[hbcondo714]

> Michael declared in March 2025 that he had a position in xAI valued between $500,000 and $1m...He sold those holdings on 9 January for between $5m and $25m, according to disclosures filed with the office of government ethics (OGE).

The transaction disclosures for this fellow aren't directly available on OGE[1]. You must manually "Request this document".

[1] https://www.oge.gov/web/OGE.nsf/Officials%20Individual%20Dis...

[malshe]

I never thought I would ever see this level of corruption in the US.

[JumpCrisscross]

Can you explain what the corruption angle is? Would it have been better if he'd held the position?

[malshe]

He should have sold it the day he took that position. Selling it after a massive bump in the stock value for which he was responsible to a great extent is immensely problematic.

From the article:

Richard Painter, a former ethics lawyer at the White House under President George W Bush, said that in general it was a criminal violation for government officials to participate in any government actions that would benefit their own financial interests.

I have put together the relevant parts from the article that show the corruption.

- Michael declared in March 2025 that he had a position in xAI valued between $500,000 and $1m.

- During the period that Michael owned the xAI stock the Pentagon announced two separate agreements with the firm. In July 2025 the Pentagon chose Grok as one of four commercial providers that would help the department utilize artificial intelligence.

- On 18 December, seven months into running the Pentagon’s research and engineering efforts, Michael received a divestiture certificate from the OGE that said he would sell his xAI stock to comply with conflict of interest laws.

- Four days later, on 22 December, the defense department, which now refers to itself as the Department of War, announced a new agreement with xAI.

- Michael did not ultimately sell his position in xAI until 9 January, disclosures show.

[hvtff]

It’s nuts. If this happened in Europe the incumbent party would be destroyed.

What the hell happened to America?

[jfengel]

Turns out Americans like corruption. Corruption is actually pretty compelling, when it makes you rich at the cost of somebody you consider "lesser".

The US has always believed that might makes right, and that wealth is proof of your virtue. "Corruption" is just good business sense, when it benefits your side.

They would, of course, throw a massive hissy fit if it had been their opponents. But that's less about the corruption in itself, as that it was one of those "lesser" people taking advantage of his betters.

[infinite8s]

The opposite - the incumbent party is destroying America.