I’m sure you intend this to highlight the alternative reading of the article, but just being frank and no offense, I actually don’t see the difference. Most of the things you highlighted are things I explained why they are implicitly actually legitimizing Musk and his actions, some seem random, and none of them contradicts my theory.

But yes, there’s are competing ways to interpret this. That’s why I call it a “fluff piece” rather than a outright authoritarian sycophancy.