upvote
If the anti-corruption revolution is going to focus on some dude's sex life rather than the extensive and obvious whoring of political office, I want none of it.
reply
"some dude's sex life"

She could have been his chess partner, and if he'd acted the same way on her behalf it would have been fireable. The sex is immaterial and anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't read up on this or is selling something.

The sex is just the icing on top of the poor judgement.

reply
> some dude's sex life

When some dude's sex life quashes an investigation into Megaspeed, yeah, it becomes germane. (There are serious questions around Lutnick, for example [1].)

[1] https://www.politico.com/news/2026/11/11/answer-in-front-of-...

reply
This looks like a major indictment of Lutnick, not Huang.

I don't get it. Huang doesn't get to decide who chips can't be sold to. Presumably Huang wants to sell chips to everyone whether or not he's fucking them. Nvidia will always say yes to another billion dollars. It's up to the state department to say no.

If Lutnick was sleeping with a Chinese spy and approved the sale, sure throw him in jail. If Huang secretly bribed Lutnick to approve the sale, sure throw them both in jail. But that's not what we're seeing?

What am I missing? Seriously, ELI5.

reply
> that's not what we're seeing?

You’re absolutely correct that we have no smoking gun in the public record. What we have, instead, is smoke. Lots of it.

> What am I missing?

"Investigators at the Commerce Department were deep into a monthslong investigation of a Singaporean company that they suspected of smuggling Nvidia’s artificial intelligence chips into China when their work came to a sudden halt late last year.

The investigation centered on Megaspeed, a data center company led by an executive who U.S. officials now believe to be a Chinese spy who had a relationship with Nvidia’s chief executive, Jensen Huang.

But the case was abruptly transferred to the Justice Department last year. The shift came after Commerce Department investigators working on the case received an email from Nvidia’s general counsel seeking information about the inquiry into Megaspeed.

It is not necessarily unusual for Commerce Department agents working on a case to speak with a company’s representatives about issues involving their firm. But what was unusual was the content of the message. Tim Teter, Nvidia’s general counsel, said that Jeff Kessler, a top official at the department, had given Nvidia permission to reach out about the case.

The agents were alarmed that Nvidia had invoked the name of Mr. Kessler, their superior, who was nominated to his role by President Trump. Some viewed Mr. Kessler’s interaction with Nvidia as violating government procedure and potentially tainting the case, according to current and former government officials and others familiar with the incident” [1].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/11/09/business/economy/nvidia-m...

reply
Thanks. I have my popcorn in hand but... so far it looks mostly terrible for the commerce department. Huang? I don't know.

Maybe the board knows more, and that's why they are "preparing to oust" him. Or maybe it's about the sex scandal.

I don't have money in NVDA but if I did I would certainly want him to stay at his desk until we have the actual gun.

reply
> so far it looks mostly terrible for the commerce department. Huang? I don't know

He caused Nvidia to violate export-control law. To help a Chinese intelligence asset’s company. He then corruptly quashed the investigation using Nvidia’s resources. Those are crimes.

> I don't have money in NVDA but if I did I would certainly want him to stay at his desk

I do have money in Nvidia. I want Huang gone. If he stays, there is a real chance the hammer about to fall on him destroys Nvidia as well.

That’s before the shareholder and supplier lawsuits extract billions from the company. Before states’ AGs extract more. Before the Congress lobs a grenade at a Silicon Valley that honestly doesn’t seem to get why this behaviour is contemptible.

reply
> He then corruptly quashed the investigation using Nvidia’s resources.

This seems awfully handwavy. Civilians don't get to quash investigations.

The legality will depend on what we find under that handwaving, but I doubt very much we will find personal checks written to Lutnik.

I have to ask: If he hadn't slept with the woman, would you feel the same way about the whole affair? If not, why does the sex matter?

reply
> Civilians don't get to quash investigations

Correct. It's called corruption.

> I doubt very much we will find personal checks written to Lutnik

You don't need this to trigger undue influence issues.

> If he hadn't slept with the woman, would you feel the same way about the whole affair?

Yes. That seems to have blown open the scheme Jensen was running [1], possibly with the knowledge of the White House.

I'm flying from Silicon Valley to New York today. The bubble that has people publicly calling this a nothing burger is the exact reason Americans are furious and fed up with our tech sector's leaders.

[1] https://www.wsj.com/business/earnings/nvidias-disappearing-s...

reply
When the "some dude" is Jensen Huang and involves sleeping with Chinese spies while advocating for relaxed export controls, then obviously it's gonna pay him some attention.
reply
The guy advocates for relaxed export controls because it makes him stupid amounts of money, at the cost of our national security.

That's why Huang doesn't get to decide whether chips should be sold to China. He can advocate all he wants, speech is cheap.

reply
> Americans voted for rooting out corruption.

Wasn’t the swap drained in 2016 too?

reply
Those of us foolish enough to vote Trump in 2016 weren't convinced he was going to leave the swamp drained, rather that it was so bad he couldn't do worse. A lesser of two evils kind of choice.

Within weeks I saw the naked racism and left the whole party behind. Having learned more about Trump and Republicans since has been ... humiliating after decades of voting 'R'.

reply
Thanks for the honesty and humility. These types of perspectives are wonderful to read.

Wherever you land on your views in the future, being willing to question everything is a superpower.

Onward!

reply
Trying to engage in good faith here. What did you see in the first few weeks after your 2016 vote that were materially different from how he ran his 2016 campaign (and I mean the hits - "they're sending rapists, ...", "grab her by the pussy", ...)?

I can imagine people souring over lack of follow through on economic promises, or the naked corruption with your $coins, but from a racism/xenophobia/morals perspective, I'd feel like most of the signal was there in the 2016 campaign was it not?

reply
For me personally it was trying to ban travel from whole countries based on race. Morally I didn't expect him to personally be a paragon of virtue. My hope was that the vile parts of his retoric were mostly campaign bluster and "locker room talk", and that he'd defer to experts once in office.

The mask-off racism was just beyond the pale, and lead me to look deeper into his past and how he was starting to govern. It became obvious that he'd mostly cheated or lucked his way into fortune and fame.

reply
Gotcha.

> Morally I didn't expect him to personally be a paragon of virtue.

Lot of people respond with this, but honestly, that is setting up a straw man to knock down isn't it? No one claims that we should expect any politician to be a paragon of virtue but in terms of how they conduct themselves and the language they choose, there is still a reasonable bar that Trump blew past and set an awful precedent.

reply
deleted
reply
> The days of the CIA running a competent conspiracy, if they ever existed, are long behind us.

Now that's something I'd like everyone to believe, if I was the CIA.

reply
The US intelligence community is pretty shot, but we too quickly forget how much of the internet is influenced by them.
reply