your net worth and still be worth $2bn and you can’t say “fuck you” to proto-fascists? The thing that is frightening is that people like him, men like him, are looking into the future and basically assuming that the US is going to become a kind of fascist state. Because, I mean, $2bn is enough to say “fuck you”. But if the US is now going to become a Maga [Make America Great Again] theocracy, and we just had the last election we’re ever going to have, then maybe he’s positioning for that. I don’t know that to be true, but that’s my darkest version.Who Is Government?: The Untold Story of Public Service, edited by Michael Lewis, is published by Allen Lane (£25). To support the Guardian and Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      How an obscure US government office has become a target of Elon Musk

      by

      Federal employees in a little-known office dedicated to tech and consulting services were at work on the afternoon of 3 February when Elon Musk tweeted about their agency for the first time.“That group has been deleted,” Musk wrote.The richest man in the world was responding to a tweet from a rightwing activist who falsely claimed that 18F, an office within the General Services Administration (GSA), was a far-left cell inside the government. The activist accused 18F of building a program to put bureaucrats in charge of preparing people’s tax returns. It was one of several false claims about the office circulating on X, the social media platform that Musk owns and spends much of his day on.Musk’s tweet immediately set off widespread confusion in 18F, which, rather than a radical leftist cabal, is tasked with partnering with agencies across the government to consult and develop software solutions. Former staffers and a current GSA employee described 18F as a workforce that focused on delivering tech services and increasing efficiency within bureaucracy – exactly the work that Musk’s so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) is ostensibly designed to carry out.At the time Musk claimed deletion, partner agencies were expecting the office’s help on civic tech projects that were already in the works and would be key to updating their operations. Would they still get that assistance? What did Musk mean by “deleted”? What would happen to the tech tools that 18F was building? Staff at the sub-agency couldn’t get a definitive answer from the new Musk-allied leadership, according to three former workers, and didn’t know what to tell other agencies.The confusion would last for weeks, until on Saturday 1 March, staff at 18F received an email at around 1am telling them that they would all be laid off and their office would be shut down “with explicit direction from the top levels of leadership within both the Administration and GSA”.The 18F episode fits a common pattern of how Musk appears to ingest and amplify misinformation online. It is also a window into the influence of rightwing media and activists on Musk as he attacks and disbands parts of the government he believes don’t fit with his ideological worldview.The week after cutting 18F, the recently appointed head of the GSA’s Technology Transformation Services, which oversees 18F, held a meeting explaining the decision. Thomas Shedd, a 28-year-old former Tesla software engineer and Musk ally who sent the mass layoff email, told staffers that 18F was shut down because employees’ hourly rates were too high and that outside consultants would cost less. Shedd did not directly respond to a request for comment on this article.“After a thorough review of 18F, GSA leadership – with concurrence from the administration and following all OPM guidelines – determined that the business unit was not aligned with the presidential EOs, statutorily required or critical activities,” a GSA spokesperson said, adding that the office was not recovering its costs.The explanation misunderstands how 18F operated and its cost structures, according to former staffers, as well as ignores that the group frequently saved agencies money by advising them against costly and unnecessary contracts with private vendors. Former employees and a current staffer at the GSA instead saw the layoffs as politically motivated.“The only reason I can see for 18F being singled out for elimination ahead of other offices would be to make Elon Musk happy,” said a GSA employee, who spoke anonymously out of fear of reprisal.Misleading tweets and Musk doom workers dedicated to government efficiencyAlthough 18F worked with various government agencies and created popular services, it was largely unknown to the public. The group quietly helped create dozens of services across different bureaus each year, however, including the IRS Direct File free tax filing system. Many 18F software projects, such as streamlining the government’s weather website for easier use in the case of natural disasters, bore the explicit intention of making government services more efficient and reducing taxpayer cost.When Musk claimed he had “deleted” 18F, he was retweeting a 3 February post from rightwing activist Alex Lorusso, a producer for the conservative media influencer Benny Johnson, who frequently interacts with Musk on X. Lorusso, who was formerly banned from Twitter in 2020 for violating the company’s policies on platform manipulation and spam, is one of several rightwing influencers regularly amplified by Musk on X, and one that Donald Trump’s administration has courted. He has worked as a paid consultant for Musk’s Super Pac, and he’s also a fan: the first post on his X profile, pinned to the top so no others will push it out of sight, is a 2023 photo of himself smiling with Musk.Lorusso’s post claimed 18F “puts the government in charge of preparing people’s tax returns for them” and suggested it was a “far left government wide computer office”. His claims about 18F were later corrected by other X users in a community note. It explained that the office had instead helped build a service that allowed Americans to file their taxes for free online – a popular pilot project that saved an estimated millions in tax fees and was set to expand nationwide.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionLorusso’s post on X, like Musk’s, was a retweet of another conservative media figure. Luke Rosiak, a writer for the conservative news site the Daily Wire, had posted a long thread on 31 January attacking 18F. He framed the tech consulting unit as a “far-left agency” and “coven of transgenders and queers hiring each other”. The thread included the profiles of several former 18F employees who used “they” pronouns in their bios, as well as images of an employee’s crowdfunding campaign for gender-affirming healthcare. It also drew on articles published in 2023 by Rosiak about the GSA and 18F, in which he suggested that the agency’s focus on diversity had resulted in major security failures, which ex-employees said was false. The first post in the Rosiak’s chain received over 13.5m views and was retweeted by Musk.Rosiak’s attack on 18F contained misleading statements, according to former employees. The Daily Wire writer asserted that 18F jeopardized security for one million Americans because it refused to insert facial recognition software into government website login.gov because of “racial equity”. The claim conflated multiple different parts of the GSA and misunderstood security issues around facial recognition, one former employee said, as well as blamed 18F for leadership decisions pertaining to an entirely different business unit.The GSA did face a legitimate scandal when its former Technology Transformation Services director, Dave Zvenyach, misrepresented the level of security that login.gov operated with, according to a 2023 inspector general’s report, but login.gov has for years been a separate entity from 18F and has no direct staffing overlap with the office. A racial equity test of facial recognition technology did take place, according to a former 18F employee, because facial recognition software is notoriously less able to recognize non-white faces, and therefore using it as a tool for identity verification would have created security problems for users.“I think it’s impossible for people who are hyper-partisan to imagine people setting aside partisanship while working for the government,” a former 18F employee said in response to the conservative vitriol against 18F.In response to a request for comment on the statements in the thread, a Daily Wire spokesperson said that Rosiak’s reporting on 18F speaks for itself.Following the mass layoffs at 18F, some former staffers set up a website attempting to correct the rightwing narrative that their group was a partisan faction within the government and instead highlight the variety of projects they completed. Others warned that their group was an early warning sign for how Doge and the Trump administration would target other agencies based on ideological grounds, rather than the content of their work.“We were living proof that the talking points of this administration were false. Government services can be efficient,” Lindsay Young, the former executive director of 18F, said in a post on LinkedIn. “This made us a target”. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk faces week of harsh setbacks amid Tesla selloff and Doge backlash

      by

      Elon Musk began the week of 10 March with a friendly sit-down interview on Fox Business to talk about his work with the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge) and the state of his businesses. Already, it had been a trying few days for the world’s richest man, who was facing a Tesla stock selloff and fierce backlash over his attempts to radically overhaul the federal government. His net worth declined over $22bn on Monday alone.After Musk jokingly brushed off initial questions about the mounting pressure, host Larry Kudlow asked the Tesla and SpaceX CEO how he was managing to run his numerous companies amid the chaos.“With great difficulty,” Musk answered, at first chuckling then taking a long sigh and staring off into the middle distance. “I mean … yeah”.The past 10 days have marked several of the most significant setbacks for Musk in months. Tesla, arguably his marquee company, continued to fall in value as investors worried about the threat of trade war and possible recession – as well as declining profits. Escalating protests against the company over the billionaire’s role in the government also grew in number and intensity across the US, coupled with rising cases of vandalism and social stigma against his cars. SpaceX has also struggled, with one of its rockets dramatically exploding in midflight last week and then an announcement on Wednesday that it was delaying a rescue mission to retrieve “stranded” astronauts. The company tried again two days later.Adding to Musk’s headaches, his social media platform, X, experienced widespread outages throughout the day on Monday. During his Fox Business interview, he claimed that it was the result of a “massive cyberattack” that the company had traced to the area of Ukraine.Musk is also dealing with increasing pushback over his role at Doge. Multiple outlets reported that the “first buddy”, as he’s christened himself, got into a heated exchange with Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, during a White House meeting last week, which ended with Donald Trump appearing to rein in Musk’s power to make staffing decisions at government agencies with a Truth social post. A federal judge in California also issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday to reinstate thousands of the workers that Doge mass fired. Meanwhile, polling this week from Quinnipiac University shows that despite Musk repeatedly declaring that the public loves what Doge is doing, a strong majority of people disapprove of his initiative.After a long string of victories for Musk that included soaring share prices and a period of seemingly unchecked power following Trump’s inauguration, some signs of strain are beginning to show on his grip on his empire. He has lost around $119bn this year so far, although staggeringly still boasts a fortune $100bn greater than the next richest man in the world, and faces questions from investors on whether his political activity is hurting his companies.Rather than step away from his role in the White House, however, Musk appears to be doubling down.Musk turns to Maga world to turn Tesla’s fortunes aroundTwo days after his labored appearance on Fox Business, Musk was once again in front of the cameras. This time, he was smiling alongside Trump on the White House lawn as the president cooed over a new red Tesla Model S and gushed to reporters about what a wonderful car it was.“Everything is computer,” Trump said, sitting in the driver’s seat. “That’s beautiful!”At the climax of the transformation of the White House into a car dealership, Trump announced that he had bought the Model S. He likewise spoke out in support of Musk and told reporters that Americans should “cherish” the billionaire. Others in the Maga world soon followed suit, declaring their backing for Tesla and urging their followers to do the same.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“I just ordered my new self driving Tesla!” Fox News host Sean Hannity posted the same day on X. “Details on how to win the Tesla of your Choice soon on Hannity.com!”The scene at the White House was a striking use of the presidency to endorse the business of the commander-in-chief’s biggest financial backer. However, the display also gave the impression that Musk needed Trump to reverse his string of losses and quell the backlash against him. Trump stated at the event that he would label demonstrations against Tesla showrooms as domestic terrorism. Attorney general Pam Bondi announced on Friday she would launch an investigation into vandalism targeting the company.“They fought the law and the law won,” Musk posted on X above news that Bondi was threatening vandals with up to 20 years in prison for attacking Tesla dealerships.The backlash against Tesla does not appear to be slowing; more protests against Tesla are set for the coming week. In response, Musk is deepening his embrace with the Maga world, including its most distasteful denizens. He spent a sizable part of Friday afternoon posting support for Tesla and Doge from rightwing media influencer accounts and Fox News clips. At one point, he retweeted a post that compared attacks against Tesla vehicles and dealerships to Kristallnacht, the infamous Nazi pogrom against Jewish-owned businesses that took place at the onset of the Holocaust. More

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Notable Tesla investor says he hopes Musk’s government role is ‘short-lived’

      by

      A devoted investor in Elon Musk’s Tesla – and once a close childhood friend of the US president’s eldest son and namesake – says he hopes the world’s richest man’s role in cutting federal spending for Donald Trump’s administration is “short-lived” and that he returns to managing his businesses.Investment manager Christopher Tsai, whose firm has tens of millions of dollars tied up in Tesla, said the stock market had demonstrated clear signs of displeasure with Musk’s activities at the so-called department of government efficiency. And, in an interview with the Guardian, Tsai said: “I hope his involvement with [Doge] is short-lived so he can spend even more time on his businesses.”The chief investment officer and president of Tsai Capital, which reportedly manages a portfolio of about $137m, made it a point to say that his stated hope does not constitute a loss of faith in Musk or his company’s earning potential, despite opinion polls establishing the Tesla boss’s unpopularity with the American public and his net worth evidently tumbling about $23bn in recent days.Tsai said the stock markets also reacted negatively when Musk bought Twitter, the social media platform now known as X, in 2022 for $44bn. Yet he said Tsai Capital – which holds about 75,000 shares in Tesla as of its most recent quarterly filings – had made more than six times its money since first investing in the company in February 2020, even with the downturn in performance of late.Tsai recently told his investors in a letter that his firm considers Tesla to be more of a creator of advanced electronics and software that it attaches to cars rather than a traditional automotive manufacturer and he insisted that the EV maker remained “on a path to become one of the most valuable companies on the planet”.Nonetheless, he said “the market … reacting unfavorably to Elon Musk’s recent involvement in politics” was real. And though he said he thought Musk’s self-professed belief that government reforms are needed is genuine, Tsai expressed a hope that the Tesla boss’s role in Doge ultimately proved to be like other temporary commitments he had previously taken on.Tsai’s comments on what is his firm’s largest holding come at a time when Musk – who prominently supported Trump’s successful run for a second presidency – has advised the White House on the widespread firings of government employees and the dismantling of various services. Those services include US humanitarian aid and development work, with experts warning that their elimination could have life-threatening consequences.If a CNN poll conducted by the research firm SSRS is any indication, such measures have not gone over well with the public. The survey showed 53% of Americans disapproved of Musk, and 35% approved – leaving him about 18 points underwater.Those results were released on Wednesday, two days after Tesla’s stock fell more than 15% amid public protests against the company and vandalism reported at some of the brand’s dealerships.Tsai’s descent from a lineage of legendary investors sets his voice apart from some of the others who have weighed in on Musk, Doge and Tesla at the two-month mark of the second Trump presidency.His paternal grandmother was Ruth Tsai, who became the first woman to trade on the floor of the stock exchange in Shanghai, China, in 1939 during the second world war. Her earnings helped her send her son – Tsai’s late father, Gerald – to college in the US, where he ultimately settled and made a name for himself as a financier and fund manager.Gerald Tsai Jr also eventually became the chief executive officer of the financial services giant Primerica, which – along with its subsidiary Commercial Credit Group – helped build Citigroup, as the New York Times has reported.A notable aspect of Tsai’s trajectory was his father’s acquaintance with Trump when the latter was primarily a real estate mogul in Manhattan. The families were close enough that, in his youth, Tsai considered Donald Trump Jr his best friend, vacationing with him and once going to a baseball game with his siblings, their mother and their father.Tsai said the younger Trump was one of the first people to whom he came out as a gay man, doing so before he did to Gerald. “That’s cool,” Tsai recalled Trump Jr telling him, while he said Gerald took a longer time to accept it.A registered Democrat, Tsai said he had not had “a meaningful conversation with any member of” the president’s family since a lunch with Donald Jr in January 2014 – more than two years before Trump Sr clinched the Republican White House nomination and won his first presidency. Tsai said they just “went in different directions” as the Trumps moved into politics, and their family patriarch aligned himself closely with Musk as he clinched the White House a second time in November’s election.Meanwhile, the elder Tsai, who married and divorced four times and once survived crashing in a helicopter into New York’s Hudson River before his death in 2008, did not pass on much of his larger-than-life personality to Christopher.The younger Tsai for instance has been married to his spouse – with whom he is raising teenaged twins – since 2005.But, as Christopher put it, Gerald Tsai Jr did teach him to learn about – and love – trading stocks in his childhood. He began investing at 12 and started his capital firm in 1997 at age 22.Tsai said some of the principles to which he adheres – whether as a philanthropic donor to artistic as well as environmental causes – were inherited from the first Chinese American to be CEO of a Dow Jones Industrial company.“My father would say you have to do deep work in order to figure out where value is and to uncover great situations,” Tsai said. “Our job as investors is to figure out what’s real, what’s not real, what that’s worth, what’s priced into the stock and where the company’s valuation is going.” More

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Democratic Senator Mark Kelly to let go of his Tesla over Musk’s federal cuts

      by

      The Arizona Democratic senator Mark Kelly announced he was ditching his Tesla car, because of brand owner Elon Musk’s role in slashing federal budgets and staffing and attendant threats to social benefits programs.“Every time I get in this car in the last 60 days or so, it reminds me of just how much damage Elon Musk and Donald Trump is doing to our country,” Kelly said, in video posted to X, the social media platform owned by Musk.Kelly also said he did not want to be “driving the car built and designed by an asshole”.Kelly and Musk first clashed recently after Musk responded to messages Kelly posted about a trip to Ukraine – criticizing Trump regarding military aid to Ukraine troops as they fight against Russian invaders – by calling him a “traitor”.Kelly called Musk “not a serious guy” and added: “Traitor? Elon, if you don’t understand that defending freedom is a basic tenet of what makes America great and keeps us safe, maybe you should leave it to those of us who do.”Musk is the world’s richest person but his focus is currently domestic, implementing brutal cuts through the so-called department of government efficiency, or Doge.Polling shows such cuts are unpopular. Musk’s move into politics has also had an adverse effect on some of his businesses, in the case of Tesla prompting boycotts and vandalism and seeing sales and shares fall. Earlier this week, it all led Trump to promote Teslas at the White House.On Friday, Kelly joined Americans including the singer Sheryl Crow in dumping his Tesla, alluding to his past as a Nasa astronaut by saying: “I bought a Tesla because it was fast like a rocket ship. But now every time I drive it, I feel like a rolling billboard for a man dismantling our government and hurting people. So Tesla, you’re fired!”In video shot near the Capitol, Kelly said he was driving to work in the car for the last time.View image in fullscreen“When I bought this thing,” he said. “I didn’t think it was going to become a political issue. Every time I get in this car in the last 60 days or so, it reminds me of just how much damage Elon Musk and Donald Trump [are] doing to our country, talking about slashing social security, cutting healthcare benefits for poor people, for seniors. It’s one bad thing after the next. [Musk is] firing veterans. I’m a veteran.”Kelly is also a former US navy pilot.“So I have a really hard time driving around in this thing,” he continued. “So I think it’s time for an upgrade today. So this is going to be my last trip in this car. There’s some things I really liked about it. There are things I didn’t like about it, but that doesn’t matter. What matters is … doing the right thing. I think it’s time to get rid of it.“You know, Elon Musk kind of turned out to be an asshole, and I don’t want to be driving the car built and designed by an asshole. So, looking forward to my new ride.”Kelly’s language reflected a trend of Democrats using profane language in an attempt to better communicate with voters, particularly on social platforms and podcasts, seeking to bypass traditional media.Lis Smith, a Democratic operative famous for her own F-bombs, told Politico: “Some of it is genuine, some of it is people trying to seem faux-edgy authentic.”On Friday, Musk did not immediately respond to Kelly. He did post complaints about vandalism done to Teslas and Tesla stores, one of which compared such actions to Kristallnacht, the “Night of the Broken Glass” in 1938 when Nazis in Germany attacked Jewish people and businesses.Musk remains the subject of controversy over his behavior at Trump’s inauguration, when he gave two Nazi-style salutes. More

    • 263 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Why is Donald Trump crashing the US economy? Because he’s high on his own supply of fake news | Jonathan Freedland

      by

      Not content with shattering the post-1945 international order, which delivered prosperity and power to his country for eight long decades, Donald Trump is seemingly set on destroying the US economy. And he’s doing it because he, and the American right, have lost their ability to grasp reality.Start with the economic vandalism, unfolding in real time and mesmerising to watch. For weeks, you could see the US stock market falling and falling until on Thursday the S&P index passed an unwanted milestone: it stood more than 10% down from the peak it had reached less than a month earlier, a fall that meets the Wall Street definition of a “correction”. In other words, even if the market eventually rallies, this is no blip.The talk now is of a recession and you can tell that Trump himself suspects it’s coming. “I hate to predict things like that,” he said this week. “There is a period of transition because what we’re doing is very big. We’re bringing wealth back to America … It takes a little time.” Did you catch that? The great booster, who campaigned on a promise to turn things around “on day one”, is now adopting the lotus position, talking of “transition” and urging patience.The source of the trouble is not mysterious. It is Trump himself. His actions since taking office less than two months ago have spooked investors. They crave stability but see a president who governs by whim. Those whims can change hourly – imposing a tariff after breakfast only to drop it before lunch. One minute it’s a 50% levy on Canadian aluminium, the next it’s 200% on European wine, only for one or the other to be binned within hours. It keeps Trump in the news, which he loves, but plays havoc with companies that have to plan for the long term. Confronted by chaos, they prefer to wait to see where things settle. That means orders on hold, workers without work, less money in everyone’s pocket.Add in a wild-eyed guy with a chainsaw taking chunks out of a federal bureaucracy that provides services that, for all their Ayn Rand talk of a minimal state, business leaders rely on – whether it’s schools, roads or air traffic controllers to keep planes in the sky – and you can see why the only surging number on Wall Street right now is the one that measures pessimism.To be clear, it’s not just the manic style of Trump and Elon Musk that’s causing alarm. Even if imposed calmly, tariffs are a prosperity killer. Trump may be their biggest advocate, but it’s clear he doesn’t understand how they work. He speaks as if the people paying them will be hated foreigners, the likes of China or Canada forced to pay billions into US coffers. When, in fact, tariffs are a sales tax levied on US consumers who have to pay extra for imported goods. A tariff on foreign cars, say, is not paid by Germany but by an American who buys a BMW. It drives prices up for Americans. When other countries hit back with tariffs of their own, making US products harder to sell, you’re in a trade war that only makes everything worse.Hence the current dread of stagflation, the grim combination of zero growth and rising inflation. The word was born in the Jimmy Carter era, but the Trumpcession will have bonus features all its own. When I spoke to Heather Boushey, who served as an economic adviser to the Biden administration, for the latest Politics Weekly America podcast, she told me that Musk’s supremacy over so much of the federal government, even as he continues to run his own mega-businesses, is having one particular chilling effect. “Companies are looking at this and saying: ‘I can’t compete with an Elon Musk that’s in charge of the regulatory agencies, that’s going to do things only for himself.’ That’s going to stymie investment, it’s going to stymie innovation, and ultimately be terrible for the US economy.”View image in fullscreenBoushey adds that Trump’s US will be less able to weather a recession, because the Trump-Musk cuts are stripping away so much of the infrastructure of support, cutting a combined total of more than $1tn from the Medicaid and food stamps programmes alone. When the storm hits, families will go hungry.It’s bad for the country and bad for Trump politically: the people most dependent on soon-to-be gutted government help such as Medicare or Medicaid are Trump voters. As the impact of the cuts kicks in – national parks closed during the summer, delayed benefits for veterans, a deadly accident, for example, in an area previously safeguarded – many Americans could sour on the president who promised to make their lives better. Especially when they see him go ahead with his signature policy: a $4.5tn tax cut that will massively benefit the very richest.Why, then, is Trump pursuing a course of action that can only damage the country and dent his own standing? The explanation lies in the way Trump sees the world. Which is through a lens clouded by the very phenomenon he once did so much to identify: fake news.For most of the past decade, the focus has been on the likes of Trump and Musk as peddlers of falsehoods. There has been less attention paid to their role as consumers of lies. And yet it’s long been clear that Musk is spending too much time on X and is getting extremely high on his own supply. Witness his credulous swallowing of all kinds of far-right rubbish about Britain.Trump is scarcely any better, believing provable nonsense about Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s poll ratings being in the single digits, when in fact the Ukrainian leader’s numbers are much better than his, to pick just one instance of Trump putting aside the briefings he could have from the world’s best-resourced intelligence agencies and preferring to gobble up internet slop instead.It’s a function of Trump not shifting his core views in decades – he was banging on about tariffs in the 1980s – and being, as Zelenskyy memorably put it, “trapped” in a “disinformation bubble”. It consists of the team of sycophants that now envelops him – the “adults in the room” of the first term are long gone – and whose message is reinforced when he meets the press: note how many of the supposed reporters whom Trump encounters are, in fact, representatives from pro-Trump outlets so slavish they make Fox News look like Edward R Murrow.The result, says one longtime Trump watcher, is that “he’s more sheltered from outside information than he ever has been before”. Like Saddam Hussein in his bunker as US forces approach the palace, he is being told that tariffs made the US rich in the 19th century and will do so again, that Elon Musk is popular and that the people are grateful to their leader, even when the economy is nosediving. Inside the info-bubble, any contrary voice can be dismissed, even if it requires acrobatics to do it. Trump’s latest target is the Murdoch-owned, conservative Wall Street Journal, which dared point out the dangers of a trade war: Trump countered that the “globalist” WSJ was “owned by the polluted thinking of the European Union”. Inside the bubble, there is no room for truth: it must be kept out by lies.For now, and armed with the loudest megaphone on the planet, the US president can keep reality at bay. But eventually, Americans will be able to see with their own eyes and in their own lives what Trump has done to the US and the wider world. Their daily experience will expose him for what he is: a confidence trickster who has made them poorer and less safe. The only question is when.

      Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More