Top
Best
New

Posted by pretext 5 hours ago

Democrats launching congressional investigations into SpaceXAI, META and Apple(www.washingtonpost.com)
119 points | 117 comments
swingboy 4 hours ago|
No Palantir?
JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago||
What are the allegations against Palantir?
josefritzishere 3 hours ago|||
[dead]
squidmaster 4 hours ago||
[dead]
grvdrm 3 hours ago||
I just hope that the congressional panelists do their homework. Especially in the televised bits in which C-suite reps testify in front of Congress.

Every time I come away thinking that the investigators themselves have not spend much (or any) time understanding the basics of these businesses.

And so they resort to what they know: speeches/lectures to let their constituents hear and see them on the record standing for anything.

behole 4 hours ago||
https://archive.is/BRasv
herodoturtle 4 hours ago|
Thanks for this.

Forgive my ignorance, but how do you make these links?

viraptor 4 hours ago|||
Go to the main domain, setup browser block for the domain of the guy getting DDoSed (https://gyrovague.com/2026/02/01/archive-today-is-directing-...), paste the link for the article.
Jtsummers 4 hours ago|||
Go to archive.is (or one of the other archive sites), paste in the URL you want to get an archive copy of, then copy the resulting URL and paste it here.
arprocter 2 hours ago|||
I have a bookmark of

    javascript:void(open('http://archive.ph/?run=1&url='+encodeURIComponent(document.location)))
insane_dreamer 1 hour ago||
they'd better keep it laser focused on stuff like bribery that is easy to demonstrate, and not stuff like "enabled ICE by hosting apps" etc. which is much less understood by the American people and harder to nail down as a crime
AlexandrB 3 hours ago||
> Lawmakers are also eyeing Apple over its hosting of tracking apps used by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

This is bizarre. ICE is an (enforcement) arm of the government. So the government is investigating Apple for hosting tracking apps used by the government?

wasfgwp 3 hours ago||
“Just following orders” is not necessarily a legitimate defence if the government was doing something illegal in the first place.
loeg 42 minutes ago||
Having immigration enforcement is legitimate and not illegal. Hosting an app related to legitimate government function in an app store is so far removed from any possible element of a real crime...
AnimalMuppet 36 minutes ago||
Having immigration enforcement is legitimate and not illegal. The way the government was doing it was, at times, illegitimate and illegal.

The app... I don't at all understand what the role of the app is, so I really can't comment on that aspect of the situation.

aliasxneo 3 hours ago||
Am I seriously being led to believe that the government was not doing this long before ICE? This seems performative at best. Come back to me when they decide to break the massive loophole where government has been buying private citizen data for over a decade now.
georgemcbay 4 hours ago||
Good.

Congress has to start working for the people it represents again, so I really hope the Democrats start pushing lots of legislation that addresses the real needs of the people. Even if every bill gets vetoed, make sure Trump and the Republicans around him own the lack of progress in a very visible way to ensure 2028 is an easy-mode Democratic win.

But... they also have to undo the damage to the rule of law that has been supercharged by the Trump administration.

Letting bygones be bygones and trying to move back to the old status quo without addressing actual wrongdoing is how you end up with Trump getting reelected even after January 6th.

If you spend years (correctly) telling people the current cronyism and open corruption is destroying our democracy, you have to act like it really was when you regain power and that means investigating and punishing those who took advantage of it, where just and applicable.

demo4567 4 hours ago||
Precisely. No bygones this time.
AnimalMuppet 3 hours ago|||
Where just and applicable.

Not "where it will score political points" or "where we really want to get that guy". Where just and applicable.

smallmancontrov 2 hours ago||
So, in any of 100 blatant and obvious places that Republicans will nevertheless whine relentlessly about.
AlexandrB 3 hours ago||
> If you spend years (correctly) telling people the current cronyism and open corruption is destroying our democracy, you have to act like it really was when you regain power and that means investigating and punishing those who took advantage of it, where just and applicable.

So the investigation into Nancy Pelosi's fortuitous stock trades is starting next week?

wasfgwp 3 hours ago|||
It makes sense to start with the biggest offenders though? Pelosi’s net worth is peanuts compared to what Mango Mussolini and his friends and family made in the last couple of years.
JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago||||
> the investigation into Nancy Pelosi's fortuitous stock trades is starting next week?

If Todd Blanche weren't busy pursuing Trump's political enemies with frivolous lawsuits, maybe he could have gotten around to this.

bryanlarsen 3 hours ago||||
How about something much larger, like investigating Biden's second largest donor and throwing him in jail for 25 years for fraud?

Wait, SBF is already in jail.

smallmancontrov 3 hours ago||||
POTUS graduated from pumping and dumping crypto shitcoins to pumping and dumping the American Economy with Iran announcements and then lining up his billionaire friends to brag about how much money they made insider trading it on public television.

Against this backdrop, it takes some truly extraordinary selective attention to be scandalized by the Pelosis managing to beat QQQ by one percentage point last time I checked.

georgemcbay 3 hours ago|||
> So the investigation into Nancy Pelosi's fortuitous stock trades is starting next week?

I'd support it.

By the same token, if Bill Clinton gets damaged by a full release of the Epstein files? Good. Fuck 'em then. I'm not a team booster. Investigate likely wrongdoing and punish the guilty, regardless of their politics.

Though of course... Nancy Pelosi isn't remotely the only one who likely benefited from insider knowledge, there are long lists of people from both parties who are in the same boat. Pelosi just gets elevated as a figurehead here because of her high profile (and despite not being a big Pelosi fan myself I still think, if we're being honest, at least a smidge of misogyny)

We should also just ban trading for all elected officials during their terms in office.

xqcgrek2 4 hours ago||
Long overdue.
herodoturtle 4 hours ago||
Paywall for me. Link anyone? Curious to read this. Thanks.
happymellon 4 hours ago||
Not sure about the others but here is information on the SpaceX investigation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2026/11/05/what-de...

majorbugger 4 hours ago|||
archive.is is your friend bro
usrme 4 hours ago|||
WallHop doesn't disable its site based on geography: https://wallhop.io/https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology...
adrian_b 4 hours ago||
> “We’ve been telling clients all year that winter is coming,” he said. “Now winter has arrived.”
ranger_danger 4 hours ago|||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_comme...

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/02/wikipedia-bans-a...

pretext 4 hours ago||
[dead]
ajuc 4 hours ago||
Good. Either the state controls the oligarchs or oligarchs control the state.
JumpCrisscross 4 hours ago|
Or, get this, no oligarchs.
ajuc 4 hours ago||
First you need to control the ones that are there.
JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago||
> First you need to control the ones that are there

No, you don't. In fact that's exactly the wrong approach because it recognizes them as institutions.

Tax them. Reduce money in politics. Investigate them if they did something wrong.

Note that I'm using the term oligarch precisely. Not just rich people. Rich people holding direct political power. You don't control that without empowering it, you remove the direct political power.

xboxnolifes 2 hours ago||
> Tax them. Reduce money in politics. Investigate them if they did something wrong.

This is controlling them.

JumpCrisscross 7 minutes ago||
> This is controlling them

It's really not. Putin controls his oligarchs. Denmark doesn't have oligarchs. (It does have nobility and billionaires.)

Avicebron 4 hours ago|
[flagged]
lukas099 4 hours ago||
Trump has the veto power until 2029. Until then, not many laws are going to be passed.
Jtsummers 3 hours ago|||
Vetoes can be overridden by Congress, though Republicans will have to vote with Democrats since the Democrats don't have a significant enough majority. And many of the surviving Republicans are going to have to evaluate how safe they feel given the recent election. Do they continue to fail their constituents and risk losing in 2028 to kowtow to a lame duck president, or do they actually do something worthwhile for their salaries and the trust that's been given to them.
JumpCrisscross 4 hours ago|||
Let Trump veto a minimum-wage increase, the ACA premium, a war-powers resolution and an Epstein bill. Then let Republicans defend not overriding it. That will deliver a Democrat trifecta in 2028.

Americans aren’t stupid.

JumpCrisscross 4 hours ago|||
If Democrats only investigate, they’ll fail. But if they ignore corruption, they will also fail.

We can raise the minimum wage ($12.50 in 2027, $15 in 2028, $17.50 in 2029, $20 in 2030 then indexed to CPI); expand Medicare (I’d add neonatal and pediatric care); restore the ACA subsidies; call a War Powers Resolution (to end Trump’s war in Iran and ban the on-and-off trick); and cut the deficit by slashing DoD and DHS funding while also impeaching and removing Hegseth, Blanche and RFK; while also pursuing the Epstein cover-up; while also investigating everyone who made donations and received a pardon; while also investigating Musk’s treason and the Cabinet’s self dealing and the crypto corruption by David Sacks et al.

Hell, if I were Speaker I’d announce a special schedule for Year One that has Congress running over time every week until these priorities are passed.

bryanlarsen 3 hours ago||
Trump will veto all of that. Much of it should still be done as a performative measure as 2028 election prep, but only as a secondary priority to actually getting stuff done.

Now that it's obvious that being a Trump shoe-licker is harmful for electoral chances, Democrats should be able to assemble veto-proof majorities to pass compromise bills. Only a handful of Republican defectors are necessary. For example, impeaching Hegseth, a war powers resolution and passing the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act are obvious candidates. Those 2 will establish a pattern and they can proceed from there.

JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago||
> Trump will veto all of that

Given the Miller appointment, probably.

> Much of it should still be done as a performative measure as 2028 election prep

It's more than that. It's getting together a cohesive policy package that Democrats can agree on. It's putting Republicans on the record opposing popular policy. And it's something that could yield extra seats as special elections come up.

Freedom2 8 minutes ago|||
> Given the Miller appointment, probably.

Historically, the HN crowd has been a fan of Miller. Curious to see why there's been a shift.

JumpCrisscross 6 minutes ago||
> the HN crowd has been a fan of Miller

Of Stephen Miller? I've genuinely never seen this.

bryanlarsen 2 hours ago|||
Agreed on all three, but it's still less important than getting something done concretely IMO. They only need 4 senator defections to be filibuster proof, and 11 to be veto proof. It's highly doable.

The 3 agendas: investigations, performative legislation and bipartisan compromise legislation are going to be really hard to balance in the next 2 years. That's a lot of work in very little time. How well they do so will be how they're judged in 2 years time.

JumpCrisscross 8 minutes ago||
> it's still less important than getting something done concretely

Oh, absolutely. Permitting reform. War powers reform. Russia sanctions. Repealing the exchange stabilization fund.

But these are in the same category as reforming the Electoral Count Act. Necessary. But insufficient without the popular policy moves.

ajuc 4 hours ago|||
The whole problem with US is that average people pay taxes and oligarchs rule the country and extract public resources.
torlok 4 hours ago|||
You can do both. This election was just as much about affordability as it was about blatant corruption in the Trump administration.
api 4 hours ago|||
That would require allowing real estate prices to fall, which neither party can ever do. Real estate price appreciation is now a sacred entitlement alongside social security and medicaid and anyone threatening that loses the next election.

Unfortunately that also means housing can't become affordable because housing can't simultaneously be affordable and a good investment.

I'm not just being cynical. It's genuinely a hard problem, since crashing real estate would open the door to the next generation while bankrupting all previous generations and causing a banking crisis.

We are very much painted into a corner here, and the US doesn't even have it the worst compared to other developed nations.

massysett 3 hours ago|||
They might not need to fall. With inflation being what it is, mere flatness in nominal terms could help.

Also, crafty government policy can make housing more affordable for some buyers while letting prices seem to rise. I’m not crafty enough to know how this would work, but it works in other markets. For instance, apartments that have high and increasing rent but with months of “free rent” and “discounts” thrown in that reflect a different reality, or new cars with “cash back,” or tuition at expensive selective private universities that is almost completely fanciful.

smallmancontrov 4 hours ago||||
Real Estate can go sideways for a decade or two while the rest of the economy grows around it. Given that bonds move in 40 year cycles and rates bottomed 5 years ago, it might already be happening.
trollbridge 4 hours ago|||
And making sure real estate prices don't fall = making sure housing doesn't get built anywhere near jobs or other places people want to live.
politician 4 hours ago|||
The plan was "lie to the public about the election" then retaliate against our enemies after the election. There is no plan to improve your life.
duplessitous 4 hours ago|||
"Retaliatory investigations"

hide your power levels if you are going to play the village idiot, it is more convincing. just extremely bad faith commenting

nancyminusone 4 hours ago|||
My Republican canidates promised affordability as well. Why did they lose then?
aliasxneo 4 hours ago|||
You will be presented a list of all the things that must be done first. Said list will then grow in such a way that the things able to move the needle on these topics will keep getting pushed down further. The show will continue until the helpless American population swings again in 2028 in the pointless endeavor of electing a government that actually cares about its constituents.

And when you try to have meaningful conversations on this topic, both sides will use Gish Gallop until you shut up or go away.

lenerdenator 4 hours ago|||
Graft, regulatory capture, and monopolies increase prices.

Also, Congress can do more than one thing at once, if it puts its mind to it.

cucumber3732842 4 hours ago|||
Those sound hard and boring. This sounds easy and flamboyant. You're not thinking like a politician.
smallmancontrov 4 hours ago|||
The plan for affordability starts with getting Trump out of Iran, because the bar is on the floor.
gpm 4 hours ago|||
Investigating people engaged in blatant corruption and crimes (including televised bribing of the president with a literal gold brick) isn't "retaliatory", it's simply doing the job.
dgellow 4 hours ago||
The republican approach to governing:

1. Destroy the country

2. Complain your opposition doesn’t solve all the problems you contributed to

More comments...