Intel just cannot get a break. This does seem like the case of national security concerns - not really Trump being Trump.
I doubt the board would approve him as CEO if they knew he’d been subpoenaed in the Cadence matter.
bpt3 · 48m ago
More like they can't stop making unforced errors.
Why they would hire someone with known ties to a major adversary right after taking billions from the US government is beyond me.
bpt3 · 3h ago
This is what happens when your company becomes a state related entity.
They should be able to tell Trump to pound sand, but can't given the state of the company. That doesn't mean that the CEO will have to resign, but they can't just ignore it entirely.
PKop · 3h ago
No serious state would ignore potential conflicts of interest with their biggest adversary related to advanced technology and military affairs:
No, a CEO should not be able to tell the government to pound sand in this type of situation.
The company he ran for over a decade just plead guilty to illegal chip design sales to China. You may not care, but that the government does is just common sense:
Then the company should fire him for these actions (assuming they weren't aware), and probably at least some portion of the board for botching the hire.
The questions Cotton asks are valid, and the legislative branch of the government, SEC, and federal law enforcement should be interested in the answers to the extent that they don't know already (given that the DOJ already negotiated the settlement).
The President of the US should have no say over who is the CEO of any private company.
taylodl · 3h ago
Sounds like Trump's Justice Department settled for a plea deal rather than continue prosecution. That's their prerogative, but justice has been served, and Trump can STFU.
tiahura · 2h ago
How in the world did the board get in this position? Every potential skeleton in his closet should have been cleared with US Government.
techpineapple · 3h ago
> No serious state would ignore potential conflicts of interest with their biggest adversary related to advanced technology and military affairs:
I agree with you, but then we're not a serious state since we've been doing this near constantly recently. Apply it equally or don't apply it at all.
bediger4000 · 3h ago
Honest question: do you think this is a case of "the state cares because of legitimate and obvious national security concerns", or a case of Trump being Trump?
I doubt the board would approve him as CEO if they knew he’d been subpoenaed in the Cadence matter.
Why they would hire someone with known ties to a major adversary right after taking billions from the US government is beyond me.
They should be able to tell Trump to pound sand, but can't given the state of the company. That doesn't mean that the CEO will have to resign, but they can't just ignore it entirely.
https://www.cotton.senate.gov/news/press-releases/cotton-to-...
No, a CEO should not be able to tell the government to pound sand in this type of situation.
The company he ran for over a decade just plead guilty to illegal chip design sales to China. You may not care, but that the government does is just common sense:
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/cadence-plead-guilty-pay...
The questions Cotton asks are valid, and the legislative branch of the government, SEC, and federal law enforcement should be interested in the answers to the extent that they don't know already (given that the DOJ already negotiated the settlement).
The President of the US should have no say over who is the CEO of any private company.
I agree with you, but then we're not a serious state since we've been doing this near constantly recently. Apply it equally or don't apply it at all.