1. #78861
    Ok, guess who is fascinated by the Jan 6 hearings and watching them on CNN to the point of badgering his friends or people who he thinks are friends? The man at the center of the whole thing, that's who.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...80ae43a7c90512

    'Fuming' Trump is badgering friends about how the Jan. 6 hearings are 'playing out' for him: CNN

    On CNN's "New Day," correspondent Kristin Holmes reported that Donald Trump has been "riveted" by the televised hearings being conducted by the House select committee looking into the Jan 6th insurrection and that he has been badgering friends and aides about how he is coming across in them.

    Speaking with host John Berman, Holmes also stated that Trump's inner circle is worried he is obsessing over the hearings when they would prefer that he be concentrating on the upcoming midterm elections.

    "Trump is always watching, we are told, riveted, according to new CNN reporting," host Berman began. "Trump was particularly angry after hearing his former staffers and White House counsel."

    Asking Holmes, "What have you learned?" she replied, "We've heard he's always following these hearings and that's much to the chagrin of those around him who would hope that he would focus on the November midterms."

    "But behind closed doors he's always talking about these hearings, asking those around him how they think they're playing out," she continued. "In his speeches and rallies he prattles on about the committee, attacking them; his social media page is a never-ending rant, essentially just attacking leaders of the committee and even talking about more obscure members of the committee and interviews they do on cable news."

    "So clearly here focusing very heavily on this. one of his biggest gripes, being still that none of these witnesses are being cross-examined and he feels he doesn't have anyone defending him, particularly after yesterday's hearing," she added. "He's not the only one focused on this. We also heard from a source close to Roger Stone who told us that Stone is watching these hearings very carefully because he believes, quote, 'the committee is trying to put him in peril.'"

    "And, remember," she elaborated, "Stone and Trump at one point were thick as thieves. He was one of his closest allies, they spoke almost every single day. but we are told by this source that it's just not the same since January 6th, that the two are still in touch but it's just not regular communication."
    I still am, while not shocked he thinks it, am bewildered that he thinks this is a criminal trial that you can cross examine people or you can present evidence and not just a hearing where they are presenting what they have found out for the public to see.

  2. #78862
    Void Lord Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    41,424
    Quote Originally Posted by gondrin View Post
    "Trump's inner circle is worried he is obsessing over the hearings when they would prefer that he be concentrating on the upcoming midterm elections."
    ...they do know this is Trump, right? Trump rather watching TV about himself than doing "his job" can't possibly be a surprise.

  3. #78863
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    ...they do know this is Trump, right? Trump rather watching TV about himself than doing "his job" can't possibly be a surprise.
    The rumor is he paid Story Daniels to paddle him with a magazine with a picture of himself on the cover.

  4. #78864
    Void Lord Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    41,424
    Quote Originally Posted by gondrin View Post
    The rumor is he paid Story Daniels to paddle him with a magazine with a picture of himself on the cover.
    She shoulda demanded the cash up front, then not done the job, because that's what it feels like when you get fucked by Trump.

    The Twitter lack-of-deal continues to make headlines, but it seems Twitter is better prepared than I expected.

    Twitter on Tuesday made good on its threat to sue Elon Musk for trying to back out of his $44 billion takeover, filing a 62-page complaint, augmented with another 180 pages or so of exhibits.

    The legal arguments made by Twitter are essentially the same ones it has already been making publicly: that Musk, not Twitter, has been violating the deal's terms and that the argument over "spam bot" counts is a pretext for Musk to try to get out of a deal that offers few escape hatches.
    In that filing, Twitter says they tried multiple times to meet with Musk and explain their methodology of the bot research they did do and did turn over, Musk just waved it off and then said they hadn't turned it over. Which they did. That's in the filing, too.

    I'm not an expert, but it's looking more and more like Musk is going to end up paying for doing nothing but troll Twitter. At least the billion in the contract he signed, but now I'm wondering if it'll be more. I keep going on about Delaware's overly protective corporate laws (seriously there's a reason chemical companies like DuPont and Gore, and scumbags like Trump and Cosby, technically "live" there) but Twitter not only has a contract but evidence they lived up to their end, while so far, Musk has gone with the questionable legal strategy of "nuh uh".

    I thought Musk was smarter than this. Or, of course, I could be missing something. The contract has an end date of Oct 24 and Twitter wants the trial over before that. We'll find out.

    - - - Updated - - -

    This is a NYTimes article, so you know what that means...quoting the whole thing.

    Trump planned a march to the Capitol, directing a mob to Congress, evidence indicates.

    Trump attempted to make the Jan. 6, 2021, march on the Capitol appear spontaneous even as he and his team intentionally assembled and galvanized a violence-prone mob to disrupt certification of his electoral defeat, the House committee investigating the attack showed on Tuesday.

    “POTUS is going to have us march there/the Capitol,” Kylie Jane Kremer, an organizer of the “Save America” rally on Jan. 6, wrote in a Jan. 4 text shown by the panel on Tuesday as it detailed Mr. Trump’s efforts to gather his backers in Washington for a final, last-ditch effort to overturn his loss. Ms. Kremer added that Mr. Trump was “going to just call for it ‘unexpectedly.’”

    Mr. Trump weighed announcing the move, according to documents obtained from the National Archives, which provided the investigators with a draft tweet that said: “I will be making a Big Speech at 10AM on January 6th at the Ellipse (South of the White House). Please arrive early, massive crowds expected. (a) March to the Capitol after. Stop the Steal!!”

    The tweet was never sent. But it was the latest evidence presented by the committee of how Mr. Trump undertook a public and private effort to channel angry supporters, including right-wing extremists, toward the Capitol, where Vice President Mike Pence and lawmakers were gathered to confirm Joseph R. Biden Jr. as the president-elect.

    For more than a year, Mr. Trump and his defenders have described the violence at the Capitol as a freewheeling peaceful protest gone awry. But the hearing on Tuesday laid out how the former president took a guiding role not only in bringing the mob fueled by his election lies to Washington that day, but also in the plan to direct it up to Capitol Hill, disregarding the advice of his closest aides.

    “Donald Trump summoned a mob to Washington, D.C., and ultimately spurred that mob to wage a violent attack on our democracy,” said Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi and the chairman of the committee.

    In its seventh hearing to lay out its findings, the committee situated Mr. Trump at the center of the quasi-legal efforts to derail the political process and also at the heart of the unprecedented chaos at the Capitol. Over nearly three hours, it introduced evidence from rally organizers, rioters and aides inside the White House who said the former president had inspired and directed what transpired that day.

    While it did not draw any direct link between Mr. Trump and the domestic extremists who orchestrated and stood at the forefront of the Capitol attack, the committee set forth in meticulous detail how Mr. Trump’s words and actions united a disparate set of far-right groups and militias and spurred them to plot a violent effort to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power.

    “The president got everybody riled up and told everybody to head on down,” said one of the witnesses at the hearing, Stephen Ayres, an Ohio man who pleaded guilty last month to disorderly conduct charges connected to the Capitol attack. “We basically were just following what he said.”

    Even Brad Parscale, Mr. Trump’s onetime campaign manager, blamed his former boss for the deadly violence that ensued, according to evidence shown by the committee on Tuesday.

    (b) A sitting president asking for civil war… I have lost faith,” he wrote in text messages on Jan. 6 to Katrina Pierson, Mr. Trump’s former spokeswoman, adding that Mr. Trump’s “rhetoric killed someone.”

    Even as it revealed new evidence about Mr. Trump’s bid to cling to power, the committee suggested that Mr. Trump was still trying to protect himself. Representative Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming and the panel’s vice chairwoman, repeated her concerns that Mr. Trump has been quietly interfering with the committee’s work by discouraging witnesses from cooperating with the inquiry. After the panel’s last presentation, she said, (c) Mr. Trump tried to call one of its witnesses and the witness, through a lawyer, alerted the committee.

    “We will take any effort to influence witness testimony very seriously,” Ms. Cheney said, adding that the panel had notified the Justice Department about the matter.

    In a statement on Twitter, Taylor Budowich, a spokesman for Mr. Trump, accused Ms. Cheney of spreading “innuendos and lies,” but did not address whether the former president had tried to contact a witness.

    In the hearing room on Tuesday, Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland and a member of the select committee, sought to draw a road map of Mr. Trump’s multilayered effort to overturn his defeat, unfolding in three concentric rings.

    On the inside ring, Mr. Raskin said, was Mr. Trump’s pressure campaign against Mr. Pence to persuade him to unilaterally throw out electoral votes for Mr. Biden as he presided over a joint session of Congress to make the official count.

    In the middle ring, Mr. Raskin said, far-right extremist groups like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers — unleashed by a Dec. 19 tweet from Mr. Trump that promised a “wild” rally in Washington on Jan. 6 — took the lead in invading and occupying the Capitol. And in the outer ring, he added, a large and angry crowd, encouraged by Mr. Trump’s lies about election fraud, became a “political force” that sought to keep the former president in power.

    The story the committee told on Tuesday took place over three chaotic weeks at the end of 2020, starting on Dec. 14, when the Electoral College met and declared Mr. Biden the winner of the election. Within a day, leading Republicans, like Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, acknowledged Mr. Biden’s victory, and several aides to Mr. Trump, including Pat A. Cipollone, the top lawyer in the White House, advised the president to concede.

    Instead, the committee documented how Mr. Trump ignored top administration officials and turned his hopes and attention to a group of outside advisers who were recommending a dangerous and unprecedented plan to use the country’s national security assets to seize control of voting machines and essentially rerun the election.

    Through videotaped testimony, the panel brought to life a heated and often profane meeting in the Oval Office on Dec. 18, 2020, in which the advisers — among them, the lawyer Sidney Powell and Michael T. Flynn, Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser — (d) fought with Mr. Cipollone and other White House advisers about the plan to seize the machines and to appoint a special counsel to investigate election fraud.

    Early the next morning, once the meeting ended, Mr. Trump posted the message on Twitter urging his supporters to come to Washington on Jan. 6, writing, “Be there, will be wild!”

    The response to the message was immediate and electric.

    It was quickly amplified by prominent Trump supporters with influential followings, like Alex Jones, the impresario of the conspiracy-laden media outlet Infowars, and the right-wing podcaster Tim Pool.

    In the darkest corners of the internet, Trump supporters on websites such as TheDonald.win soon began discussing bringing handcuffs, body armor, shields, bats and pepper spray to Washington. Others talked about committing violence.

    “Why don’t we just kill them?” one person wrote on the chat board 4chan. “Every last democrat, down to the last man, woman, and child?”

    Mr. Trump’s tweet also had significant effects in the real world.

    Within days of it being posted, a pro-Trump organizing group called Women for America First changed its plans to hold a rally in Washington after Mr. Biden’s inauguration, moving the event up to Jan. 6. Around the same time, the committee showed, the prominent Stop the Steal organizer Ali Alexander registered the website WildProtest.com, which provided information about numerous protests in Washington on Jan. 6 with event times, places, speakers and details on transportation.

    (e) Mr. Alexander sent a text to an associate on Jan. 5, 2021, saying that he believed Mr. Trump was going to “order” him and his associates to march to the Capitol, the committee showed.

    On Dec. 21, 2020 — two days after Mr. Trump’s tweet about Jan. 6 was posted — a group of far-right members of Congress met with the president at the White House to discuss the conservative lawyer John Eastman’s theories about pressuring Mr. Pence to disrupt the normal workings of the Electoral College and keep Mr. Trump in power. The members of Congress at the meeting included Representatives Andy Biggs of Arizona, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Louie Gohmert of Texas and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, the committee said.

    The committee heard on Tuesday from another witness, Jason Van Tatenhove, a former spokesman for the Oath Keepers, who described the group as a threat to democracy. The leader of the Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes, is one of several members of the group who has been charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with the Capitol attack.

    And for the first time, the committee heard testimony from a criminal defendant who was at the Capitol on Jan. 6 and is now facing charges. The defendant, Mr. Ayres, told the panel that he had gone to Washington at Mr. Trump’s direction and marched to the Capitol when the president told him to, and would never have gone in the first place had he known that Mr. Trump’s election fraud claims were false. He said that his participation in the riot had ruined his life, and that he felt duped and betrayed by Mr. Trump.

    “I felt like I had, you know, like horse blinders on — I was locked in the whole time,” Mr. Ayres said. “The biggest thing for me is, take the blinders off, make sure you step back and see what’s going on before it’s too late.”
    Bolded annotations mine.

    There's a lot in that article about Trump's rabid fanbase. Now, of course, human beings have free will, but if we find out that there was direct, specific communication between Team Trump and these KKK motherfuckers who planned a violent, armed treason attempt, who brought AR-15s and grenades, with pre-planned knowledge of the "spontaneous" march, then that's the death knell. Until then, it's the same as Trump's help from Russia. Yes, he asked Russia for help. Yes, Russia provided help after Trump asked for it. Yes, Trump wanted that to happen. It just falls short of "we can charge Trump for this".

    For now.

    This article stuck out to me because it involved a deleted Twit. Sorry, deleted Tweet. If they can find that, they can find a bunch of other stuff, too.

  5. #78865
    Quote Originally Posted by gondrin View Post
    The rumor is he paid Story Daniels to paddle him with a magazine with a picture of himself on the cover.
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/stormy-...utes-interview

    Stormy Daniels: Right, right. And so I was like, "Does this-- does this normally work for you?" And he looked very taken-- taken back, like, he didn't really understand what I was saying. Like, I was, "does, just, you know, talking about yourself normally work?" And I was like, "Someone should take that magazine and spank you with it." (LAUGH) And I'll never forget the look on his face. He was like--"

    Its probably the most human thing I've ever heard Trump do.

  6. #78866
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    The Twitter lack-of-deal continues to make headlines, but it seems Twitter is better prepared than I expected.

    In that filing, Twitter says they tried multiple times to meet with Musk and explain their methodology of the bot research they did do and did turn over, Musk just waved it off and then said they hadn't turned it over. Which they did. That's in the filing, too.
    We probably should make a new thread for this. Fascinating as it is to watch things crash and burn for Musk, it seems wholly unrelated to Trump.

  7. #78867
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    We probably should make a new thread for this. Fascinating as it is to watch things crash and burn for Musk, it seems wholly unrelated to Trump.
    It is related to Trump given Musk's commitment to unbanning Trump if/when the deal went through.

    And the current TMZ-esque drama going on between the two.

  8. #78868
    Void Lord Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    41,424
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    We probably should make a new thread for this.
    Disagree.

    1) Musk said he'd let Trump back on Twitter. Musk made this topic Trump-relavent.

    2) Trump has made it about himself for months.

    There are no two rich narcissists better poised for a public feud than former President Donald Trump and Tesla billionaire Elon Musk, who have been trading barbs following reports that Musk wants to back out of his purchase agreement with Twitter.

    The latest blow came on Tuesday, when Trump jabbed at Musk’s “driverless cars that crash” and “rocketships to nowhere” in recounting how Musk came to the White House to ask for help with subsidies for his business ventures. “I could have said, ‘drop to your knees and beg,’ and he would have done it…,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

    But according to multiple sources who spoke to Trump about Musk earlier this year, the catty feud has been gurgling beneath the surface since at least April, when the twice-impeached former president could occasionally be heard privately mocking Musk — including for being “sloppy” and on drugs. (Trump seemed to be referring to a viral 2018 clip of Musk appearing to smoke pot on Joe Rogan’s show.)

    Then in mid-May, Trump posted a statement to his Truth Social account, blaring: “There is no way Elon Musk is going to buy Twitter at such a ridiculous price, especially since realizing it is a company largely based on BOTS of Spam Accounts. Fake anyone?”

    Trump's Own Campaign Manager Blamed Him for Jan 6. Death, New Texts Show
    Relations between the Trump and Musk fiefdoms deteriorated further after the former president first caught wind last month that Musk had said that he was “leaning” towards backing Ron DeSantis — whom Trump views as his top rival for control of the GOP’s future, and whom he semi-regularly ridicules as a boring and ungrateful snake — for president in 2024. According to one source who talked to Trump about this weeks ago, the former president simply said Musk “didn’t know what he was talking about.”

    Another source who spoke to Trump about Musk’s pseudo-endorsement of the Florida governor recalled Trump saying of the pro-DeSantis Musk: “What an idiot!”

    Trump unleashed on Musk during a rally in Anchorage, Alaska, on Saturday night, a day after it was reported that Musk wants to back out of his deal to acquire Twitter. Trump called Musk a “bullshit artist” for saying that his vote for Mayra Flores in a South Texas special congressional election last month marked the first time he voted for a Republican.

    “Elon, Elon, is not going to buy Twitter,” Trump said on Saturday. “He’s got himself a mess. He said the other day, ‘Oh, I’ve never voted for a Republican.’ I said, ‘I didn’t know that. He told me he voted for me.’”

    Musk then responded to Breitbart’s tweet of Trump’s statement by saying that he doesn’t “hate the man,” but that “it’s time for Trump to hang up his hat & sail into the sunset,” and asking democrats to “call off the attack.”
    Musk wants this to be about Trump, and Trump wants this to be about Trump.

    It belongs in the Shitshow. Sorry. I don't make the rules.

  9. #78869
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    It belongs in the Shitshow. Sorry. I don't make the rules.
    Agree to disagree, then, I guess. I don't make the rules either.

    Looking at Twitter's filing, though... Holy shit, how on Earth did Musk's lawyers let him sign this kind of insane agreement? Apparently he told Twitter he intended to buy them, under threat of "reconsider[ing] [his] position as a shareholder," Twitter recognized that while they had a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders, they were also fully aware of how unreliable Elon Musk is. So they intentionally crafted a ridiculously one-sided deal in their favor and filled it with clauses specifically to make it very difficult for Musk to get out of it. This included explicitly waiving Musk's right to pre-signing due diligence. And he still signed it.

    One person commented that this legal brief appears to be written in a way designed to provoke him into publicly whining even further about it, providing still more fodder for Twitter's case. One of my favorite bits is this one:
    Last edited by DarkTZeratul; 2022-07-13 at 06:37 PM.

  10. #78870
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    Holy shit, how on Earth did Musk's lawyers let him sign this kind of insane agreement?
    You assume Galaxy Brain Elon listened to them.

    His lawyers are probably too focused on hardcore litigation to actually provide other legal advice.

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    So they intentionally crafted a ridiculously one-sided deal in their favor and filled it with clauses specifically to make it very difficult for Musk to get out of it. This included explicitly waiving Musk's right to pre-signing due diligence. And he still signed it.
    Yes, because he never expected them to actually do it and force the sale if he pulled out. Because this was, at the end of the day, just him trolling the FEC with the $54.20 per-share offer.

  11. #78871
    Void Lord Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    41,424
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    Holy shit, how on Earth did Musk's lawyers let him sign this kind of insane agreement?
    That's the issue we'll see decided in a few months. Devil's advocate more literally than usual, but if I had to guess, Musk wrote in what he thought was an ironclad escape clause. Most people, if asked out of nowhere what % of Twitter accounts/posts were bots, probably would have guessed higher than 5%. Musk could have been counting on Twitter being unwilling to reveal the info, and therefore, get him a way out. In his mind, once he "proved Twitter was lying" the contract was broken, and the massive number of clauses that held him in place were suddenly all immaterial.

    He was wrong, as we're seeing now. Or at least wrong enough to end up in court.

    So why let him sign that? Well, for one, there could be some "nobody tells Musk what to do" but I don't think he's that stupid to hire lawyers and ignore them. It could have been that the walk away penalty was "only" one billion, and Musk was convinced he could fuck with Twitter's stock price, lowering their value by more than the $1 billion he lost, and still buy it later at a lower, insulting offer. I'm not sure that works very well either, considering Twitter could just say "no, you ruined your credibility, fuck off troll". And of course, there's the possibility that...okay I swear I had a third one a minute ago.

    But even those feel clumsy to me. So I'm with you, I have only wild guesses what Musk and his lawyers were thinking. Based on the articles I've read, he's damaged his reputation (you said he was unreliable before, think about after), in all likelihood he'll lose in court, and now Trump is waging war on him. Of course, Trump is on his social media platform which has maybe seven people on it, so it's not a very effective war.

  12. #78872
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    81,963
    I love how the "Chuckmate" meme literally embodies the "don't play chess with a pigeon; it'll shit all over the board and think it won because it can't understand the rules" meme.

    Where Chuck's the pigeon, if that's not clear.

    Which I have to state outright, apparently, for chucklefuck morons like Musk who don't understand this shit.

    You could've at least had Chuck Norris pulling off a successful Fool's Mate, but no. Just express that you don't know chess and can't get that you're the joke, here.


  13. #78873
    Holy shit, Chuck Norris memes are still relevant?



    I thought that shit largely died out a decade ago before he went full Christian nationalist.

  14. #78874
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    if I had to guess, Musk wrote in what he thought was an ironclad escape clause. Most people, if asked out of nowhere what % of Twitter accounts/posts were bots, probably would have guessed higher than 5%. Musk could have been counting on Twitter being unwilling to reveal the info, and therefore, get him a way out. In his mind, once he "proved Twitter was lying" the contract was broken, and the massive number of clauses that held him in place were suddenly all immaterial.
    Per Twitter's filing, Elon Musk waived all due diligence in the purchase agreement. It stated that there was no express or implied guarantee as to the accuracy or completeness of the provided information, that the merger was being performed based solely on independent reviews that had already been conducted, and that Twitter's ONLY obligation thereafter was to keep Elon Musk up to date about the status of their efforts to move the process along. Twitter even gave him enormous amounts of data that they were under no obligation to provide, which he failed to read and then straight-up lied about having not received. And they have the receipts.

    I don't think he's that stupid to hire lawyers and ignore them.
    I wouldn't be so sure. Per Twitter's filing, when Elon Musk tweeted out that the deal was on hold, he did it entirely on his own initiative without even alerting Twitter. Basically everything Musk did since signing this deal is something any credible lawyer would have strenuously told him not to do.

  15. #78875
    https://apnews.com/article/2022-midt...7344d371e3f1e4

    The former elections manager for a Colorado clerk indicted on charges of tampering with voting equipment has been arrested on allegations that she was part of the scheme, an official said Wednesday.

    Sandra Brown, who worked for Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, turned herself in Monday in response to a warrant issued for her arrest on suspicion of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation and attempting to influence a public servant, said Lt. Henry Stoffel of the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office. The arrest was first reported by The Daily Sentinel newspaper.

    Peters and her chief deputy, Belinda Knisley, are being prosecuted for allegedly allowing a copy of a hard drive to be made during an update of election equipment in May 2021. State election officials first became aware of a security breach last summer when a photo and video of confidential voting system passwords were posted on social media and a conservative website.
    Man, what's with all these Republicans and getting arrested for voter fraud, or crimes related to voting? I'm beginning to think the GOP has a point in pearl clutching about voter fraud, but it's not the point they think it is, it's that they're the actual threat to secure elections

  16. #78876
    Void Lord Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    41,424
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    straight-up lied about having not received. And they have the receipts.
    This is what really needs to come back and bite him. Again, that stupid theory is that Musk broke the contract so that he could get "free discovery" and force Twitter to hand over documents he claims they had about too many bots.

    First of all, I still think that's now how it works in general.

    Second of all, even if it was, I'm even more sure that's not how it works in a Delaware civil court.

    Third of all, even if it was, as you pointed out Musk said on the contract he signed he didn't care, so it extra more sure shouldn't work this time in particular.

    And I will continue to defend that Musk can't break the contract, then demand Twitter hand over "free discovery" to show him a reason to break the contract which he didn't have when he broke the contract.

    "Police, that man is a drug dealer!"
    "What's your proof?"
    "Uh..." *BLAM* "Okay he's dead, now let me search his house to find the drugs, proving it was okay for me to shoot him."

    I will give Musk some credit, he did an excellent job tanking Twitter's stock price, then breaking the deal when it was half what he offered. (Checks stock price) Well, that aged poorly. If Musk was in a position to re-negotiate, that would have been an effective move.

    But I can't find a hole in your logic, not that I'm looking hard. It sure sounds like his excuse, "Twitter didn't tell me about the bots", just doesn't seem legally relavent. We'll find out in court, but barring a loophole, I don't see how this won't directly cost Musk at least the billion dollars in the contract's escape clause.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I love this headline.

    Tears, Screaming and Insults: Inside an ‘Unhinged’ Meeting to Keep Trump in Power

    Okay, I already posted a wall of NYText so I'll tone this one down.

    “It got to the point where the screaming was completely, completely out there,” Eric Herschmann, a White House lawyer, told the committee in videotaped testimony. “I mean, you got people walking in — it was late at night, it had been a long day. And what they were proposing, I thought was nuts.”

    Mr. Lyons and Mr. Herschmann joined the group. “It was not a casual meeting,” Mr. Lyons told the committee in videotaped testimony. “At times, there were people shouting at each other, hurling insults at each other. It wasn’t just sort of people sitting around on a couch like chitchatting.”

    Mr. Herschmann said he was flabbergasted by what he was hearing.

    “And I was asking, like, are you claiming the Democrats were working with Hugo Chavez, Venezuelans and whomever else? And at one point, General Flynn took out a diagram that supposedly showed IP addresses all over the world and who was communicating with whom via the machines. And some comment about, like, Nest thermostats being hooked up to the internet.”

    When the White House officials pointed out to Ms. Powell that she had lost dozens of lawsuits challenging the results of the 2020 election, she replied, “Well, the judges are corrupt.”
    These are people Trump hired. Oh, wait, there's one more line.

    “I’m like, everyone?” Mr. Herschmann testified. “Every single case that you’ve done in the country that you guys lost? Every one of them is corrupt? Even the ones we appointed?
    Yeah. Truly Trump is a very stable genius who hires only the best people.

  17. #78877
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    I don't see how this won't directly cost Musk at least the billion dollars in the contract's escape clause.
    Potentially a whole lot more, because Twitter is suing to force him to go through with the sale at the agreed-upon price. And the contract he signed would seem to require him to do so.

  18. #78878
    https://www.spokesman.com/stories/20...-climate-posi/

    Republicans, who actually hate capitalism, apparently want to prevent Wall Street investment firms from choosing how they invest their and their clients money. They seemingly want to force them to maintain investments in areas like coal mines and coal power plants, despite the financial risks that come with continuing to back fossil fuels and the public demand to continue transitioning away.

    Just a reminder: Republicans are inherently authoritarian and do not actually support capitalism. They never have.

  19. #78879
    Void Lord Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    41,424
    The Jan 6th panel has been looking into the Alternative Electors, also known as "traitors", and have been talking to the DOJ about them too.

    As I said on a related topic earlier, this is where Team Trump should be praying there's nothing leading back from the fake electors to them. Even deleted texts are showing up.

  20. #78880
    https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...ender-1382976/

    Republican congressional candidate Carl Paladino has hired a convicted sex offender as the new “assistant treasurer” of his campaign, the New York Post reported on Wednesday.

    Joel Sartori, a former controller of Paladino’s development firm, was convicted on charges related to possessing and promoting child pornography in 2017, and sentenced to 10 years probation. Paladino has kept Sartori on his payroll as assistant controller for Ellicott Development. “Joel has been with me for ages,” Paladino told the Post, ”He served his punishment for what he did. He’s a wonderful employee.”

    Paladino, who is running for New York’s 23rd Congressional District and is backed by House Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) was caught last year praising Adolf Hitler during a radio appearance.
    Man, Republicans sure do love themselves some Hitler and some pedophiles!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •