MUSK ... DECLINE OF A TECH THUG

The former Unelected President of the United States, Elon Musk, has had a bad run recently, highlighted by three consecutive failures to launch his SpaceX Starships … four if you count his disastrous DOGE flight of fancy and five, if you consider the growing fragility of his Tesla empire. 

As he scuttles out of the White House and back to Tesla, SpaceX and X, he faces a major reality check.

Tesla, has been wounded, perhaps mortally, by the backlash to his cavalier actions with DOGE and their ramifications.

Tesla’s car sales are down 20% year-on-year, net income has plummeted 71%, shares have plunged 40% this year and market capitalisation is off by $US600 billion since DOGE. And Trump’s mad tariff shenanigans have emboldened China’s EV industry to double down on its competition with Tesla.

In his early promotion of his DOGE work for Trump, Musk claimed the (Department of Government Efficiency) would wield the “chainsaw for bureaucracy” and slash $US2 Trillion from the US budget. Soon after, he quietly revised this to $US1 Trillion.

DOGE published a scorecard of its claimed savings from dismantling agencies, cancelling contracts and firing federal workers on what it called “the wall of savings”.

But, from the start, the media debunked the rubbery, often absurd, figures and forced DOGE to cut back the proven savings, while planned cuts were caught up in court cases challenging their legality.

It seems that, rather than $US1 Trillion, Musk’s young tech thugs perhaps reduced the bureaucracy by around $170 billion (and even much of that is unconfirmed). But, in doing so, they created some devastating unforeseen consequences.

Musk once boasted that he “fed USAID into the wood chipper”. But its demise has led to a resurgence in AIDS in Africa and has directly contributed to the death of up to 300,000 people, mostly children.

The usually-measured Bill Gates accused Musk, “the world’s richest person of killing the world’s poorest children.”

What can we learn from Musk’s 130 days of unfettered interference by an unelected and often unhinged tech thug, who last week was accused by the New York Times of being a heavy user of ketamine and a dabbler in a random cocktail of recreational drugs, like ecstasy, cocaine, magic mushrooms and pot?

Often top government executives must undertake drug tests. When The Times asked whether this had applied to Musk, the administration refused to answer.

Musk posted on X: “To be clear I am not taking drugs. The New York Times is lying its ass off.” The Times stands by its reporting.

This latest claim may give some context to his bizarre public behaviour: the fascist salute, the chainsaw, the rambling speeches, maybe even his one-man campaign to lift the world’s birth rate through multiple partners, donated sperm and serial secret relationships resulting in more than a dozen offspring.

The human damage wrought by DOGE will take months and years to fully manifest itself, both at home and abroad.

As with all bullies, Musk has taken the line of least resistance - the easy way out – slashing and burning without strategic thought and untrammelled by any compassion or responsibility and leaving Congress and the Senate to cobble together some workable structures from the debris.

Surely, even the most avid Trumpites must now see that this experiment has cost their nation dearly.

It has undermined desperately-needed services to US veterans, shattered educational institutions and healthcare, and has destroyed America’s international reputation and its global “soft power”.

And it has focussed attention on both Musk’s health and Trump’s judgement.

When he was Executive Producer of Nine’s Wide World of Sports in the 1980s, David Hill, used to have a brass sign on his desk that read: “Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups”.

He was a brilliant and imaginative creator of television. He led and mentored a generation of technicians, camera crews, producers, writers and reporters at WWOS in Australia and then Rupert Murdoch persuaded him to work for him, first in London setting up Sky TV in the late 1980s and then in the US where he ran Fox Sports from 1993.

As he did in Australia, Hill transformed sports coverage in Britain and America, introducing what became known as ‘augmented reality’ to screens.

He started with football broadcasts in the UK by introducing a box on the screen showing the score and the game time.

In America he refined and expanded that into what became the Fox Box or Fox Bug in the network’s NFL games (with the time, scores, timeouts, and later developed it to include win-loss and performance stats, comparisons, etc.)

The virtuosity of Hill’s concept was so powerful that it has become an essential element in virtually every sporting broadcast in the world.

This week in New York, David Hill will receive not one, but two, lifetime achievement awards, one from the Sports Emmys and the other from the US industry bible Sports Business Journal.

Rupert Murdoch called Hill “a dynamic and imaginative leader who has changed the experience of nearly all major sports on three continents. Whether launching Sky Sports, Fox Sports or our regional sports networks, we owe him an enormous debt.”

Adam Sharp, president and CEO of National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, said: “David’s numerous contributions to sports broadcasting have impacted the way sports have been and will be viewed around the world forever”.

Not bad for a boy from Newcastle, NSW!

A QUESTION OF HONOUR ...

The long-running travails of former SAS operator Ben Roberts-Smith VC took another turn last Friday when the Federal Court rejected his attempt to overturn an earlier judgement that found he had committed war crimes in Afghanistan.

The original decision came after Roberts-Smith sued a group of media outlets and journalists for defamation in 2018. That trial ran for 110 days, saw 42 witnesses and cost an estimated $30 million.  

At its conclusion, in 2023, Federal Court Judge Anthony Besanko found that, while Roberts-Smith had been defamed, most of the implications “were substantially true” and that the respondents to his defamation suit had proved “to the requisite standard that (Roberts-Smith) had committed, or was complicit in and responsible for murder, on three different missions”.

Roberts-Smith appealed that decision in a hearing that ran for ten days in February 2024. He has been waiting since then for Friday’s verdict.

The Full Bench of the Federal Court (Justices Nye Perram, Anna Katzmann and Geoffrey Kennett) rejected Roberts-Smith’s appeal, saying:

“Having carefully considered all these matters, we are unanimously of the opinion that the evidence was sufficiently cogent to support the findings that the appellant murdered four Afghan men and to the extent that we have discerned error in the reasons of the primary judge, the errors were inconsequential. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed with costs.”

For his part, Roberts-Smith continues to maintain his innocence and immediately announced he would take the final appeals step available to him, in the High Court.

Even a man who has been tested to superhuman lengths in training and battle must have his limits. It’s hard to imagine the impact of the prolonged strain he has endured this past decade or so.

The case has descended into a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions: shaking Australia’s military to its core and casting a shadow over the time-honoured system that has determined our highest award for valour under fire, the Victoria Cross.

I have been interviewing our veterans for more than fifty years. In that time, dozens of Diggers (mainly WWII veterans) have told me of actions they witnessed that they believed should have been recognised by the award of a VC.

But in all that time, over many hundreds of interviews, never have I heard serious doubt cast at individuals who had been awarded the medal … until Ben Roberts-Smith.

It was a group of Roberts-Smith’s former SAS comrades who blew the whistle on him.

His supporters vehemently claim these men were motivated by jealousy and spite and they manufactured their evidence. Others praise them for their moral (and physical) courage in standing up for what they believed was true and for the honour of their storied regiment and for the hard-earned reputation of Australia’s military that has been built over more than a century.

It's now nine years since Major-General Paul Brereton began investigating claims of misconduct by Australian forces in Afghanistan and five years since he handed down his report that concluded there was credible evidence that 25 Australian SAS operators were responsible for the unlawful killing of 39 Afghans.

This week there have been suggestions that Australia’s richest woman, Gina Rinehart, has been underwriting Roberts-Smith’s latest legal action. She has remained mute on that but has publicly supported him, saying:

“The relentless attack on Ben Roberts-Smith hasn’t made the country better, as some journalists like to imply, it’s just weakened our Defence Force already struggling with inadequate numbers to defend us.

Many patriotic Australians query, is it fair that this brave and patriotic man who risked his life on overseas missions which he was sent on by our government, is under such attack.”

Strange how often the word patriotic is invoked these days (yet another adoption of the American right’s approach when their views are challenged).

The reality is that it was Ben Roberts-Smith who initiated the defamation case against the media.

We were not there to witness the events in question in Afghanistan. We do not know the facts. We must rely on the courts.

A TALE OF THREE CONFLICTS ...

As Donald Trump tours the Middle East adding to his wealth and unleashing his now customary storm of random announcements, Israel is starting to look as though it has been sidelined.

Trump’s lavender-carpeted tour is unfolding against a background of three conflicts with one thing in common: they all involve nations with nuclear weapons.

As people die daily in Gaza, Ukraine and on the Indian-Pakistani border, looming in the background are the nuclear arms of Israel, Russia, India and Pakistan.  

One of the many announcements Trump made recently, swamped by the theatrics of Canadian PM Carney’s visit, was a decision to stop bombing the Houthis in Yemen.

He said it was because the Houthis had committed not to bomb US interests. He did not mention that they did not commit to stop their missile strikes against Israel.

Trump then ended the decade-long sanctions against Syria, even though Israel considers the state a jihadist regime.

Indeed, even as he made the announcement in Riyadh, sirens were warning Israelis in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem of an incoming missile from Yemen.

From the outside, it seems the region is being reshaped with little or no input from Israel.

To add to the unreality of the times, Trump exited the stage in Riyadh to the strains of the Village People’s YMCA … strange days indeed.

THE KLEPTOCRAT-IN-CHIEF

‘Kleptocracy’: “a society or system ruled by people who use their power to steal their country’s resources”.

Donald Trump seems intent on outdoing Vladimir Putin to become the Global Kleptocrat-in-Chief with his most recent decision to consider accepting the most valuable gift from a foreign government in modern history.

Apparently, Trump is thinking of accepting a Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the Qatari royal family. The luxury airliner, known as the ‘flying palace’, is worth about $US400 million and Trump plans to refit it and use it as Air Force One.

It would replace the aircraft that Boeing is currently building to replace the ageing Air Force One, which are slated for delivery in 2027.

As Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer, said: “Nothing says ‘America First’ like Air Force One, brought to you by Qatar. It’s not just bribery, it’s premium foreign influence with extra legroom.”

Sure, it may well be the latest Trumpian publicity stunt, aimed at deflecting attention from his plummeting economy and popularity figures, but it shines a bright light on the unprecedented levels of corruption being wrought by Trump’s family and his administration.

Indeed, the proposed gift comes just days after the Trump Organization (now run by his sons, Eric and Don Jr) announced a new project for a $US5.5 billion golf course to be built in Qatar in partnership with Qatari Diar, a property group backed by the country’s sovereign wealth fund.

The US constitution states clearly that ‘no present of any kind whatsoever’ can be accepted by the president without the approval of Congress.

As Congressman Jamie Raskin wrote: “A gift you use for four years and then deposit in your library is still a gift (and a grift).”

AUSTRALIA, YOU SHOULD BE PROUD OF YOURSELF

I don’t know about you but I’m feeling really proud of Australia today.

It’s not because of the result of the election but because, in a world of Trumpian lies and tough-guy politics, the Oz heartland chose the kinder road and moved toward civility and compassion.

And I’m proud that, after the dust settled, our leaders also rejected America’s reptilian politics and chose to win (in Albo’s case) with humility and to lose (on Peter Dutton’s part) with grace, by giving respect to their opponents.

Australians showed their character by ignoring Clive Palmer’s crude attempts to import Trump’s brand of scattershot brazen lies, half-truths and puerile name calling.

They showed that the national ‘No Dickheads’ policy is still in force and that they’re capable of choosing policies over slogans and individual character over mindless party loyalty.

The problems we face are real but we now have some clear air in which to figure out some sustainable solutions, without Clive’s incessant robo-texts, the sloganeering and name calling.

We learned that the ABC retains its credibility – its election-night coverage’s ratings beat the rest by a factor of four.

We also learned that spending millions on media and social advertising doesn’t deliver seats – Clive’s Trumpets spent as much as Labor, around $24 million, and won nothing.

It all depends on your message.

TIME FOR OUR KIWI BROTHERS TO PROPERLY RECOGNISE THEIR VETERANS

New Zealand’s only living Victoria Cross recipient, Willie Apiata, has handed his precious medal to his Minister for Veterans’ Affairs to protest his nation’s current two-tiered system on veteran recognition and compensation.

Currently, only NZ veterans who have been injured while deployed overseas during a war or an emergency operation qualify for compensation or pensions as veterans, as defined by the nation’s Veterans Support Act 2014.

“The definition that resides within our country at the moment splits us into two peoples when we should be one because we all gave one service,” Apiata said.

 Whether we go abroad or we stay at home, we sear our allegiance to our people that are here, within Aotearoa and our shores, and to serve under our queen or king.”

Apiata has been advocating change in the definition of a veteran for more than five years and has decided he cannot wear his medal until all Kiwi servicemen and women are defined as veterans.

Handing his medal to NZVA Minister, Chris Penk, Apiata said:

“You are the chief and commander of the veterans, and you need to lead us now, and we will follow you to support you so that we are all under the same umbrella of what service really means. Every single one of us.”

For his part, Penk thanked Apiata for the gesture and committed to hand back the medal as soon as he could after working to change the definition.

“I don’t wish to retain that taonga (the medal) long. It weighs heavily on me. I will return it to you. I undertake to do that as soon as possible on the basis you have set out,” he said.

New Zealand is the odd one out among its Five Eyes partners in the definition of a veteran. Australia, UK, US and Canada all agree that a veteran is anyone who has honourably served as a member of their defence forces, whether deployed or not.

AMERICA'S LAWYERS SURRENDER TO TRUMP ...

Not since Japan’s surrender to end World War Two have we seen a submission to match that of the craven capitulation of America’s top law firms to Donald Trump.

By an Executive Order on April 9, Trump threatened law firms that have either lawyers who have investigated Trump, have challenged his policies, worked for Democrats or, in some way offended him, with the order reading in part: “Lawyers and law firms that engage in activities detrimental to critical American interests should not have access to our Nation’s secrets, nor should their conduct be subsidized by Federal taxpayer funds or contracts …”

Of course, Trump’s administration decides what would be “detrimental” and what would constitute “critical American interests”.

But the threat was enough to see nine leading US law firms cave in to the bullying and pledge to provide Trump with almost $US1billion worth of legal work.

The first firm to rollover, Paul, Weiss, apparently decided that promising Trump $US40 million in pro bono work was a good deal when calculated against the fees, clients and talent it believed it could lose if it fought the threats.

Only three top firms decided to fight Trump’s order in court. One of them, Perkins Coie, sought an order throwing out Trump’s order, calling it “a threat to both the firm and the broader legal profession”.

Yesterday, Reporters Without Borders, the Paris-based non-profit safeguarding freedom of information, joined with 60 other similar organisations in court actions aimed at opposing Trump’s executive orders targeting law firms because they would jeopardise news outlets and journalists by denying them legal support.

It’s a continuation of Trump’s relentless campaign aimed at destroying press freedom.

WE CAN'T LET THIS HAPPEN IN AUSTRALIA ...

Say what you will about Donald Trump, but even his most vehement critics must admit that he is, in a bizarre way, a brilliant communicator.

I say bizarre because clearly he has the ability to cut through and deliver a message, even if that message either makes little sense or, very often, is an outright lie or a misconstruction of the truth.

But Trump has been enabled in telling his outrageous lies and in unleashing his self-focussed stream-of-consciousness ramblings because of the gradual collapse of serious media in America and the impotent White House press corps.

We in Australia must take note of what has been happening behind the scenes in Washington. And we must make sure it doesn’t happen here.

White House press briefings have descended into a low-level vaudeville act where Trump’s latest press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, the youngest and least-experienced in history, holds court.

She is a 27-year-old whose credentials extend to being a former intern at Fox TV and in the First Trump White House and a 2022 failed New Hampshire House of representatives’ candidate.

At each White House briefing, she parrots the Trump party line with all the blind passion and unquestioned certainty of one who doesn’t know what she doesn’t know.

She picks favourites for questions, ignores queries that don’t suit her message and generally refuses to accept any accountability on behalf of the administration.

And she’s able to do that because Trump’s media handlers now effectively control access to the briefings.

Their doctrinaire selection process has allowed them to infiltrate the accredited media there with Trump-friendly ‘media’ representatives. In addition, they’ve cut back the number of briefings; changed seating plans to favour supportive news outlets; restricted live coverage; and limited the number of questions.

The tone is invariably adversarial, with Leavitt regularly labelling stories and outlets ‘fake news’ when they are counter the party line.

But, hopefully, there are some stirrings of a fightback.

Today, the US District Court ordered the White House to restore Associated Press’ full access to presidential events.

The administration had banned AP, the 179-year-old not-for-profit news agency, from the briefings and aboard Air Force One after it refused to comply with Trump’s executive order unilaterally renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

In handing down the order, US District Court Judge, Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, said:

“Under the First Amendment, if the Government opens its doors to some journalists – be it to the Oval Office, the East Room, or elsewhere – it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints.

“The Constitution requires no less.”

But, while AP has had a small victory, Trump’s war against the media continues apace.

His minions have instigated investigations against the major TV news networks ABC, CBS and NBC, dismantled the government-run Voice of America and threatened to remove funding for public broadcasters, PBS and NPR.

It’s straight out of the playbook for dictators and autocrats. And it’s a recipe for disaster because a cowed, ineffectual media is the first step along the road to the destruction of democracy.

AMERICA'S COMPASSION BY-PASS ...

The one thing Donald Trump has been successful in eliminating from America’s international relations has been the very characteristic that set it apart from other great powers, compassion.

There have been many proud examples of American compassion on the international stage: the Lend-Lease deal with Britain in WWII described by Churchill as “the most unsordid act in the whole of recorded history”; the Marshall Plan after WWII to help rebuild Europe; the Berlin Airlift to break the Soviet blockade in 1948-9; and the Peace Corps created by JFK in 1961.

In recent years, America has continued in this vein: its humanitarian aid, especially in natural disasters; its acceptance of refugees, especially those fleeing violence, like Syria and Afghanistan; its global health programs, especially to combat AIDS and malaria; its educational exchange programs, like the Fulbright scholars; and its disaster relief programs (eg Ebola, tsunamis, etc).

Then came Trump reading from the Project 2025 manifesto.

In just a few months, Trump – supported by his tech thugs and his doctrinaire back-up singers - has worked tirelessly to eliminate compassion from all levels of his administration.

Sadly, it seems that it’s the one area of Trump 2.0 where he’s succeeded, both at home and abroad.

The resulting damage will be long-lasting and widespread and it will place America in the same category as Russia and China in dealing with its own citizens and with other nations.