[HN Gopher] Trevor Milton is raising funds for a new jet he clai...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Trevor Milton is raising funds for a new jet he claims will
       transform flying
        
       Author : jgalt212
       Score  : 72 points
       Date   : 2026-03-18 12:52 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.wsj.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com)
        
       | jgalt212 wrote:
       | > "There's a sucker born every minute" is a quotation often
       | associated with American showman P. T. Barnum (1810-1891),
       | although there is no evidence that he actually said it. Early
       | instances of its use are found among salesmen, gamblers and
       | confidence tricksters.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%27s_a_sucker_born_every_...
        
       | NickC25 wrote:
       | I'm sorry, but anyone Donald Trump has pardoned for fraud should
       | not be trusted at all. It's literally a matter of "game
       | recognizes game". If Donald Trump gets a cut of the fraud, that's
       | all that matters to him.
        
         | boca_honey wrote:
         | That's was the article said. I think you understood it
         | incorrectly.
        
       | maxweylandt wrote:
       | https://archive.is/https://www.wsj.com/business/trevor-milto...
        
       | kotaKat wrote:
       | "Investor documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal said the
       | goal is for the plane to be the first light jet to focus on
       | artificial-intelligence flight."
       | 
       | Oh cool, can't wait for the vibe-coded autopilot to CFIT into the
       | Rockies or dump itself into the ocean that it thought was totally
       | a runway while a completely untrained, inexperienced hot shot
       | with $10 million to blow flies this generation's V-tailed doctor
       | killer[1] to their final destination.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beechcraft_Bonanza
        
         | nhinck3 wrote:
         | Sounds like he's on the verge of developing a valuable product
         | then.
        
         | crote wrote:
         | What is it even supposed to _mean_?
         | 
         | Airplanes have had autopilot (the genuine kind, not Musk's
         | snake oil) for ages now. Commercial airlines have been using
         | autoland on well-equipped airports for decades. Garmin's fully
         | autonomous emergency autoland has already saved a few Cessna
         | owners' lives. With the ongoing adoption of CPDLC the ATC-to-
         | pilot link is also actively being automated and standardized.
         | 
         | There are no big technical hurdles left to solve! The main
         | thing preventing fully-automated flight from taking off is the
         | industry and regulators (rightfully) being _incredibly_
         | conservative, and preferring paying pilots over the horrible PR
         | fallout of an incident aboard an automated flight killing
         | hundreds of people. Artificial intelligence isn 't going to be
         | of any help here!
        
           | kotaKat wrote:
           | The technical hurdle to solve they feel is getting the
           | barrier to 'flying' dumbed down even more. They want this to
           | be something that Joe off the street can get in with minimal
           | flight training and go zip around in a high performance jet
           | once their vesting clears and they can cash out a few mill.
           | 
           | So... basically, an even more digital cockpit with more
           | touchscreens and less verbatim information presentation on
           | the screens. Why give you multiple engine gauges for N1, N2,
           | temps, etc, when we can just give you one dumb "Thrust"
           | gauge? Why make programming the autopilot a fifteen day
           | course on the ground when you can just have a LLM figure out
           | what your flight plan should be and punch it all in
           | automatically?
           | 
           | It's like how Cirrus positions themselves to be the family
           | SUV of the skies with their products and falls back on "just
           | pull the chute / push the Autoland button, bro".
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | You seem to be confused about the reasons. Fully automated
           | flight is technically feasible (with the right equipment)
           | under normal conditions. However, it will never be a
           | replacement for a pair of human pilots for Part 121
           | commercial passenger flights -- at least not without some
           | fundamental advancement in AGI. The problem is not with
           | routine flight operations but with emergency procedures. By
           | their very nature, emergencies can't be anticipated and it's
           | impossible to write code in advance to handle them. Whereas
           | humans can improvise solutions on the fly based on first
           | principles. A prime example is US Airways Flight 1549
           | "Miracle on the Hudson" where the pilots intentionally
           | disregarded parts of the emergency checklist to safely ditch
           | in the water.
           | 
           | The Garmin Autonomi autoland system is an amazing technical
           | achievement but it's intended as a last-ditch way to save the
           | passengers when a Part 91 single pilot is incapacitated. It
           | would never be approved for routine non-emergency use and
           | can't even take VHF radio instructions from controllers.
        
         | 6510 wrote:
         | You are missing the advantage of having an AI to blame
         | everything on.
        
       | JoshGG wrote:
       | Says a lot about whether you can trust the WSJ.
        
         | schmidtleonard wrote:
         | "Convicted fraudster pardons convicted fraudster therefore you
         | can trust convicted fraudster."
         | 
         | Wild!
        
         | ttubrian wrote:
         | 'We Can Trust You Now' is a quote in the story from the
         | subject. The subject himself claims:
         | 
         | "I walk into meetings now, and I'll get high-fives from the
         | most wealthy people in the world," he said. "They're like,
         | 'Welcome to the club. You can withstand the fire. We can trust
         | you now.'"
         | 
         | The WSJ interviewed him and is reporting information about his
         | past. I think the article portrays him as extremely shady and
         | untrustworthy. Not sure what you could be seeing here to demean
         | the WSJ.
        
           | superxpro12 wrote:
           | Shades of Goodfellas when Henry did his time and was welcomed
           | back with open arms.
        
           | huhkerrf wrote:
           | There's a school of thought that reporting on a bad person
           | without coming out and saying "this is a bad person" is akin
           | to endorsing that person.
           | 
           | Myself, I think people are mature enough to be able to read
           | past a headline and come away from this with a clear eyed
           | view of this fraudster.
        
             | bloomingeek wrote:
             | My rule has always been, forgive people, but never forget
             | what they did. After they've made restitution, help them
             | back to their feet, but don't let them ever get to the
             | place where they can fail the same way. And whatever you
             | do, don't let them get into a leadership position. They've
             | already proved they can't help themselves when the pressure
             | in on.
        
               | cheema33 wrote:
               | > forgive people, but never forget what they did.
               | 
               | How many times are you willing to forgive? Trevor has
               | seen prison only once. But frauds? Many.
        
             | watwut wrote:
             | I agree with you on the first part. But, if one needs to
             | read past headline to find the opposite of the headline is
             | truth, headline deserves all the criticism in the world.
             | 
             | Headline is what is presented to the world. Headline is the
             | claim being made to people who dont find the topic
             | interesting. And majority of the people dont find all the
             | fine details of pardoned CEO situation interesting. So,
             | yes, if the headline lies, the news deserve to be
             | criticized.
        
             | schmidtleonard wrote:
             | > I think people are mature enough to be able to read past
             | a headline
             | 
             | What trainwreck of misconceptions could possibly compel an
             | otherwise reasonable person to believe something so
             | ridiculous?
        
           | seanhunter wrote:
           | And pretty much rule number 1 is if someone says "you can
           | trust me" you cant' trust them. Trustworthy people generally
           | don't need to say things like that.
        
         | boca_honey wrote:
         | Why would you say that? The article was basically a hit piece
         | on the guy. "We can trust you" was a quote from an associate,
         | as you surely remember from when you read the whole article.
        
           | schmidtleonard wrote:
           | Messaging is attention-weighted. It always has been, but the
           | exploitation of this fact has been on the rise and in 2026
           | everyone should know it and internalize the consequences: if
           | you signal boost statement A and bury nuance B, you are
           | promoting statement A, flat out, completely independent of
           | what B brings to the table.
        
             | boca_honey wrote:
             | "We can trust you now" has quotations marks in the title.
             | That means a verbatim quote from a source. Sure, messaging
             | should be clear, but we must expect basic reading
             | comprehension and jornalistic literacy from people that
             | participate in a place like a Computer Science forum, while
             | reading The Wall Street Journal.
        
       | Zealotux wrote:
       | Fool me once, shame on you...
        
       | jadbox wrote:
       | The favor trading corruption is blatant without shame. More of
       | the media should be highlighting these cases.
        
       | etempleton wrote:
       | In my experience, people who are compulsive liars or those who
       | are willing to make large or repeated deceptions for personal
       | gain never change. It is as natural to them as breathing. Some of
       | them I am quite convinced believe their lies, but the net result
       | is the same.
       | 
       | I don't know Trevor Milton. I have never met him. Maybe he isn't
       | a compulsive liar but just got in over his head and was trying to
       | make it work. But I know I would never invest in something he is
       | doing.
        
         | hliyan wrote:
         | Isn't this also in line with recent proclamations by at least
         | two venture capitalists that they do not reflect / introspect /
         | dwell on consequences in any way?
        
           | kjksf wrote:
           | No because you don't understand what Andreessen means by
           | reflection / introspection.
           | 
           | He obviously thinks you should learn from your mistakes and
           | that you must be an avid and quick learner.
           | 
           | But learning skills is not what introspection / dwelling is.
           | 
           | It's spending times on thoughts like "what should I be doing
           | with my life". "I can't believe how much of a victim of the
           | system I am".
           | 
           | And he specifically contrasted it against doing stuff.
           | 
           | Writing code >>> walks in the woods.
           | 
           | Obviously reflection is necessary to recognize mistakes of
           | the past. What Andreessen was talking about that you should
           | spent majority of your time acting not reflecting. Not that
           | you should spent 0 time reflecting.
        
             | philipwhiuk wrote:
             | > introspection / dwelling
             | 
             | It's surprising to me that you consider these equivalent.
             | 
             | Introspection is a process of discovery, to uncover a
             | deeper cause why you did something.
             | 
             | Dwelling is when you can't let go.
             | 
             | Introspection is important. Dwelling is problematic.
        
             | triceratops wrote:
             | > It's spending times on thoughts like "what should I be
             | doing with my life".
             | 
             | How else do you decide what to do?
        
         | chneu wrote:
         | They believe other people are doing it and by not doing it they
         | are selling themselves short.
         | 
         | Theyre not exactly wrong
        
         | cheema33 wrote:
         | > Maybe he isn't a compulsive liar
         | 
         | I have followed Trevor for many years. And I think anybody who
         | has done the same will tell you, lying is very very central to
         | his inner core. He lies even when he has zero need to. He just
         | cannot help himself. It satisfies some inner need.
        
           | etempleton wrote:
           | I grew up with someone like this. And otherwise he was a nice
           | likable person. And his lies were benign, but he lied almost
           | any time you talked to him. Most people didn't even notice,
           | but once you did you couldn't unsee it. A couple of times we
           | both witnessed the same event and he would have a completely
           | different recollection of events that favored him and I think
           | he believed those lies himself. I think for some people it is
           | some kind of defense mechanism.
        
       | some_random wrote:
       | Just for once I want "CEO convicted of fraud making their
       | comeback" to come back with some really boring business. Like, I
       | want Elizabeth Holmes to serve out her sentence then come out
       | swinging to raise funds to vertically integrate pallet
       | construction.
        
         | jlarocco wrote:
         | If there were any justice, after jail these fraudsters would be
         | working low paying jobs like fast food and retail, and the CEO
         | jobs would go to people who haven't been convicted of fraud.
         | 
         | But of course they'll leverage their connections and get high
         | paying jobs like in this case.
        
         | notlenin wrote:
         | I feel like part of the secret to being that type of CEO is
         | that whatever your business is, you can spin it into something
         | "oh my god, much wow".
         | 
         | Like it won't be just "vertically integrating pallet
         | construction", it'll be "a heartwarming revolution in the
         | construction of pallets, now with AI and blockchain".
         | 
         | Kind of like how TFA mentions that Milton's new SyberJet will
         | "pioneer AI flight".
        
           | chneu wrote:
           | Sell me this pen
        
           | seanhunter wrote:
           | Exhibit A: Adam Neuman, who somehow convinced people that
           | office rental + shitty app that didn't work was "The first
           | physical social network" and therefore deserved a tech
           | company valuation.
           | 
           | And to be clear he's not been convicted of fraud, he walked
           | away from the cash bonfire with over a billion dollars.
        
           | some_random wrote:
           | This could make a funny bit as well now that I think of it,
           | advertise your new enterprise as an AI NFT Blockchain
           | Distributed Pallet Revolution but under the hood it's just a
           | sensible Harvard Business School rollup.
        
         | elphinstone wrote:
         | How about Holmes comes back and works at Starbucks? Why should
         | we want known criminals and con artists back in positions of
         | power and trust? Investing in someone like that is a breach of
         | fiduciary duty. Give the opportunity to some worthy unknown,
         | not known liars and criminals.
        
           | JohnFen wrote:
           | > How about Holmes comes back and works at Starbucks?
           | 
           | I wouldn't trust her to make my coffee.
        
       | close04 wrote:
       | > Trevor Milton's conviction for defrauding investors in truck
       | company Nikola was wiped away
       | 
       | Best justice money can buy.
       | 
       | > He's now raising funds for a new jet he claims will transform
       | flying
       | 
       | With his history building the "truck that can roll unpowered down
       | a hill" I shudder to think just _how_ his jet would transform
       | flying.
        
         | PatentlyDC123 wrote:
         | The old Buzz Lightyear: falling, with style
        
         | notlenin wrote:
         | they're going to pioneer "AI flight" :D
        
         | enoint wrote:
         | One insight might be that airlines and aircraft manufacturers
         | get bailed out often.
        
       | hermannj314 wrote:
       | The President has plenary authority to grant pardons and I
       | imagine a time, in the near future, when questioning any
       | authority of this administration would he deemed an act of
       | treason.
       | 
       | Therefore, I wish only the best of luck to never-committed-a-
       | crime Trevor Milton and to the infallibility of our dear leader
       | in his wise and judicious use of the power he has been given by
       | God and the Constitution.
        
         | enoint wrote:
         | Coming soon to an email signature near you
        
         | cheema33 wrote:
         | > The President has plenary authority to grant pardons
         | 
         | This really needs to be taken away. Or at least severely
         | limited. Maybe you could pardon at most 10 people. And that too
         | has to be approved by congress or the senate.
        
       | game_the0ry wrote:
       | I struggle to understand the psychology of how founders who are
       | clearly incompetent charlatans get second+ chances -- they
       | couldn't do fraud successfully but investors have a faith they
       | could do business successfully. But they still get funding (like
       | adam neumann of wework fame) and full on "narrative tongue baths"
       | by the business media community (like this wsj article on trevor
       | milton).
       | 
       | Why? I struggle to understand the incentives + motivations here.
        
         | elzbardico wrote:
         | Having a great exit is the golden dream for VCs.
         | 
         | But having founders that raise lots of money also have a value
         | in itself even if the business fails in the long run.
        
           | game_the0ry wrote:
           | But you also have to build a business with the money you
           | raise, or else you kill your reputation along the way.
        
             | elzbardico wrote:
             | As the founder, yes. For the VCs there's not a lot of
             | consequences by having hyped things like Theranos or
             | WeWork.
        
               | game_the0ry wrote:
               | I guess I would make a terrible VC, bc my money and
               | reputation would matter to me.
        
         | ahf8Aithaex7Nai wrote:
         | The reason for this is the same as why real estate is so
         | expensive and the price of gold is so high. There is far too
         | much capital accumulation among the ultra-wealthy, who don't
         | know what to do with all that money. The expertise of someone
         | like this founder lies simply in recognizing that this is the
         | case and that it can be monetized.
        
           | exogeny wrote:
           | There was a great Money Stuff blurb about that w/r/t Adam
           | Neumann. I can't find it to quote it directly, but the gist
           | was that if you disabuse yourself of the notion that Neumann
           | was playing a game of entrepreneurship and good-faith empire
           | building, and instead conclude that the game he was playing
           | was shameless capital extraction, every step and action he
           | took suddenly makes sense.
           | 
           | The truly amazing thing, especially the second time around,
           | are the supposedly sophisticated investors who fall for it.
           | "Oh, he's learned his lesson -- he won't do it again!".
        
             | game_the0ry wrote:
             | > ...if you disabuse yourself of the notion that Neumann
             | was playing a game of entrepreneurship and good-faith
             | empire building, and instead conclude that the game he was
             | playing was shameless capital extraction, every step and
             | action he took suddenly makes sense.
             | 
             | Sort of. I get the capital extraction part, but you also
             | need to be a good steward of capital and make a profitable
             | business out of it. He failed badly at the later part, and
             | his reputation is an obstacle for the former.
             | 
             | Not saying you are wrong, but if I am a "capital allocator"
             | at a16z, he would be no-go.
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | Some of those sophisticated investors are also engaged in
             | shameless capital extraction. Their investment thesis is
             | based on the "Greater Fool Theory": they're gambling that
             | they can dump the inflated assets on another bag holder
             | before it blows up.
        
               | game_the0ry wrote:
               | But they might end being the bag holder themselves. And
               | is the reputational risk worth it? I would say - no.
        
         | alex_c wrote:
         | The past failure is in the abstract, and in the past. And
         | anyway, they were unfairly maligned. There is an inside version
         | of the story that they will be happy to tell you, which was
         | clearly not their fault.
         | 
         | But that is neither here nor there. What is important is the
         | now, and in the now you are in the presence of someone who is
         | Good At Making Money. And you too, by joining forces, will be
         | Making Lots Of Money with this charismatic person, who can
         | clearly achieve great things and will be clearly avoiding any
         | past missteps that may have caused their downfall right before
         | reaching greatness (but weren't their fault anyway).
         | 
         | Think of the future, not the past!
        
           | jongjong wrote:
           | This guy is a crook. Every adjective you could use to
           | describe this guy goes against my core values.
        
             | busyant wrote:
             | I suspect the person you replied to was being subtly
             | sarcastic. edit: but honestly, I'm not sure.
        
               | jongjong wrote:
               | It's hard for me to tell because I've seen this multiple
               | times in my career (in tech). People wasting investors'
               | money getting funding over and over while those actually
               | building stuff get suppressed.
               | 
               | I swear there are some people who control a lot of money
               | who are just having fun ruining people's lives for
               | laughs.
               | 
               | There are people who spend years working for some
               | company, betting their career on it but it turns out the
               | whole thing was some kind of inside joke.
               | 
               | My view is that some companies are basically somebody's
               | toy and the employees are part of the entertainment like
               | a personal reality TV show for some rich person so they
               | can play-act as a hotshot entrepreneur.
               | 
               | Probably it serves as some kind of inflation control
               | mechanism. If you have a lot of money and want to spend
               | it without driving inflation, you have to find things
               | with extreme diminishing returns and you have to invest
               | in people who value such things.
        
               | busyant wrote:
               | Thanks for the reply.
               | 
               | The only thing I can add (regarding the motivations of
               | people willing to invest with a fraudster) is that many
               | people invest with the belief that they'll make money
               | because they are just _part_ of the scam and they assume
               | there 's a greater fool somewhere down the line.
               | 
               | But that's probably obvious.
        
               | alex_c wrote:
               | I thought I was laying on the sarcasm pretty thick. But I
               | guess it's harder and harder to tell these days!
        
               | quantified wrote:
               | There is no tone of voice in writing. This is part of the
               | problem with written social media. Some writers will say
               | "only an idiot would believe what I wrote", showing
               | themselves to be adversarial in their communications. I
               | don't think that's you in this case.
        
         | jongjong wrote:
         | I just can't comprehend the mental process or discussion that
         | happened which led to this guy getting a pardon.
         | 
         | It's just hard to imagine that anybody would give a f about
         | this fraudster. Only explanation is he must know some dirt on
         | someone.
         | 
         | It's clear now. Modern society runs on blackmail. There's a
         | blackmail hierarchy all the way to the top.
         | 
         | I bet there are many people out there just making a living from
         | just knowing dirt about people.
        
           | cheema33 wrote:
           | > I just can't comprehend the mental process or discussion
           | that happened which led to this guy getting a pardon.
           | 
           | Trump when pardoning Trevor Milton said that he didn't know
           | the guy, but heard that he said nice things about him.
           | 
           | And Milton made a $1m _donation_.
        
           | bryan0 wrote:
           | It's not that complicated. From the article:
           | 
           | > Milton and his wife had also donated at least $3.2 million
           | to Trump's 2024 election and to political groups and people
           | in Trump's orbit, including Health Secretary Robert F.
           | Kennedy Jr.
        
           | vjvjvjvjghv wrote:
           | Trump seems to have a weak spot for fraudsters. Milken,
           | Conrad Black, Keith, Blagojevich and many more. Not sure why
           | though.
        
         | jongjong wrote:
         | These fraudsters who get second chances have got blackmail.
         | Trust me, all the people we see in the media are sharks. They
         | only help each other if they feel a threat or have something to
         | gain.
        
         | freediddy wrote:
         | Look how many people couldn't care about Epstein and the fact
         | he was a convicted sex offender. Bill Gates didn't care and he
         | was literally the richest person in the world at one point.
         | 
         | The rich VCs and billionaires and aspirational billionaires
         | only care about doing what they want to do and don't care what
         | the peons like us think or care about.
        
         | madeofpalk wrote:
         | I recently invested a small amount of money in an early stage
         | company where I had to declare I was _either_ a  'high net
         | worth individual' _or_ a  'sophisticated investor'. The
         | mutually exclusive clause seemed important to me.
        
           | philipwhiuk wrote:
           | Maybe you become both by not investing in such a company.
        
           | enoint wrote:
           | In the US, we have this class called "accredited investor"
        
         | watwut wrote:
         | Because those investors have exactly same moral and ethical
         | framework. The fraud is just another legitimate way to make
         | money to them. It is the same thing with Epstein or meetoo ...
         | they were actually fine with all that and whoever complains is
         | just pesky idiot.
         | 
         | This article is not praising trevor milton tho.
        
         | TrackerFF wrote:
         | They are charismatic. They know how to work people.
         | 
         | If you've ever worked with narcissists and sociopaths, you'll
         | soon enough discover that they will do anything to get what
         | they want. And they are professionals at playing people.
         | 
         | They know what to say, how to present themselves, how to make
         | their story, and what strings to pull on the people they try to
         | convince.
         | 
         | Some investors are also willing to suspend their disbelief -
         | thinking that if they are the first to ditch to bag, there's
         | money to be made...as long as they're not the ones holding the
         | bag.
        
         | gaoshan wrote:
         | Charisma and connections are pretty much all it takes. Really
         | only connections are needed but since these people are coming
         | back from being exposed they need charisma to assuage the
         | concerns of their connections.
        
         | khat wrote:
         | To understand why you must understand the tax code. You can
         | write off any investment losses. You can also recover losses if
         | its from fraud. Though usually not fully. But you give 1
         | million for investment, boom its a fraud, and you get $800,000
         | back as opposed to keeping a million and paying $400,000 on it
         | in taxes. It's a win-win situation. There is no penalty in
         | betting on fraudsters. Whether this guy's schemes are
         | deliberately for that is debatable. But on the flip side,
         | putting downsides to investing on possible fraudsters
         | considerably hinders any new genuine start up ideas from
         | gaining investors.
        
         | rsp1984 wrote:
         | It's distribution. Guy's got a brand name now. People and
         | investors recognize his name. It's a lot easier to find an
         | absolute quantity N of investor money for a fraudulent but
         | well-known name than it is for an unknown upstart.
         | 
         | The fraud might have a low close rate but the top of the funnel
         | is _huge_. The unknown upstart can 't even get meetings.
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | He might credibly have access to federal bailout, too. That's
           | worth something.
        
         | socalgal2 wrote:
         | This come up in a subthread last week
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47305450
         | 
         | My guess is that they're good talkers. They make it sounds like
         | they learned their lesson or were framed but regardless if you
         | hire them they'll make you rich!
        
         | vjvjvjvjghv wrote:
         | A lot of the investors are also bullshitters so they like
         | bullshitting founders. I see a similar thing in companies.
         | People wonder why people who don't produce much but are
         | politically savvy are moving up. The answer that most
         | leadership is the same so they recognize each other.
        
       | josefritzishere wrote:
       | I cannot fathom the thinking of any party investing in the new
       | company of a convicted fraudster.
        
         | notlenin wrote:
         | > In August [2022], it was announced that Andreessen Horowitz
         | had invested in Neumann's new residential real-estate company,
         | Flow.
         | 
         | source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Neumann
        
           | seanhunter wrote:
           | Not only did they invest, but if I'm not mistaken, at the
           | time that was the biggest single check that Andreessen
           | Horowitz had ever written. It's completely baffling to me.
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | And they invested more in 2025.
           | 
           | https://a16z.com/announcement/flow/
        
         | Nihilartikel wrote:
         | Exactly! Any knowledgeable observer would have expected him to
         | run for elected office instead.
        
       | exogeny wrote:
       | Pathetic. Everyone in this story is pathetic. Trump, Milton, all
       | of them.
        
       | Invictus0 wrote:
       | For anyone that hasn't seen it, or just wants to reminisce,
       | here's Hindenburg's report on Nikola, Milton's previous scheme.
       | It is a truly hilarious read.
       | 
       | https://hindenburgresearch.com/nikola/
        
       | arbuge wrote:
       | Whenever I see any news about this guy, I always think of this:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38686150
        
         | enoint wrote:
         | Lovely. Utterly untrustworthy except for the important case of
         | identifying others like him.
        
       | nerevarthelame wrote:
       | On top of the fraud convictions, Trevor Milton was credibly
       | accused of sexual assault by his own cousin and a girl he
       | employed. Both victims were minors at the time.
       | 
       | https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/29/two-women-file-sexual-abuse-...
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | > It was wiped away with a phone call. In March 2025, Trump
         | called Milton to tell him he had signed an unconditional
         | pardon. Milton had styled himself as a political victim of the
         | Biden administration, and Trump agreed.
         | 
         | Birds of a feather flock together.
        
           | chneu wrote:
           | Its not rape when the president doesnt believe rape is
           | possible for a rich man to commit.
        
             | vkou wrote:
             | I've no doubt that he believes it is possible for his
             | political enemies to commit it.
        
           | cheema33 wrote:
           | > Milton had styled himself as a political victim of the
           | Biden administration, and Trump agreed.
           | 
           | That and a $1 million donation. He bought his pardon fair and
           | square.
        
         | Weryj wrote:
         | I guess we know how he managed to get the funding.
        
         | dyauspitr wrote:
         | She was 15, that's older than the age of consent in a lot of US
         | states.
         | 
         | EDIT: Nvm, it's 16.
        
           | dmitrygr wrote:
           | > She was 15, that's older than the age of consent in a lot
           | of US states.
           | 
           | What are you smoking? The lowest age of consent in any US
           | state is 16
        
           | doubletwoyou wrote:
           | False? No US state has an age of consent below 16 except in
           | cases between minors (Romeo & Juliet laws), which this most
           | certainly isn't?
        
             | dyauspitr wrote:
             | Yes you're right. I was looking at the Romeo Juliet ages.
        
               | fdghrtbrt wrote:
               | You're off by 500 years, could happen to anyone.
        
           | mh2266 wrote:
           | is the intended point here that it is okay to sexually abuse
           | 16 year olds, so everything is fine--but 15 year olds are
           | right out? or... what?
        
       | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
       | Text-only, HTTPS optional:
       | 
       | https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA1YRlL9...
        
       | JohnTHaller wrote:
       | Translation: Convicted fraud pardoned by convicted fraud is
       | likely gonna fraud again
        
       | mh2266 wrote:
       | is he going to roll it down a hill to make it take off?
        
       | gok wrote:
       | An HTML5 super jet?
        
       | tw04 wrote:
       | There's a reason he should be sitting in prison still. It's not
       | because he's an honest human or a good businessman.
        
       | cat-turner wrote:
       | People like to invest in people like them. Simple as that.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-03-18 23:00 UTC)