Slashdot Mirror


Peter Thiel Is Joining Donald Trump's Transition Team (theverge.com)

Peter Thiel's time spent campaigning for Donald Trump during the election season has paid off. According to a statement released today, Donald Trump has named Thiel to the executive committee of his presidential transition team. The Verge reports: Thiel, who donated $1.25 million to Trump's campaign late in the election cycle, mostly stood alone among colleagues in his support for Trump, who was publicly disdained in the Valley. Thiel's support came at a cost to businesses like startup accelerator Y Combinator, which soon attracted negative publicity for having Thiel as a part-time adviser. Thiel also brought criticism to Facebook, where he is a board member, although Mark Zuckerberg defended his place at the company. Thiel further angered First Amendment supporters by bankrolling the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that brought down Gawker. Thiel said before the election that he would find some way of working with the Trump administration, and although his final role is unclear, his appointment to Trump's executive committee signals the relationship will indeed continue.

51 of 820 comments (clear)

  1. he bet on the winner by turkeydance · · Score: 5, Insightful

    he reaps the rewards.

    1. Re:he bet on the winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bully? Remind me who were the ones screaming people down with accusations of "racist, misogynist, nazi, hitler", etc to anyone who dared to disagree with them? Logical debate was not permitted. It always devolved into name calling and outrageous comparisons to hitler or the kkk.

      The marxists that make up today's left-wing movement absolutely despise the American system and the constitution. They detest free speech and free elections and would just prefer to use government force to cram their ideals down everyone else's throats. They are always demanding more and more power be given to the federal government, not caring about the abuses of power it results in, because they believe it will be THEIR power to use against their opponents. With their loss of this election, they are are slowly realising why such power is not to be granted. Their opponents now wield this power, and they are terrified of it being used against themselves.

    2. Re: he bet on the winner by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He's already planning to bring coal burning back, push the Keystone Pipeline through, picked Ebell, and it's been less than a week.

      Amazing how little it takes to scare you. Keystone XL pipeline should have been approved a decade ago and coal burning hasn't been shown to be a big deal, let us note once again! And appointing someone not particularly environmentally friendly who still has to survive passage through the Senate. Oh dear, he'll be gassing six million Jews next.

      Maybe you should learn how to manage your fear rather than justifying bullying behavior on the basis of unreasonable fear.

    3. Re: he bet on the winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > coal burning hasn't been shown to be a big deal

      Wow you have really gone full retard, haven't you?
      What's next, chemtrails and HAARP?

    4. Re: he bet on the winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh noes! He's going to allow pipes to carry oil instead of those so much more environmental methods such as trucks and trains!

      Get your head screwed on, pipelines beat the alternatives, and saying no to them doesn't do what you think it does (because I'm betting you think it means people won't be able to buy oil).

    5. Re:he bet on the winner by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 5, Insightful

      if Peter lands a spot in Trump's administration, it certainly won't be business as usual.

      When is the last time a Republican Administration had an openly gay man in a senior role?

      Peter would make a decent tech adviser to Trump. For all the people bitching that Trump is a raciest, homophobic, bigot... well, you're not paying attention...

    6. Re:he bet on the winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You're a fucking cretin.

      There are no "Marxists" in the American government. Washington is far right of centre.

    7. Re: he bet on the winner by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He's already planning to bring coal burning back

      Coal isn't dying because of politics. It is dying because of cheap shale gas. Coal is not coming back.

    8. Re:he bet on the winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I still can't understand how anyone is for child murder, but there are funny people in this world.

      No one is for child murder.

      Everyone is for dictionaries.

    9. Re:he bet on the winner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Made up BS.
      Meanwhile there is video of Trump supporters getting beaten simply because they voted for him.

    10. Re: he bet on the winner by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You're not getting it, The pipeline encourages and cheapens the use of a fuel that we need to stop using. There is also likely some adverse environmental effects of the pipelines installation.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    11. Re: he bet on the winner by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd encourage you to go visit a country like India or China, live near a coal burning plant for a year

      I'll note that I've lived near a coal plant for about five years. But it was in the developed world with actual pollution controls.

      Look at Germany - they've got enough solar and wind power to supply _all_ their needs.

      For two costs: 1) doubled their electricity prices, and 2) having to import major power when solar and wind didn't supply their needs.

    12. Re: he bet on the winner by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure most of us understand the Luddite obstructionism strategy quite well. We have other needs than just using less petroleum. I believe a pipeline does a good job of balancing the relative neediness of the needs.

    13. Re:he bet on the winner by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The debate on abortion in the US is legally messy.

      That is one of the problems of having "laws" written by courts...

      As messy as Congress can be, the courts can be "too simple" in this regard.

      Side note: My personal belief is that you do not have an abortion, even to save the life of the mother. You do not kill children for any reason whatsoever. I will not stand before God and tell him "I wanted my wife to live, so I killed my child to save her".

      That being said... I'm not so fixed on this to be unable to see that not everyone agrees with me. Abortions being illegal (murder) except in the case of rape, incest, or the life of the mother, I could compromise on. I could also understand if the child is damaged in some way, brain dead or otherwise never going to live anyway. If a doctor certifies that this is the case, then fair enough, I can compromise there.

      I personally wouldn't do it, but I also understand we live in an imperfect world and other people have points of view.

      The problem with the whole "A woman's right to choose" is that the choice is the death of a child. How about my "right to punch you in the nose because you're an idiot"? Do I get the "man's right to choose to punch idiots"? To me, that is equally stupid as the "woman's right to choose nonsense". Murder is illegal for a reason, after all. You can't just do ANYTHING that you want in this world, we have rules...

    14. Re:he bet on the winner by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The term "pro-life" angers me greatly. The vocal pro-lifers are nothing of the sort. I believe there is a very strong overlap between being "pro-life" and supporting the death penalty.

      Also, most of those "pro-life" people don't care about life after birth. If the child dies in poverty, they don't care. That's not pro-life.

      "Pro-life" means "Control". It's about control, not just of birth but of the sex lives of young people.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    15. Re: he bet on the winner by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Less emotionally, abortion rights are really about people having an inherent right to personal autonomy. There's no one reasonably suggesting a ban on tubal ligation or snipping the vas deferens in man's testes, and yet gametes are just as capable of forming a human life as is a zygote or a fetus. So really, all the anti-abortion types just pick their own artificial moment when some cells are a human life, declare that point the point where the state should use its vast powers to prevent interference.

      If you're going to declare that a batch of cells that will eventually become a fully formed human must be protected as legal persons, then why not sperm cells and ova? Why aren't anti-abortion types demanding an end to surgeries that remove the fallopian tubes?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  2. Crony Capitalism by srwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A little conflict of interest here with his company Palantir Technologies and its half a billion dollars in defense contracts.

    1. Re: Crony Capitalism by prefec2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why? Corruption is the standard in Washington. I wait for the day when Trump voters find out that Trump is also part of a rich elite. That they will stay poor and have no jobs. Lower taxes is BTW only good for people who earn that.much that they have to pay them.

  3. Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan by tlambert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Thiel further angered First Amendment supporters by bankrolling the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that brought down Gawker"

    I'm pretty sure the only people who felt angered at this as a first amendment issue were the folks at Gawker.

    Everyone else was pretty happy to see the Silicon Valley Version of TMZ (Thirty Mile Zone) go away, and quit outing the sexual orientation of businessmen whose only possible reason for being considered "public persons" was having been promoted as such by Gawker in the first place.

    Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan: I personally cheered for the verdict in this case, and am glad Thiel backed it.

    1. Re:Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Would you be OK with a defendant in a lawsuit for which you had legitimate cause tying you up in court until your money ran out?

      Let's ask Gawker shall we? They did that multiple times, to numerous people that they slandered.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:Peter Thiel and Hulk Hogan by Mashiki · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure you'd be OK with someone offering to pay any lawsuits naming you as a defendant, and that this wouldn't result in lots of people suing you hoping to make a buck.

      That depends. Did I turn around and refuse multiple court orders and have a past history of engaging in SLAAP like-behavior to stop people from suing me for ruining their name?

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  4. Re:It's the transition team, people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's the Vice President

    Sorry he wasn't your pick but the electorate didn't have a problem with him.

  5. Re:Congratulations! by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't wait to watch the intellectual contortions you put yourself through as you and your fellow Trump supporters being to realize what it is you actually elected.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  6. Act like an adult! by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Good. I want the Republicans to go all in: have Roe v. Wade overturned, ban abortion, eliminate the fillibuster, repeal the ACA, lower taxes on the top earners while shifting the tax burdern to the lower and middle classes, have gay marriage overturned, everything. Make things as painful as possible for as many people as possible. Most people, it seems, only respond to pain; make them feel it.

    Gah! Is there nothing more important to liberals than winning?

    Is getting your way more important than burning everything to the ground and salting the Earth?

    There are people out there who have different opinions than yours. They want to live peacefully in this world, and deep down you do as well.

    GET OVER YOURSELF AND START ACTING LIKE AN ADULT!

  7. wut by ArylAkamov · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thiel further angered First Amendment supporters by bankrolling the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that brought down Gawker.

    I didn't realize publishing private sextapes and ignoring orders from judges was a first amendment issue, but hacked nudes were a completely different, terrible thing to do.

    http://i.imgur.com/CQ5qgvu.jpg

  8. Re: It's the transition team, people. by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Homophobic? Isn't Peter Theil gay?

    --
    "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
    --- Jerry Garcia
  9. Re:It's the transition team, people. by lucm · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is a guy who as governor, instructed law enforcement to investigate women who miscarried to make sure they weren't aborting their fetuses.

    Isn't it strange how the people who scream "small government" and "freedom" go out and employ extra people just so that they can poke their noses into the most private places.

    What's strange is that you would take this anecdote and try to pass it as a huge pattern. You're arguing like a woman who knows she's wrong.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  10. Re:It's the transition team, people. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh, the irony. A far leftist, suddenly concerned with what's happening in flyover territory. Funny how there's such concern in the last 72 hours, when, before, all you had was laughter and abuse. Oh wait, that's all you have now, too. Nothing but blistering abuse for the ignorant proles who are too stupid to follow your leftist enlightened ways. Here's a video you need to watch. It concerns why you lost, and will continue to lose in the future.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  11. Re:It's the transition team, people. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Good. I want the Republicans to go all in

    Lots of liberals said the same thing back in 1980 when a B-movie actor was elected president.

    He was re-elected in 1984 with one of the biggest landslides in history.

    Over the past year, many people have underestimated Donald Trump ... "he will flame out before the Iowa Caucus", "he can't survive Super Tuesday", "he can't win over moderate Republicans in the upper midwest", "he is leading the Republican Party into the wilderness", "he doesn't stand a chance against Hillary". So far, they have all been wrong.

  12. Re:It's the transition team, people. by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    mandate that families hold funerals for miscarried or aborted fetuses

    This was so crazy that I had to look it up. Turns out "hold a funeral" is "dispose of remains properly" -- the bill required that fetal remains be either interred or incinerated. Generally speaking that would be the responsibility of the healthcare facility in custody of the remains.

    Tell me straight, is "require families to hold a funeral" truly the most accurate and reasonable way you could come up with to indicate the nature of the bill, or is it a purposeful deception?

    This is what happens when you believe what you read at Media Matters. In this case, MM was blindly copying from Esquire:

    http://mediamatters.org/resear...

  13. Re:It's the transition team, people. by tsotha · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This kind of unhinged nonsense just confirms Trump's election was the right thing for the country.

  14. Re:It's the transition team, people. by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 0, Insightful

    The women were to have been asked if they wanted their fetus buried or cremated. A judge struck down that part. What's the point of legislation like that other to introduce religious dogma where it doesn't belong?

  15. Re:It's the transition team, people. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pence is Trump's impeachment insurance.

    Trump's the first republican to hold a pride flag on stage. http://m.washingtontimes.com/n...

    On Sunday, at a rally in Colorado, Mr. Trump proudly held up a rainbow flag with the words “LGBT for Trump” written on it to a cheering crowd of thousands. It was an historic moment for gay equality and the Party of Lincoln as the 2016 GOP nominee for President of the United States held high the flag for gay equality. No other Republican Presidential nominee in history has embraced the LGBT community in such a loud and proud way.

    He's also said trans could use what ever bathroom they wanted and Caitlyn Jenner took Trump up on bathroom offer. http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/28/...

  16. Re:pay to play by Kohath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about the $750,000 speech Bill Clinton gave for Ericsson 9 days before telecom equipment was left off a list of items prohibited by Iran sanctions. Just a coincidence probably.

  17. Re:What do you make of it? by Mashiki · · Score: 1, Insightful

    That one involves democrats they're above the law. Now just remember that Thiel is a traitor to gay people, Trump is Hitler, and buzzfeed is saying he's launching the jack-booted right-wing death squads now...

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  18. Oh boy, not this shit again by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Keystone was shut down because it was primarily a way for Canada to ship oil to China. It's of very, very limited use to the United States while presenting significant risks (oil pipelines break all the time because it's cheaper to let 'em break than to maintain them since the tax payer cleans up the spills).

    Coal burning isn't a big deal because we regulated the fuck out of it. It's not profitable when they coal burners can't externalize their costs by dumping crap into the air and water. That's what shut down coal burning.

    He won't gas jews, but I am worried about my daughter's access to reproductive services. She's got some fairly serious congenital health issues that might someday require an abortion of a non-viable fetus to save her life. This is a surprisingly common occurrence that Mike Pence believes his God forbid's. If you think I'm speaking hyperbole then you don't know the horror of child birth left in God's hands. Educate yourself.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Oh boy, not this shit again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Keystone was shut down because Warren Buffet wants to keep making money running oil on his trains.

    2. Re:Oh boy, not this shit again by khallow · · Score: 1, Insightful

      My sister similarly has major health issues and relies on a number of provisions of Obamacare in order to stay alive. Losing insurance for her would be a death sentence.

      That's what Medicare/Medicaid are for.

      Without insurance her medication jumps to $5000/month.

      That's fine, if she's one of a few with those costs which currently is the case. But what happens when it becomes a significant fraction of the population? The answer is that we naturally revert to "sucks to be you" medical care where you pay for what you can afford.

      Sooner or later everyone's medical care costs become greater than society can afford and they die.

      My point behind this is that things like Obamacare are ongoing disasters in US health care. In addition to those high deductibles and expensive insurance, I see massive increase in unofficial monopolies on drugs (how much did her $5k per month drugs cost ten years ago?); insurance pools that healthy people steer clear of despite the tax penalty; a massive increase in Medicaid combined with reduction in Medicaid benefits; and a number of indications that insurance companies are consolidating or failing in ways that leave most of the US in oligopoly conditions for the Obamacare markets (such as a large fraction of the US covered by only one or two market participants).

      What's the point of your sister needing provisions of Obamacare, if it's going to harm hundreds of millions of peoples' health in the process? Maybe we can do better for all involved?

  19. Hyperbole by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    but not necessarily unhinged. Pence is on the extreme right. He's intensely religious and believes his religion dictates his actions.

    The thing that frightens me about Christians more than most religions is that their God punishes _them_ for _my_ sins. Think about Sodom & Gomorrah or the Floods. Think about how many baby's God killed. Sure, they're with God now, but they're still dead.

    To many Christians who take the bible literally my sinning represents an existent threat to them. Not just their "way of life" but their actual lives. This makes Christianity powerful, because there is a powerful incentive to spread the faith by any means necessary. It's one of the reasons it's as successful as it is. But if your a non-believer and you notice it then it's downright terrifying...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Hyperbole by tsotha · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You realize we've had devout Christians in the oval office before... right?

  20. Re:It's the transition team, people. by Alypius · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have faith in America for that exact reason. Reagan was an idiot who was going to start a nuclear WW3. W was going to impose a theocracy. Trump's not even inaugurated yet. Let's calm down, be vigilant, and see what happens.

  21. Re:pay to play by Imazalil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're willfully missing the point.

    Clinton is questionable as hell, and that is why she wasn't elected.

    Trump promised (or technically implied so, maybe there is a literal swamp he'll be draining somewhere) to clean things up. Now, he is putting people into government that were throwing money at him. Sure, they're a transition team and all that, but so much for a clean break. Screaming Clinton this, Clinton that doesn't make Trumps hypocrisy any better.

  22. Get used to that being the continued response by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Humans are sadly very tribal so the Trump supporters are going to be unwilling to admit he's not what they wanted him to be. One common denial tactic you'll see is a redirection where someone points out that Trump or his people do something bad, is to point out a time that the other team, Secretary Clinton in particular, did something similar. To them that justifies it in the sense "We are still in the right because the other guy would have been even worse." It is a way to deflect acknowledging criticism.

    You saw the same thing with supporters of President Obama. When he was criticized for things that went against campaign promises, such as offering government transparency, supporters inevitable dredged up President Bush. Basically since President Bush had done something they would argue was worse, that would excuse what President Obama did.

    Same shit, different side. Expect to see plenty of it as there is essentially no way at all that Trump can keep most of his promises. Many that see them selves as on that "team" won't want to acknowledge criticism as valid, so they'll deny it when they can, or use redirection like this when they can't.

  23. Re:It's the transition team, people. by mukinrestak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, no, no, We have a huge problem with him. Hillary was just EVEN FUCKING WORSE.

  24. Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be fine, we just won't have to pay for her abortions if she chooses to have them.

  25. Re:Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be f by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    we just won't have to pay for her abortions if she chooses to have them.

    Then why are my tax dollars being used for drug treatment programs for people who chose to use drugs? No one forced them to shoot heroin, snort cocaine or smoke weed. Let them pay for it themselves.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  26. Re:Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be f by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because it is not about junkies, it is about crime prevention.

    So then, war on drugs?

    Far better and cheaper if a junkie in a need of the next fix won't have to rob and maybe kill someone to get the money.

    Far better and cheaper to let them kill themselves than waste money on people who are smarter than all the experts and ignore the Mt. Everest-sized evidence about the dangers of drug use.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  27. Re:Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be f by amiga3D · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Good point. Let's let them pay for their choices too. Everyone wants freedom to choose but they want someone else to pay for the consequences.

  28. Re:pay to play by Kohath · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So? Trump sucks. But I prefer Trump to Hillary because:

    - While Trump said nasty things about groups, Hillary said nasty things about groups that include me.
    - Trump stood up to the political correctness bullies in the culture and the paid liars in the press.
    - If Hillary got elected, the press and bureaucrats would have helped her get away with continued corruption. With Trump, the press will investigate Trump Administration wrongdoing because the press are almost all leftists who hate Trump. And bureaucrats will resist and leak. We might actually know what the government is doing.
    - All the political pundits rediscovered checks and balances! Maybe they'll even start to consider whether it's wise to put government in charge of everything.

    Also, on issues:

    - Judges who might actually care what the Constitution says instead of voting a party line
    - Corporate tax reform so we can have business taxes that are like every other country in the world
    - Obamacare repeal -- a failing law that the majority never wanted, sold to people based on a deliberate lie
    - Environmental policy that might be more for people and less beholden to the green religion
    - Immigration policy that's designed to help Americans, not one designed to replace us with a population that's easier to control
    - Hopefully trade deals that aren't about the President and friends personally lining their pockets. Maybe they'll still be about that, but there's at least a little reason to hope.

    Trump will probably be a bad president. So would Hillary. So was Obama. So was Bush. But maybe we can make a little progress on a few things before the next election.

  29. Re:Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be f by Pascoea · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be fine

    Unless you live in Texas (down to one operating abortion clinic, last I heard) or anywhere else in the country that feels as though the rights of cells outweighs the rights of a living breathing human being.

    You kid yourself if you don't think this particular issue is going to come up in an administration that is 100% controlled by the Republicans. That isn't a Trump bash or a poke at the republicans. It is an observation based on facts stated by those particular people. Bible Belt Republicans were licking their chops, looking at Roe v Wade as soon as the election results started coming in.

  30. Re:Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be f by jebrick · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Your daughter's "reproductive rights" will be fine, we just won't have to pay for her abortions if she chooses to have them.

    The Hyde amendment makes it illegal to spend federal money on abortion so that has not been a problem since 1976. Allowing women the option is becoming more of a problem.