Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

LOL, yes, it’s very clear you are not a business lawyer.

I know right? I’m not trying to cover for a fraudulent company!

There is no evidence of fraud. That is pure speculation on Musk’s part.

It’s not idle speculation. Twitter has a record of lying https://mashable.com/article/twitter-miscounted-users

Musk has a bigger record of lying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

There’s the very small matter of there being absolutely zero evidence of fraud. Details details.

"People are saying there's fraud."

-Donald Musk

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

LOL, yes, it’s very clear you are not a business lawyer.

I know right? I’m not trying to cover for a fraudulent company!

There is no evidence of fraud. That is pure speculation on Musk’s part.

It’s not idle speculation. Twitter has a record of lying https://mashable.com/article/twitter-miscounted-users

They made a mistake that they discovered and admitted over three years ago.

If Musk was so concerned about whether the bot estimates in Twitter’s SEC filings were accurate, then he should not have waived due diligence so he would have had the right to evaluate the issue before closing the deal. What Musk is doing is the equivalent of signing a purchase agreement for a house as-is with no inspection, and then trying to get out of the deal because you claim if you brought in an inspector they might find issues under the roof.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

There’s the very small matter of there being absolutely zero evidence of fraud. Details details.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

LOL, yes, it’s very clear you are not a business lawyer.

I know right? I’m not trying to cover for a fraudulent company!

There is no evidence of fraud. That is pure speculation on Musk’s part.

It’s not idle speculation. Twitter has a record of lying https://mashable.com/article/twitter-miscounted-users

Then it would have behooved Musk to do Due Diligence. Do you know why he didn't? Because Twitter had no interest of being acquired, he had to make them an offer they could not refuse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

LOL, yes, it’s very clear you are not a business lawyer.

I know right? I’m not trying to cover for a fraudulent company!

There is no evidence of fraud. That is pure speculation on Musk’s part.

It’s not idle speculation. Twitter has a record of lying https://mashable.com/article/twitter-miscounted-users

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

He can sue them for damages after he closes the deal and gathers evidence/proves fraud. As of this moment, he has zero evidence of fraud and IS NOT entitled to any additional information from Twitter. Again, he voluntarily waived Due Diligence, even thought to be frank the level of detail he is requesting is proprietary and would not be provided during Due Diligence anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

LOL, yes, it’s very clear you are not a business lawyer.

I know right? I’m not trying to cover for a fraudulent company!

There is no evidence of fraud. That is pure speculation on Musk’s part.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

LOL, yes, it’s very clear you are not a business lawyer.

I know right? I’m not trying to cover for a fraudulent company!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

LOL, yes, it’s very clear you are not a business lawyer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.

I haven’t seen the contracts but if there is fraud then it’s void. And I believe lying to the SEC is fraud, and I’m sure there are warranties about those public filings being accurate. Not a business lawyer but this seems fairly straightforward.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

Twitter has given him everything he’s asked for even though he waived due diligence to get them to accept the deal.

No, they haven’t. He wanted IP addressed to verify. I don’t think he should get them. But the SEC probably can.

DP. The merger agreement does not entitle him to any information he wants, only that information he needs for a business purpose related to closing the merger, and then only if it does not meet any of a slew of exceptions. Musk has not demonstrated publicly why that information was necessary for him to be able to close the deal (e.g., information requests from underwriting for his loans).

Well I think the obvious answer is that he doesn’t want to buy a company that lied to the SEC.

He waived his ability to investigate that when he decided to waive due diligence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

Twitter has given him everything he’s asked for even though he waived due diligence to get them to accept the deal.

No, they haven’t. He wanted IP addressed to verify. I don’t think he should get them. But the SEC probably can.

DP. The merger agreement does not entitle him to any information he wants, only that information he needs for a business purpose related to closing the merger, and then only if it does not meet any of a slew of exceptions. Musk has not demonstrated publicly why that information was necessary for him to be able to close the deal (e.g., information requests from underwriting for his loans).

Well I think the obvious answer is that he doesn’t want to buy a company that lied to the SEC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

Twitter has given him everything he’s asked for even though he waived due diligence to get them to accept the deal.

No, they haven’t. He wanted IP addressed to verify. I don’t think he should get them. But the SEC probably can.

Well, he also wants the source code. But no company is going to give that out to a prospective buyer. Putting aside the fact that he waived due diligence!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Musk waived due diligence when he made the offer for Twitter. I hope they make him pay the $1 bn breakup fee and that the SEC actually takes action for once on this blatant market manipulation.

If there was fraud, he’s not on the hook. I’m really curious here because I do believe Twitter has been lying about the number of accounts that are bots.

Musk believes that, too. That doesn’t mean it’s true.

Twitter has not yet been able to give a concrete number of fake accounts, Musk has an easy out.

That’s not how that works, sweetie.

When the contract stipulates no more than x% are fake accounts, and Twitter can not (or will not) confirm that fact, it is

Sweetie.

Feel free to cite where the contract stipulates that. We’ll wait.

Where are you PP? We’re all waiting for that citation. Surely you did not just make that up.

I’m not the PP you’re responding too hun, but it’s not in the contract. It’s in their official SEC filings. Pretty sure lying in those is a big deal. And I wouldn’t want to bet on Twitter. It’s always been a steaming trash fire. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/elon-musk-says-twitter-deal-cannot-move-forward-until-he-has-clarity-on-bot-numbers.html

Again, Musk clearly *believes* that Twitter is lying in their SEC fillings about the bot percentages. That DOES NOT MEAN that Twitter is actually lying about the bot percentages in their SEC filings about the bot percentages. See also Trump who clearly *believes* that he won the 2020 election when he did not.

I imagine he has more evidence … researchers have been looking at this for quite a while. Guess we will see! SEC can always investigate. *shrug* I’m not an Musk fan, but if he tanks twitter I won’t be sad.

This is not a moral quandary, this is a business transaction. Musk WAIVED Due Diligence, which is the discovery process that would allow him to verify such information. He signed a binding agreement to buy Twitter AS IS.