Daily Archives: January 18, 2025

The bros’ new clothes: How Big Tech lurched to the right

The sight of Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg sitting together at Donald Trump’s inauguration — as they reportedly will do Monday — would be a shock for their 2016 selves.Back then, these titans of the tech world were way to the left of Trump, whose political stances put him about as far to the right as Republicans get, then and now. Musk, once a vocal Barack Obama supporter, voted for Trump’s opponent Hillary Clinton in 2016. The Bezos of that year blasted candidate Trump for “eroding democracy.” Zuckerberg didn’t make an endorsement, but the issues he put his money behind at the time — social justice, inequality, easing the immigration process — put him squarely on the Democratic side of the political line. The most vocal tech world supporter of Trump in 2016, Paypal co-founder Peter Thiel, was seen as an outlier back then: Silicon Valley was solid blue. Now the outlier is Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, who hasn’t donated to Trump’s inauguration fund and won’t be attending. All the other big names in tech will be there: Apple’s Tim Cook, Google’s Sundar Pichai, Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, and TikTok’s Shou Chew, have all donated $1 million or more, and all save Altman will be in attendance. What happened? It wasn’t just that these men were made so much richer by a stock market rally following Trump’s election in November. A similar rally happened in November 2016 as well, and it didn’t make tech CEOs any less reluctant at a Trump Tower meeting with the president-elect. That was the roundtable where Thiel’s smile stood out in a sea of grimaces.Paypal co-founder Peter Thiel, left, and Apple CEO Tim Cook display very different reactions to Donald Trump speaking after his 2016 election.Credit: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty ImagesThe process of tech leaders learning to love Trump may have begun piecemeal during his first administration. But it only really kicked into high gear over the course of 2024, with a speed and ferocity that has left many observers’ heads spinning. No wonder President Biden, in his farewell address, warned of a tech-led “oligarchy” that may threaten democracy itself. To understand what happened, let’s take a look at the three richest tech bros, who also happen to be the three wealthiest men in the world, and the journey they took from opposing Trump in 2023 to sitting together at his inauguration in 2025. Elon MuskNowadays, of course, Musk is so central in Trump’s camp that he is sometimes described as the incoming “co-president.” He donated $250 million, spoke at Trump rallies, called himself “Dark MAGA,” and clearly put more than a thumb on the scale for Trump on Twitter/X throughout the fall of 2024. Musk’s America PAC seized the @America account from its original owner, and even now faces a fresh lawsuit from Pennsylvania’s Attorney General over that PAC’s dubious $1 million lottery for swing state voters. But it’s important to remember that Musk wasn’t always this far right, and his turn towards Trump came fairly recently. Yes, he joined Trump’s business council in 2017, but he also quit when Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate accords. Back then, the Bay Area-based Burning Man attendee was still happy to support Pride month.Musk drifted rightwards during the pandemic years, when he moved Tesla HQ to Texas and, according to reports, began feuding with his trans daughter. The drift seems to have accelerated when he bought Twitter in 2022, started tweeting about the “woke mind virus,” and endorsed the GOP (unsuccessfully) in that year’s midterm elections. Even then, Musk was no Trump fan. In 2023 he helped launch Florida governor Ron DeSantis’ presidential campaign in a disastrous Twitter Spaces. Musk’s statement that Trump should “sail into the sunset” prompted a brief feud with the former president. “I could have said, “drop to your knees and beg,” and he would have done it,” Trump responded, recalling an Oval Office meeting in his first term. Then came 2024, and three key events. First, DeSantis dropped out in January. Then on May 31, Donald Trump’s conviction in a New York courtroom over hush money payments that possibly swung a close 2016 election his way. Musk fumed that the charges were “trivial” and politically motivated. By then, perhaps not coincidentally, Trump was already talking to Musk about a possible advisory role — and we were starting to learn just how many federal agencies were investigating Musk.But the deal was sealed in July when Trump survived a shooting in Butler, Pennsylvania. Musk “fully endorsed” Trump on Twitter that day, then made his first appearance with Trump on his return to Butler in October. By then, Trump had already promised Musk his Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, the advisory group that Musk is set to lead along with fellow billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy. The latest reports on DOGE say that Musk will have an office inside the White House itself. Notably, Musk did not have to drop to his knees and beg for any of this. Which leads us to wonder: who is really on whose leash here? Jeff BezosIn the 2016 election, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos was one of Trump’s most outspoken critics in the tech world. A month after Trump entered the White House, Bezos’ Washington Post unveiled its pointed new slogan, echoing its owner’s warnings: “Democracy dies in darkness.” Bezos and the Post’s coverage continued to earn Trump’s ire. Two years later, in an equally pithy Medium post, Bezos attacked Trump ally David Pecker, head of the company that owns the National Enquirer, for what Bezos said was blackmail over nude photos of the billionaire. But a curious thing had started to happen by then. With his growing wealth, which spiked in the late 2010s, plus his new marriage and new yacht, Bezos started to develop a serious case of Rich Guy Brain. By 2022, his tone on social media had changed entirely, becoming much more Musk-like. No longer was Bezos skewering his Trumpian opponents for literally threatening to expose his ass; instead, he was discussing compliments on his ass. Finally came the moment that Bezos’ opposition broke. His top lieutenant at the Post told staffers there would be no presidential endorsement in 2024 — which, if democracy was still at risk, seemed a curious case of fence-sitting. (Indeed, the Post staff had prepared a Kamala Harris endorsement that was effectively spiked.) More than 200,000 Post subscribers cancelled their subscription in disgust. Still, Bezos seemed unmoved. This time he penned a piece explaining that newspaper endorsements didn’t matter. It was, he said, a complete coincidence that Trump was visiting his space company Blue Origin the same day. After the election, Bezos continued his shift towards Trump. In a December interview he said the incoming president was “calmer” and had “grown a lot over the last eight years.” Time will tell whether that’s true, or whether Bezos has simply shifted to the side of Dark MAGA. Mark ZuckerbergUnlike Musk and Bezos, who moved Trumpwards all at once, the Facebook founder seems to have slalomed back and forth in his attempts to placate Republicans in Washington since Trump first took office.Prior to Trump’s first election, Zuckerberg was easily the most liberal of this Big Tech trio. As a New York Times investigation during election season noted, he helped found Fwd.us, an advocacy group dedicated to giving undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship. The Zuckerberg-Chan initiative spent nearly half a trillion dollars on causes such as legalizing drugs, reducing the number of people in U.S. prisons, and promoting universal healthcare. But then in the immediate aftermath of the 2016 election, Zuckerberg quickly tossed aside claims that unchecked fake news on Facebook had contributed to Trump’s victory. He later regretted that stance, but not enough to avoid being dubbed Misinformer of the Year in 2017 by the watchdog group Media Matters for America. Zuckerberg’s response to Trump’s first election was twofold: he minimized the presence of news posts in Facebook feeds, which unintentionally contributed to a widespread crash in readership for media entities. And he set up a fact-checking service, which often earned the ire of conservative groups. The fact-checking service was nuked in January 2025, pleasing the incoming Trump administration. Often wanting to appear amenable to conservative concerns about the news feed and which stories get promoted, Zuckerberg made repeated changes to the algorithm that boosted pro-GOP voices. When internal data showed right-wing news sites like the Daily Caller were getting more interactions on Facebook than anyone else, Zuckerberg nixed the release of that data. The more amenable he is, however, the more conservative voices (including Musk) complain — an old tactic called “playing the ref.” Now Zuckerberg has morphed again, apologizing even for his donation to election integrity groups in 2020. Most recently, he told Joe Rogan that corporate America needs more “masculine energy.”What that means for the social media giant remains to be seen, but America is certainly about to get a lot more oligarch energy from Zuck and his fellow tech bros.

Washington board opposes new state solar legislation

President-elect and self-proclaimed “tariff man” Donald Trump has vowed a “manufacturing renaissance,” pledging tariffs to bolster US-made products and reduce import reliance. Trump plans to impose tariffs ranging from 60% to 100% on Chinese goods sold to American businesses, and a 20% universal tariff on other global imports. His aim is to increase the price of imported goods to make American-made products more appealing. During his first term, Trump placed tariffs on solar panels, washing machines and certain metals, which were kept by the Biden administration. Economists see Trump’s proposal as a double-edged sword, as although it could rebalance the US economy, it may lead to higher interest rates and reignite inflation. The tariffs are estimated to cost a typical American household over $2,600 a year, and could cost American consumers between $46 billion and $78 billion in spending power each year. “[There will be] some increase in costs – that’s the price you pay – but the benefit is it will begin to put in place some industrial capability in the United States that I think is desperately needed. I think it’s needed for jobs. I think it’s needed for middle, industrial class and lower-skilled workers all over the country,” said Bayard Winthrop, founder and CEO of apparel manufacturer American Giant. According to pro-tariff researchers, a 10% universal tariff could create 2.8 million jobs. Although Trump’s previous tariffs boosted steel jobs, it harmed import-reliant industries and exports. Large economies such as such as China, the United Kingdom and the European Union are preparing for a large economic blow throughout Trump’s term due to his proposed tariffs. Experts have emphasized the need for a “strategic application” of tariffs, recommending a “gradual increase over time.”
unbranded – Newsworthy

Senate Bill 1190

BRISTOL HERALD COURIER

The Washington County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution Tuesday formally opposing a new Virginia state Senate bill that seeks to strip away local control from governing solar energy projects.“I oppose this with every bone in my body,“ Supervisor Saul Hernandez said at Tuesday’s meeting in Abingdon, Virginia. “And, when you look at it, it’s absolutely horrible.“The bill, carried by Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Charlottesville, would create the Virginia Energy Facility Review Board. The purpose of the board is to review proposed energy projects, such as solar farms, according to Hernandez.Senate Bill 1190 “requires the Review Board to issue a regional energy report that models each planning district’s meaningful annual contribution to clean energy generation, energy efficiency measures, and energy storage.”

People are also reading…

It further “requires the Review Board to establish a model local ordinance for siting, permitting and zoning of critical interconnection projects and all other ground-mounted front-of-meter solar energy and energy storage projects.The bill also would require each locality to adopt an ordinance for the permitting of solar energy facilities and energy storage facilities, that is consistent with the Commonwealth Clean Energy Policy and the model ordinance and submit it to the Review Board.On Thursday the legislation was referred from the General Laws and Technology Committee to the Committee on Commerce and Labor by a unanimous 15-0 vote.On Tuesday, Hernandez said he was not against renewable energy or solar projects, but added, “I am against this overreach.”The state board would review applications for solar projects, then would recommend these proposals to local governments, Hernandez said.If the local government rejected a proposed plan, a developer could then take the locality to court and settle the matter in Circuit Court, Hernandez said.Hernandez recalled how the county leaders in 2024 investigated a proposed project by Texas-based Catalyst Energy to place solar panels on about 2,000 acres of land zoned both industrial and agricultural.“It never actually came to our board for a vote,” Hernandez said. “It went to the Planning Commission, and they rejected it. But I think we all know how it would have gone had it come to us.”Hernandez called the proposed legislation “arrogant” and said it undermines local governments ability to set forth zoning, which was established in Washington County in 1971.This state board would require localities to adopt a solar ordinance consistent with a statewide model, Hernandez said.That could be in conflict with a proposed ordinance change that is slated to come for review by the Planning Commission later this month, which will limit any and all solar farms to 5 acres in Washington County.This legislation would mean that the county leaders would have to “defend“ any positions “to some state bureaucrat,“ Hernandez said.“I know the reason they’re doing this. The Commonwealth of Virginia has written a check it can’t cash,” Hernandez said, referring to the Clean Economy Act, a mandate that Virginia must turn more towards renewable energy by 2035.The supervisor said he wants to evaluate any project in the county and not have the state tell him what’s good for the Tyler District that he represents.“They don’t know anything about the Tyler District. I do. I live in it,” he said.On a motion by Hernandez, the board voted unanimously to pass the resolution opposing the state legislation.“This is a good statement being made by our board of supervisors that we are against these activities that are an overreach of state power,“ Supervisor Dwayne Ball said.Urban areas “do not eat without us,” Ball said. “They didn’t build their cities without our coal.”This legislation “opens a Pandora’s box” that could tell a county “what to do with our own land,” Ball said.Supervisor, Wayne Stevens said the legislation makes him “mad” on how “they’re trying to go around the corner on us and leave us holding an empty bag.”
#lee-outstream-wrap {
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
max-width: 800px;
margin: 0 auto;
display: none;
position: relative;
}
#lee-outstream-wrap .ima-controls-div { z-index: 99; }
#lee-outstream-wrap .lee-outstream-video {
position: relative;
padding-bottom: 56.25%;
height: 0;
}
#lee-outstream-wrap .lee-outstream-video video {
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: 0;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
z-index:1;
}
#lee-outstream-close {
display: none;
position: absolute;
cursor: pointer;
top: -25px;
left: -25px;
padding: 10px;
overflow: hidden;
background-color: #000;
border-radius: 20px;
color: #fff;
z-index: 99;
line-height: 0;
box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.4) 0px 0px 5px 0px;
}
#lee-outstream-close:hover { color: rgba(255,255,255,.8); }
#lee-outstream-wrap.sticky {
position: fixed;
bottom:0;
right:0;
width: 400px;
z-index: 1000;
height: auto;
box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.4) 0px 0px 10px 0px;
}
#lee-outstream-wrap.sticky #lee-outstream-close{ display: block; }
@media (max-width: 767px){
#lee-outstream-wrap.sticky { width: 60%; }
}

[email protected]

Billionaires and their cash head to Washington for Trump’s inauguration

As Donald Trump raises his right hand to take the oath of office on Monday, the world’s three richest men — Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg — will be there to witness it.The trio, who hold sway over companies worth trillions of dollars, will be joined in a freezing Washington by the likes of Open AI’s Sam Altman alongside throngs of lesser-known chief executives and investors hoping to curry favour with the president-elect or make amends for their former criticism.Their pilgrimages to the US capital come as Trump’s inaugural committee looks on course to have raised a record sum from corporate donors and wealthy elites. Although final figures will not be disclosed for months, the committee is expected to smash the $107mn record set by Trump in 2017, when corporations scrambled to get in with the then-political neophyte. Big Tech giants Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft have donated at least a million dollars each over the past few weeks, while Apple’s Tim Cook has donated the same amount in a personal capacity. Uber and its chief executive donated $1mn each.Century-old American carmakers and banks, the pharmaceutical lobby and the leaders of the nascent AI industry have all rowed in behind the president-elect. Altman, GM, Ford, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America have all donated to the inaugural committee, according to reports.Trump allies and Wall Street are relishing the president-elect’s return to power, as his victory sent stocks soaring in expectation of extended tax cuts and widespread deregulation. Brian Ballard, a top lobbyist and Trump fundraiser, called it “a very exciting time”.“The divisiveness of eight years ago is largely gone,” he told the Financial Times. “It’s a wonderful moment for America.”Pro-Trump fundraisers pitched potential donors on giving $1mn or more to secure six tickets for the swearing-in ceremony, four hotel rooms and two tickets to an “intimate dinner” with vice president-elect JD Vance on Saturday night. “With average commitments coming in at the $1 million mark, our $50k-$500k packages won’t last much longer,” wrote a fundraiser in one message seen by the FT. “Contact me today to secure your spot and celebrate in style at one of our iconic D.C. venues! Do not delay!”The private, black-tie “Crypto Ball” kicked off on Friday at the Andrew W Mellon Auditorium near the Washington Monument in a sign of the industry’s burgeoning political power, sparking jokes about the boom of rented tuxedos among the T-shirt crowd. Trump has picked industry-friendly appointees and promoted his family’s crypto venture, World Liberty Financial.“If people knew who were coming I think it’d pump the price of Bitcoin,” said one Crypto Ball attendee said.Another hot ticket on Friday night was a small dinner at a downtown Washington hotel hosted by super lobbyist Jeff Miller and featuring the president-elect’s oldest son, Donald Trump Jr.On Saturday, top donors will mingle with Vance and the incoming cabinet at a museum on the National Mall for a reception and black-tie dinner.On the eve of the inauguration, Musk, who gave more than $250mn to Trump’s cause in 2024, will speak to the Maga faithful at the Capital One arena, according to NBC. The inaugural committee will then host a “candlelight dinner” at the National Building Museum across the street. Meanwhile X, Uber and The Free Press media organisation are scheduled to host a cocktail event nearby with a performance by country music singer Dierks Bentley.On Monday, Trump will be sworn in as the 47th US president, making his vows over his mother’s Bible and another used by Abraham Lincoln in 1861. The ceremony at the US Capitol will feature country music singers Carrie Underwood and Lee Greenwood, who sells a $59.99 Bible endorsed by the president-elect. Following Trump’s parade, Zuckerberg, who recently shook up his government affairs team and rolled back Meta’s fact-checking policies in likely overtures to Trump, will co-host a reception with billionaire GOP donor Miriam Adelson, Houston Rockets owner Tilman Fertitta and Chicago Cubs owner Todd Ricketts.Some chief executives are staying away. Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, who visited Trump at Mar-a-Lago this week, will not be attending the inauguration, according to a person close to him. Jensen Huang, the boss of chipmaker Nvidia, will be celebrating Lunar New Year with staff, while the leaders of AMD and Intel will also be elsewhere, their spokespeople said. Lisa Gilbert, the co-president of progressive pressure group Public Citizen, predicted that Trump’s final inauguration haul would exceed $200mn and said donating was an “obvious way for corporations and special interests to try and influence the incoming administration”. She added that executives were also seeking to stay out of the crosshairs of a “weaponised Department of Justice” that could go after the president-elect’s political enemies.“It is a record-breaking swamp of special interests,” said Gilbert, echoing last week’s warning from departing president Joe Biden of a growing “oligarchy” in the US.Democratic senators Elizabeth Warren and Michael Bennet blasted the donations, writing to the chief executives of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Uber and OpenAI on Friday and noting their companies were under regulatory scrutiny from a variety of agencies in Washington. “These donations raise questions about corruption and the influence of corporate money on the Trump administration, and Congress, and the public deserve answers,” they wrote.Altman responded on X, the platform Musk owns, “funny, they never sent me one of these for contributing to Democrats . . . ”.additional reporting by Michael Acton and Cristina Criddle in San Francisco