zlacker

What Trump is doing is pure extortion. Intel gives up equity, and in exchange, Trump maybe doesn't use the massive power of the state to claw back billions of dollars that were legally awarded to Intel, and Trump stops pressuring Intel to fire their CEO (note how he now calls the CEO "highly respected").

The comparison to the GM bailout makes no sense. GM got something that it needed from the bailout. Here, all Intel is getting is the withdrawal of threats that Trump himself made. It's mob boss style government, and it's happening to many institutions in this country (law firms, universities, corporations, etc). Why you would want to try to normalize it is utterly beyond me. Maybe you just like being the "well actually" guy because you think it makes you sound smarter than everyone else.

>>apical+(OP)
I’m not a “well actually” guy, I’m a constitutional fundamentalist. It’s definitionally not extortion to threaten to do something you have a legal right to do. The CHIPs Act gave the executive a bunch of money for making discretionary grants. And that means the President has a bunch of money to make discretionary grants.

Also, why should we give companies money without getting equity?

>>apical+(OP)
>Maybe you just like being the "well actually" guy because you think it makes you sound smarter than everyone else.

He's a lawyer at the Federal bar, so on the subject under discussion he is more knowledgeable than most of us.

>>holler+ds1
Knowledge doesn’t override partisanship. Rayiner used to be a thoughtful voice here but, like many other Republicans, in the age of Trump personal fealty outranks knowledge or past principles.

>>acdha+CR2
I've believed the administrative state is unconstitutional since I took admin law in law school (when I was a Democrat).