• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge rejects Elon Musk's bid to end 2018 settlement with SEC

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
84,798
Reaction score
71,517
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
A federal judge on Wednesday denied Elon Musk's request to scrap a 2018 settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission that required some of his tweets to be preapproved.

Why it matters: The decision means Musk could remain barred from freely tweeting about Tesla despite reaching an agreement to buy Twitter for $44 billion.

--

Well, isn't this interesting? I wasn't aware Elon Musk had an order against him forcing him to refrain from Tweeting about Tesla!

I can't help but wonder if this may have played a roll in his buying Twitter?
 
Musk made a number of comments that I felt went a little to far for the owner of Tesla. The SEC agreed with me. ;)
 
It would explain an ulterior motive to buy Twitter. As the SM platform's owner, HE could Tweet anything he wanted and no one could bar him from saying it even if such Tweets involved submitting favorable commentary about his other companies in an effort to improve their stock or public image.
 
It would explain an ulterior motive to buy Twitter. As the SM platform's owner, HE could Tweet anything he wanted and no one could bar him from saying it even if such Tweets involved submitting favorable commentary about his other companies in an effort to improve their stock or public image.

To the bolded, I suspect not. The SEC order still applies, as was pointed-out in the article.
 
To the bolded, I suspect not. The SEC order still applies, as was pointed-out in the article.
Yes, but we/he didn't know this until today's ruling. So, at the time of purchase Elon probably believed that was something he could get away with. Now he knows otherwise.
 
It would explain an ulterior motive to buy Twitter. As the SM platform's owner, HE could Tweet anything he wanted and no one could bar him from saying it even if such Tweets involved submitting favorable commentary about his other companies in an effort to improve their stock or public image.

You can count on him doing that.

I wonder how long it will be before Trump nation figures out that Elon Musk isn’t going to give “free speech” to anyone. I’m sure they’ll figure it out long before they admit it.
 
You can count on him doing that.

I wonder how long it will be before Trump nation figures out that Elon Musk isn’t going to give “free speech” to anyone. I’m sure they’ll figure it out long before they admit it.
SSHHH……. Let them fete their new hero.
 
Yes, but we/he didn't know this until today's ruling. So, at the time of purchase Elon probably believed that was something he could get away with. Now he knows otherwise.

I suspect Musk's lawyers made him aware.
 


--

Well, isn't this interesting? I wasn't aware Elon Musk had an order against him forcing him to refrain from Tweeting about Tesla!

I can't help but wonder if this may have played a roll in his buying Twitter?
he violated SEC rules and manipulated the stock price...that is why he was restricted. I think it is more about the kid he hates....the one that is posting his location on Twitter.
 
he violated SEC rules and manipulated the stock price...that is why he was restricted. I think it is more about the kid he hates....the one that is posting his location on Twitter.
I wouldn't be surprised if someone gave him a website do to that. Somethings called 'Whereiselton.org'
 
It would explain an ulterior motive to buy Twitter. As the SM platform's owner, HE could Tweet anything he wanted and no one could bar him from saying it even if such Tweets involved submitting favorable commentary about his other companies in an effort to improve their stock or public image.
Anyone that believes his new purchase is about free speech has another thing coming. It's about Musk and only Musk. Why is the hard right now calling for him to fire all his liberal employees? That'll set a great example for free speech.
 
It would explain an ulterior motive to buy Twitter. As the SM platform's owner, HE could Tweet anything he wanted and no one could bar him from saying it even if such Tweets involved submitting favorable commentary about his other companies in an effort to improve their stock or public image.
This is what I suspect. He sees it as the ultimate marketing tool.
 
You can count on him doing that.

I wonder how long it will be before Trump nation figures out that Elon Musk isn’t going to give “free speech” to anyone. I’m sure they’ll figure it out long before they admit it.
Have you ever considered the possibility that Twitter just might start marketing "Sponsored Free Speech" whereby the "sponsor" would be entitled to more favourable treatment by the algorithms (potentially to the point where a -'twit'- 'tweet' would go to EVERY user of Twitter REGARDLESS of the user's spam settings or where another person's -'twit'- 'tweet' that the "sponsor" didn't like would receive less favourable treatment by the algorithms (potentially to the point where it would only go to users who had specifically requested that messages containing the identical content be delivered to them)?
 
Perhaps this is why it is making news that Musk may be backing out?

Breakingviews: Elon Musk probably won’t buy Twitter​

NEW YORK, April 27 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Four years ago, Elon Musk vowed to set up a peanut brittle company to take on Warren Buffett’s iconic U.S. confectioner See’s Candies. Then he changed his mind. It wouldn't be surprising if Musk's $44 billion deal to buy social network Twitter went the same way.

Sure, the Tesla boss was clearly serious about acquiring Twitter as of recently. The financing from Morgan Stanley is shored up. The agreement includes a fee of $1 billion that he – or Twitter – would have to pay if they renege on the contract. And Twitter’s lawyers even wedged in a so-called “specific performance” clause, which could theoretically force Musk to buy the company if he threatens to back out, though in practice this could probably be settled by adding to the break fee.

There are good reasons for him to get cold feet. The biggest is Tesla. The electric-vehicle maker’s stock has fallen around a fifth since Musk first revealed his stake in Twitter, partly because Musk may sell shares to fund his new adventure. If Tesla’s stock bounces back – likely if the Twitter deal falls away – the $40 billion of recouped wealth would more than make up for the break fee.

China is a major sticking point too. Tesla produces half of its vehicles there, as well as a quarter of its revenue. But Twitter is no friend to the People's Republic, most recently for defying Beijing in its handling of content related to Hong Kong protests. China could easily hold Tesla to ransom if a Musk-owned Twitter didn’t play ball. That’s uncomfortable for a self-professed “free speech absolutist.”In reality, Musk’s absolutism probably won't survive a Twitter deal anyway. European Union Commissioner Thierry Breton told the Financial Times this week that the company must police illegal or harmful content or risk being banned. In the United States, where regulators are less aggressive, other technology firms could effectively create the same threat. Apple, for example, gets to decide which apps appear in its influential store.

 
Anyone that believes his new purchase is about free speech has another thing coming. It's about Musk and only Musk. Why is the hard right now calling for him to fire all his liberal employees? That'll set a great example for free speech.
musk has never been just about musk.. why the hell would he start an electric car company and a space company as his main businesses if that were the case?
 
Perhaps this is why it is making news that Musk may be backing out?

Breakingviews: Elon Musk probably won’t buy Twitter​

NEW YORK, April 27 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Four years ago, Elon Musk vowed to set up a peanut brittle company to take on Warren Buffett’s iconic U.S. confectioner See’s Candies. Then he changed his mind. It wouldn't be surprising if Musk's $44 billion deal to buy social network Twitter went the same way.

Sure, the Tesla boss was clearly serious about acquiring Twitter as of recently. The financing from Morgan Stanley is shored up. The agreement includes a fee of $1 billion that he – or Twitter – would have to pay if they renege on the contract. And Twitter’s lawyers even wedged in a so-called “specific performance” clause, which could theoretically force Musk to buy the company if he threatens to back out, though in practice this could probably be settled by adding to the break fee.

There are good reasons for him to get cold feet. The biggest is Tesla. The electric-vehicle maker’s stock has fallen around a fifth since Musk first revealed his stake in Twitter, partly because Musk may sell shares to fund his new adventure. If Tesla’s stock bounces back – likely if the Twitter deal falls away – the $40 billion of recouped wealth would more than make up for the break fee.

China is a major sticking point too. Tesla produces half of its vehicles there, as well as a quarter of its revenue. But Twitter is no friend to the People's Republic, most recently for defying Beijing in its handling of content related to Hong Kong protests. China could easily hold Tesla to ransom if a Musk-owned Twitter didn’t play ball. That’s uncomfortable for a self-professed “free speech absolutist.”In reality, Musk’s absolutism probably won't survive a Twitter deal anyway. European Union Commissioner Thierry Breton told the Financial Times this week that the company must police illegal or harmful content or risk being banned. In the United States, where regulators are less aggressive, other technology firms could effectively create the same threat. Apple, for example, gets to decide which apps appear in its influential store.

You do know that "Breakingviews" is OPINION and not news - don't you?
 


--

Well, isn't this interesting? I wasn't aware Elon Musk had an order against him forcing him to refrain from Tweeting about Tesla!

I can't help but wonder if this may have played a roll in his buying Twitter?
I remember when that happened. Dude tweeted that he was going to take Tesla private. Had a HUGE impact on the stock market. He's not very stable. I didn't know it was still ongoing.
 
This is what I suspect. He sees it as the ultimate marketing tool.

I suspect that with the SEC ruling, he might start losing interest in buying it. Things like that happened before
 
I remember when that happened. Dude tweeted that he was going to take Tesla private. Had a HUGE impact on the stock market. He's not very stable. I didn't know it was still ongoing.

Fair point.

These guys can make millions influencing their stock prices by merely Tweeting.

Nice work, if you can find it! (y)
 
musk has never been just about musk.. why the hell would he start an electric car company and a space company as his main businesses if that were the case?
Because he gets millions in government subsidies for both businesses. Who does that benefit? Musk.
 
Because he gets millions in government subsidies for both businesses. Who does that benefit? Musk.
still, not the easiest businesses to make money. and yes, he gets subsidies... you know why? his businesses help humanity as a whole.

the man is a visionary, and a liberal that I actually admire, and progressive types hate him because he isn;'t afraid to speak up and say your antics are wrong.

if that doesn;t spark a WHOLE lot of introspection about which side of the twitter and free speech issue you should come down on, it should.

elonProgressives.JPG
 
Last edited:
still, not the easiest businesses to make money. and yes, he gets subsidies... you know why? his businesses help humanity as a whole.

the man is a visionary, and a liberal that I actually admire, and progressive types hate him because he isn;'t afraid to speak up and say your antics are wrong.

if that doesn;t spark a WHOLE lot of introspection about which side of the twitter and free speech issue you should come down on, it should.

View attachment 67388056
Funny thing, that same graphic has been shown, but with the 'right left' reversed.. That version is older too, and much more accurate.
 


--

Well, isn't this interesting? I wasn't aware Elon Musk had an order against him forcing him to refrain from Tweeting about Tesla!

I can't help but wonder if this may have played a roll in his buying Twitter?
1651247272694.png
 


--

Well, isn't this interesting? I wasn't aware Elon Musk had an order against him forcing him to refrain from Tweeting about Tesla!

I can't help but wonder if this may have played a roll in his buying Twitter?
50 billion for advertising? That still doesn't connect the dots to be some ulterior motive.

To me, it was a business decision. One in which he plans on making money doing.
 
Back
Top Bottom