The firing of FDA staff involved in reviewing Neuralink’s applications, allegedly coinciding with layoffs at DOGE, raises serious concerns about potential conflicts of interest and regulatory capture. The timing is undeniably suspicious, leading many to question whether these dismissals were merely coincidental or a deliberate attempt to influence the regulatory process.
The narrative that Elon Musk holds no legal authority over DOGE and therefore couldn’t orchestrate these firings seems questionable, given the interconnectedness of his business empire and the influence he wields. The sheer scale of resources and power at his disposal makes it difficult to dismiss this as a simple coincidence.… Continue reading
Following a tragic accident at Reagan National Airport, President Trump initially offered condolences and praised first responders. However, subsequent posts on Truth Social questioned the accident’s circumstances, highlighting the helicopter’s seemingly direct trajectory towards the plane despite clear weather conditions and bright aircraft lights. He questioned the lack of preventative action from air traffic control. The president expressed concern that the accident appeared preventable.
Read More
FAA Chief Michael Whitaker’s resignation on January 20th, following Elon Musk’s demand for his dismissal, has sparked significant controversy and raised serious concerns about the state of aviation safety in the United States. The timing of Whitaker’s departure, coinciding with the start of a new administration and preceding a major aviation incident, has fueled speculation regarding the influence of powerful individuals on crucial government agencies.
The sequence of events leading to Whitaker’s resignation began months earlier when the FAA proposed substantial fines against SpaceX for safety violations. Musk, in response, publicly demanded Whitaker’s resignation and threatened legal action, escalating the situation beyond a typical regulatory dispute.… Continue reading
In a recent op-ed, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy propose a plan to combat the influence of unelected civil servants, ironically positioning themselves as outside volunteers who will “cut costs” despite lacking the authority to do so directly. Their plan involves assembling a team within the White House Office of Management and Budget to make recommendations for cost-cutting measures. However, this approach raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest and opportunities for self-enrichment given their lack of accountability. The authors’ proposal essentially advocates for indirect influence, contrasting their volunteer status with the very civil service protections they criticize.
Read More
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker