> 2. Is it relevant that Thiel co-founded it, rather than also mentioning Karp? Is it to stuff as many boogey men into the lede? Maybe it's just my bubble, but

> 2. Is it relevant that Thiel co-founded it, rather than also mentioning Karp? Is it to stuff as many boogey men into the lede? Maybe it's just my bubble, but I "know" Thiel, and I know he's connected to Vance and Musk, and I don't know anything about Karp, so the relevancy decision makes sense to me. Karp is mentioned as being CEO later in the article. I have now googled him enough to know he's left-wing, so I see where you're going, but still feel he's not relevant enough to merit more mention. > 4. Isn’t DOGE the official name? What’s with prefixing it with “so-called”? It could just be a dig, but maybe more likely a reference to the legal concept that it's not a cabinet-level department and that its legally-correct(?) names are U.S. DOGE Service and U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Government_Efficiency#Legal_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Government_Effic...).