Comment by viraptor

> Musk does not have the authority to fire anyone, or terminate any programs. He's only an advisor

Sure, I agree he has no authority. He's only an advisor that seems to have any advice rubber-stamped. And he announces the changes personally before the executive action is announced. And opm employees get an email with basically the same wording as Twitter employees about a leave offer which legally cannot be offered to them.

We can pretend that "actually it's not Musk making those changes" but it's obvious he's telling others what to do. And not in an "advice" way. (He's obviously shielded from legal responsibility in this case.)

> The team aren't accessing data they don't have appropriate security clearances for.

You're arguing against a federal judge. Do you know something they don't? https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjw4g2q62xqo

Even if they were allowed access, we know they disregard the access rules by posting NOFORN level data publicly https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elon-musk-doge-posts-classifi...

> They don't have write access to data, only read access.

Are you arguing that both Ron Wyden is incorrect and the treasury secretary is lying about granting write access? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/feb/02/elon-musk... And that the staff didn't remove the access later on with audit note of that change? https://archive.is/s5myG

> Musk is not authorised to review any agency or program where he has a material conflict.

Yet he's involved in the review of treasury which he has conflict with.

(from the score jumping up and down, I'm guessing people don't like seeing receipts...)