4 ms·
Elon Musk doesn't show at hearing over super PAC's $1M lottery for voters
- paulpauper 2y agoUnless it's federally required, he can no-show. It's still civil. It would have to be referred for criminal prosecution.
- owenpalmer 2y ago[flagged]
- dialup_sounds 2y agoThe article does not say he gave the money to Trump voters.
- owenpalmer 2y agoThe article says he gave it to voters, which is not true. It was not a requirement to vote in order to get the money. Since Elon endorses Trump, I wrote "Trump" voters, but I guess you're right, I should have just written "voters".
- dialup_sounds 2y ago"Voters" in this context means "registered voters", which America PAC does require people to be to get the money. Quoth https://petition.theamericapac.org/ https://petition.theamericapac.org/: > To be eligible, both the referrer and the petition signer must be registered voters of Arizona, Michigan, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bdjsiqoocwk 2y agoTo individuals who are in swing states and aren't registered to vote. If the constitutional petition is so important why restrict it those individuals? Because it's really about getting people who are likely to vote trump and who have a chance to make a difference.
- leereeves 2y ago[flagged]
- hn_acker 2y ago> To individuals who are in swing states and aren't registered to vote. The $1 million lottery reward is only for people who have signed the petition and have registered to vote, so some people who signed the petition could have registered before Elon Musk started the petition and lottery.
- bdjsiqoocwk 2y agoSo what? The question isn't whether Enron Musk might be using his money to influence the outcome of an election in a way that's sub optimal, which is what you've shown. The question is whether he might be using his money to influence the outcome of an election, which is what I've shown.