It's only been 18 minutes. Usually takes 30 minutes to get flagged.

It's open corruption and it seems the silicon valley acquaintances are all in on it. It's truly a spectacle to see from outside of the US right now.

There's a bunch of us who aren't buddying up to Musk. We're just tired of 10 Musk posts a day.

Most politics are off topic here. Yeah, there's some exceptional stuff going on, that's worth talking about. No, that doesn't mean that every political story is now something we should cover.

But for every story, there are people who say, "Yes, but this story is one we should cover!" That's fine; you can think that.

What's less fine is thinking that everyone who flags it is licking Musk's and/or Trump's boots. That's not cool. That's 1) not assuming good faith, and 2) drifting into personal attacks, both of which are against the site rules.

So cool it with accusing us of being Musk sycophants. Some of us are just tired of the same stuff multiple times a day, every day for the past month.

Note well: I personally did not flag this story... but I understand why others might.

Do you think there exist any circumstances in which the NYT would say anything against the liberal narrative? Specifically, if there was incontrovertible evidence of government waste uncovered by DOGE, or anything else where there were facts and evidence but stating them would make the president look good, would NYT report it? Or would they ignore it? Or, just a theory here, maybe they would minimize it? You know, get the views from the story but apply a treatment to reduce values, like say, dollar values? Could they ever be capable of such a thing?