>At one point, Putin asked the billionaire to avoid activating his Starlink satellite internet service over Taiwan as a favor to Chinese leader Xi Jinping, said two people briefed on the request.
Under US law, "treason" means either 1) trying to overthrow the government or 2) providing "aid and comfort" to enemies in war. The last time I checked, the US has not declared war with Russia.
No one said anything about US law specifically (which wouldn't apply to Musk anyway in this regard), or any kind of law.
One can also read it as: "moral treason", betrayal, etc. Not for talking with the guy, per se. But at the moment, if anyone is talking with Putin, it should be for one purpose only: to end the war -- and with that explicit framework in mind. Not business as usual of any kind.
And we shouldn't be expected to believe that they talked about “space as well as current and future technologies" in any case.
On the contrary, in this very comment section posters have already called for Musk to be put on trial and possibly executed for treason. That doesn't sound very metaphorical...
Musk is speaking to people who facilitated attacks on U.S. warships. He should not have a security clearance if this is true. If that means him giving up control at SpaceX, so be it.
There is a reason treason is both prominent is US law: it's in the constitution, and it is hard to convict because the definition is very narrow and requires specific evidence. The men at the center of our revolution were labelled traitors by the British.
Though Elon is the kind of overachiever to possibly surmount a high bar, FARA might be a better bet.
It’s irrational to demand that. Treason can obviously preclude war. In practice, seditious conspiracy charges are far more common. There was a slave revolt in the 1800s after which charges of treason didn’t stick because resisting slavery is not war against the nation.
"In October 2023, Musk shared a meme to his millions of followers" that according to leaked documents obtained by a number of European media outlets "was put together by none other than the Social Design Agency" -- a Moscow-based group accused by the U.S. of orchestrating a "persistent foreign malign influence campaign" on behalf of the Kremlin.
Yeah, and Russia "mysteriously" getting more and more "illegal" StarLink terminals / access... Can't Musk cut off their service (since they're sanctioned and supposedly "illegally" using the service / equipment)?
It's quite mysterious how an internet service provider isn't aware of their devices being used in an active warzone at the hands of war criminals and doesn't seem to care that much to see if their devices are violating sanctions or not.
It's almost like you're saying that Starlink is a risk to national and international security because any terrorist group can use it unchecked.
You're being ridiculous. The equipment is being used in Ukraine, not Russia and devices don't violate sanctions. People and Organizations do.
There's a Pentagon working group responsible for dealing with the proliferation issue in Ukraine and the Pentagon claims SpaceX is proactive and fully cooperative.
Starlink isn't operative in the areas of Ukraine subject to sanctions and SpaceX has no agreement with any Russian entity to supply them with equipment. They don't accept Russian payments or deliver to Russia
Any terrorist group can use any similar product. You can go online and buy similar products. Did you somehow think Starlink was the first company with SATCOM or phased arrays? I've noted the Taliban leadership has a preference for iPhones and Kim Jung Un drives a BMW.
The Taliban also used SATCOM on drones before Starlink existed.
Taiwan doesn't want Starlink. When they are ready to deal they'll get it. Like many countries and territories have.
Read that article you linked and stop with jumping to conclusions on headlines. You'll get the insights you need. A hint is SpaceX doesn't do joint ventures.
Starlink is already heavily regulated by multiple regulators
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason. [1]
To "adhere" means to support or be loyal to. In this context, it refers to someone aligning themselves with the enemies of the U.S., either by joining them or providing help and resources, such as intelligence, weapons, or logistical support.
Sounds like Trump would match this description too with his relationship with Putin, how he sent Covid machines to him instead of the American people, how he's promised to withdraw all support to Ukraine and cripple NATO.
Essentially he wants to give Putin everything he asks for.
He’s very protected because less than 2/3 of the Senate voted to convict his impeachable offenses. The reality of Presidential treason depends on his/her reputation among our betters in the Senate.
Hypothetically speaking, would supporting an entity that attacked an US Navy ship, directly resulting in death of US navy servicemen, constitute as such?
Treason requires allegiance to the United States. Seditious conspiracy is more often used. For example, Jan 6 revolutionaries might have denounced the United States thinking that it would get them off a treason charge, only to discover that denunciation is a conspiracy to commit sedition.
"...Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Musk floated a controversial proposal on Twitter in October 2022, arguing that Ukraine should permanently cede occupied territories (e.g. Crimea) to Russia, and that Ukraine should drop its bid to join NATO..." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Views_of_Elon_Musk
The correct title is Elon Musk's Secret Conversations With Vladimir Putin.
Omitting the word "Secret" makes it seem like the conversations were innocuous. Keep in mind that Musk has a security clearance that allows him access to certain classified information. If he is having secret conversations with Putin while possessing classified information that's a problem.
We call this treason, ok sure. Cant say, I am confused by the word treason these days. You cannot deny the oligarchy thats present, When citizens united is being so aggressively embraced by the big corps, is that not treason?
Disclaimer: Compleete neutral. Only alliance is with a MOSFET
65 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 135 ms ] threaduh.
holy s--t!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason_laws_in_the_United_Sta...
Are you actually unaware he is getting contracts from DOD?
One can also read it as: "moral treason", betrayal, etc. Not for talking with the guy, per se. But at the moment, if anyone is talking with Putin, it should be for one purpose only: to end the war -- and with that explicit framework in mind. Not business as usual of any kind.
And we shouldn't be expected to believe that they talked about “space as well as current and future technologies" in any case.
No? No evidence that’s the Journal’s source. And we don’t know when what was reported.
> article claims it's all good
Where?
Though Elon is the kind of overachiever to possibly surmount a high bar, FARA might be a better bet.
Slave rebellions
Puerto-Rican separatists
American citizens implicated in terrorism
The Congress has never even come close to declaring war in any of these circumstances.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/elon-musk-s-secret...
"In October 2023, Musk shared a meme to his millions of followers" that according to leaked documents obtained by a number of European media outlets "was put together by none other than the Social Design Agency" -- a Moscow-based group accused by the U.S. of orchestrating a "persistent foreign malign influence campaign" on behalf of the Kremlin.
https://futurism.com/the-byte/elon-musk-shared-putin-propaga...
We're talking about accounts posing as US citizens, for example, spreading disinformation.
It was like a backdoor was opened for this sort of thing to flow unchecked.
It's almost like you're saying that Starlink is a risk to national and international security because any terrorist group can use it unchecked.
Except when Putin requested him not to deploy Starlink on Taiwan, and looks like Elon complied: https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/news/4938264
If it's Russia using them on the battlefield, "oh anyone can use it it's a retail product"... if it's Taiwan "well it's complicated"...
So maybe you're right, Starlink should become heavily regulated moving forward.
I'm all for the law taking action on these matters. If there's corruption at play, let it come to light.
There's a Pentagon working group responsible for dealing with the proliferation issue in Ukraine and the Pentagon claims SpaceX is proactive and fully cooperative.
Starlink isn't operative in the areas of Ukraine subject to sanctions and SpaceX has no agreement with any Russian entity to supply them with equipment. They don't accept Russian payments or deliver to Russia
Any terrorist group can use any similar product. You can go online and buy similar products. Did you somehow think Starlink was the first company with SATCOM or phased arrays? I've noted the Taliban leadership has a preference for iPhones and Kim Jung Un drives a BMW.
The Taliban also used SATCOM on drones before Starlink existed.
Taiwan doesn't want Starlink. When they are ready to deal they'll get it. Like many countries and territories have.
Read that article you linked and stop with jumping to conclusions on headlines. You'll get the insights you need. A hint is SpaceX doesn't do joint ventures.
Starlink is already heavily regulated by multiple regulators
You can stop reading here
To "adhere" means to support or be loyal to. In this context, it refers to someone aligning themselves with the enemies of the U.S., either by joining them or providing help and resources, such as intelligence, weapons, or logistical support.
[1] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=prelim&path=%2Fp...
Essentially he wants to give Putin everything he asks for.
"Russia’s Putin praises Elon Musk as an ‘outstanding person’ and ‘talented businessman’" - https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/12/russias-vladimir-putin-prais...
"Billionaire FBI informant Peter Thiel dished about two Kremlin invites to private Putin meetings" - https://www.businessinsider.nl/billionaire-fbi-informant-pet...
Omitting the word "Secret" makes it seem like the conversations were innocuous. Keep in mind that Musk has a security clearance that allows him access to certain classified information. If he is having secret conversations with Putin while possessing classified information that's a problem.
https://tass.com/politics/1850993
That was the answer when the German chancellor was thinking about talking to Putin.
So it seems Musk has common topics to talk about with Putin.
Disclaimer: Compleete neutral. Only alliance is with a MOSFET