[chonkerz]

I think the difference is in the kind of positions the "second chance" people get hired to. They aren't put in positions where they could cause significant wide scale harm with no auditing or barriers.

The debate isn't whether he should go to jail. The debate is whether he should get a clearance for some of the most powerful access someone can possibly get. He's not suitable. Why can't Musk replace him? He's just a kid.

[rob74]

> Why can't Musk replace him?

Because, like Trump, he values loyalty above all else? That's the reason why he reinstated that other guy who resigned after his extreme-right social media posts were unearthed (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/07/musk-doge-st...). That's also the reason why Trump pardoned all January 6 rioters, even those convicted of violent crimes. If it's his people vs. some random cops, he will always favor his people.

[watwut]

I think that in the cases you mention, the extreme-right social media posts appealed to Musk and Trump actively wants people to do violent crimes on behalf of his coup.

Neither case was them valuing loyalty over something else. They rewarded people who did exactly what they wanted.

[benzible]

"Suitable" depends on what the aim is. If this were a good faith effort to find "waste and fraud" then clearly not. But if the goal is to destroy the capacity of the government to place any restraints on enterprise (and in particular Musk's enterprises), and an assault on the rule of law in general, and the instantiation of a racist ideology, then he's ideal. The fact that they let him go in the first place was the surprising part as what he said was no worse than what many Trump appointees have done.