This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Election 2020

How Big Aerospace Supported Efforts To Undermine Democracy

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
January 8, 2021
How Big Aerospace Supported Efforts To Undermine Democracy

Donors to Electoral College Objectors, OpenSecrets
“OpenSecrets compiled a list of the top donors to GOP lawmakers who objected to the Electoral College results on Jan. 6, 2021. The dataset includes the top PAC donors, top individual donors and top industry donors to the campaigns and leadership PACs of lawmakers who objected to at least one state’s election results.”
Keith’s note: This is what big aerospace thinks about American democracy – they were massive donors to efforts to undermine the election:
10. Northrop Grumman $687,500
15. Lockheed Martin $651,000
18. Raytheon $570,000
19. Boeing $567,000
It is one thing for big aerospace companies to play both sides. It is quite another to even consider supporting someone who’d have undemocratic leanings – regardless of their party affiliation.

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

9 responses to “How Big Aerospace Supported Efforts To Undermine Democracy”

  1. Richard H. Shores says:
    0
    0

    Sadly, not a surprise. Anything to keep the Military Industrial Complex churning.

  2. ed2291 says:
    0
    0

    I love space, but there are some things that are more important than space exploration and this is one of them. I note with approval that Space X is not in this list of shame.

  3. John Thomas says:
    0
    0

    I believe that Democratic lawmakers have objected to certification of electoral votes several times in recent history, but were not described as trying to “undermine the election”.

    In 2001, House Dems challenged votes for Bush, but no Senator supported it. In 2017, House Dems challenged votes for Trump, but no Senator supported it. In 2005, House Rep Stephanie Tubbs and Sen Barbara Boxer challenged the votes based on voter irregularities but neither was able to gather enough support.

    Funny how this bit of history is ignored by the news media.

    But now its bad when Republicans do it? Seems hypocritical. Isn’t this ability to challenge is in the US constitution? Trying to shame people and companies for exercising their constitutional rights is a good thing?

    • chuckc192000 says:
      0
      0

      The difference is that they didn’t continue their challenges AFTER their leader had incited an armed insurrection against the Capitol.

      • kcowing says:
        0
        0

        Were you not paying attention? Congress most certainly continued their challenges as soon as the insurrectionists were cleared from the House and Senate chambers.

        • chuckc192000 says:
          0
          0

          I meant the Democrats would not have continued their challenges if their leader had incited an armed insurrection.

      • John Thomas says:
        0
        0

        Saying that Trump incited an armed insurrection against the capital is absurd and just a liberal talking point.

        First Trump did not call to attack the capital but to participate in protected free speech.

        The first wave of protesters arrived at the Capitol at about 12:40PM. Trumps speech ended at 1:11PM and was at least a 45 min walk between the 2 locations which would put the first people from Trump’s speech arriving at the Capitol no earlier than 1:56PM, a full hour and 16 min after the attackers arrived.

        The first pipe bomb was discovered at the RNC headquarters at 12:45PM, again prior to the end of his speech.

        The day before Trump’s speech and the attack, the FBI was warning that extremists were preparing to come to Washington to attach Congress and engage in “war”.

        It’s more likely that Trumps speech was used as a basis to conduct an attack and now Big Tech, Democrats and the new media are using it to suppress free speech.