The Atlantic's account of the scrapped and then revived executive order captures surface-level confusion, yet it underplays how these reversals echo a deeper pattern of policy oscillation that predates the current term. Trump's January rescission of Biden-era AI safeguards, followed by the May preview of FDA-style reviews and the eventual toothless June order, mirrors earlier swings on issues like semiconductor export controls and TikTok bans, where initial deregulation pledges gave way to selective interventions under pressure from competing factions. This instability risks eroding the very innovation lead the administration claims to champion, as companies face unpredictable compliance costs that favor well-resourced incumbents like OpenAI over smaller players. The piece misses how David Sacks' pivot from critic to cheerleader parallels similar realignments among tech advisers during the first Trump term, when libertarian rhetoric clashed with populist demands for oversight. Synthesizing with reporting from The New York Times on internal White House debates and a Center for Strategic and International Studies analysis of AI supply-chain vulnerabilities, the contradictions point to governance fragility that could accelerate capital flight to jurisdictions with steadier frameworks, such as the EU's AI Act. Long-term, this erraticism may compound regulatory capture, leaving economic stakes—ranging from cybersecurity investments to global standards-setting—exposed to short-term political theater rather than coherent strategy.