Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Elon Musk’


Posted by M. C. on September 2, 2022

Darren Beattie joins Steve Bannon, talking about Elon Musk’s countersuit against Twitter.

Darren says Twitter’s former cybersecurity chief, Peiter Zatko aka “Mudge” is the whistleblower advising Musk and that he’s corroborating what I and others have been saying for a while, that these social media sites exist almost solely to conduct psychological operations and that they constitute the primary theater of operations for 5th generation warfare via Interactive Internet Activities.

As Darren puts it, the platform “Is an absolute cesspool for influence operations from intelligence agencies…[Twitter’s] chief value is it serves as a platform for various intelligence agencies and other nefarious operatives to influence public opinion, often through entirely deceptive and artificial means, by creating various bot networks and so forth.”  

Darren says Musk just wants out of the deal, after seeing what’s really going on and after getting a taste of what it’s like to be an enemy of the Biden Regime – and by extension, of the Global Elite. He says Musk’s bid to Make Twitter Great Again is a “failed mission” and that Musk would rather go back to doing “tech support for the regime.”

Darren continues, “Big Tech, for matters of importance functions essentially as an extension of the security state and that’s why it’s so hard to tame. They’re extensions of our security apparatus; the censorship functions, the mass-propaganda functions have effectively been outsourced to these big, ostensibly private companies but not ultimately private companies…”

Contributed by Alexandra Bruce


Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

How Much Did the US Government Pressure Twitter to Ban Alex Berenson?

Posted by M. C. on July 13, 2022

Elon Musk, who had been in a deal to purchase Twitter until a few days ago, responded to Berenson on Twitter: “Can you say more about this: ‘… pressures that the government may have placed on Twitter …’”

Berenson replied, “I wish I could, but the settlement with Twitter prevents me from doing so. However, in the near future I hope and expect to have more to report.”

July 11 – Nearly a year ago, former New York Times Journalist Alex Berenson was permanently banned from Twitter for writing the following lines about the Covid shot: “It doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission. Don’t think of it as a vaccine. Think of it – at best – as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS. And we want to mandate it? Insanity.”

From the beginning of the Covid hysteria, we followed and cited Berenson many times on the Ron Paul Liberty Report. Berenson took government and mainstream media rhetoric about the pandemic the way journalists used to take it: with a heavy dose of skepticism. And not long after he was banned for saying so, even the CDC Director admitted what he wrote is true.

But at the time, he was a danger to the government narrative on Covid, and the “private” social media company Twitter silenced him. They did not only silence one reporter who was a thorn in their side, however. They preemptively silenced anyone else who might might question the narrative. The message was clear to all the would-be Alex Berensons out there: do you want to follow him to the digital gulag?

So not only was Berenson’s free speech under attack – free speech itself was under attack.

Many, especially libertarians, might respond that Twitter as a private company has the right to do business with anyone they wish. That is true, but only to the extent that Twitter is actually acting as a private entity. The real question is to what degree has Twitter and the other social media companies been directly doing the bidding of government?

After nearly a year-long legal battle with Twitter over the ban, Berenson settled with Twitter and was reinstated earlier this month. Writing about his reinstatement, he hinted at something very ominous: “The settlement does not end my investigation into the pressures that the government may have placed on Twitter to suspend my account. I will have more to say on that issue in the near future.”

Elon Musk, who had been in a deal to purchase Twitter until a few days ago, responded to Berenson on Twitter: “Can you say more about this: ‘… pressures that the government may have placed on Twitter …’”

Berenson replied, “I wish I could, but the settlement with Twitter prevents me from doing so. However, in the near future I hope and expect to have more to report.”

Questions about the vaccine were silenced just as were questions about the origins of the virus. Was it possible that the outbreak originated in a Chinese lab that just happened to be funded by the US government? And if so, how far would powerful people in the government wish to suppress any discussion or investigation into this possibility?

At a critical time – just as authoritarians were locking the country down and threatening anyone who refused the shot – all public discussion about the matters was shut down by “private” companies that just happened to have very close ties with the US government.

This raises fundamental questions about the First Amendment that hopefully might be explored by Congress after the November elections. The American people deserve to know who is trying to shut them up…and why.

Read more great articles on the Ron Paul Institute website.
Subscribe to free updates from the Ron Paul Institute.

Copyright © 2022 by Ron Paul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Elon’s Folly

Posted by M. C. on June 13, 2022

Instead of trying to save a dying Marxist bird, the richest man in the world should spend $44 Billion to take a flame thrower to the agenda of Global Tyrants.

The Good Citizen

A Serious Man?

There has been much debate about Elon Musk’s stance on the Great Reset, UN Agendas, Technocracy, and Posthumanism, which I partly addressed in a previous post 40 days ago. He was listed as a 2008 World Economic Forum “Young Global Leader”. Almost every prominent figure in business or politics has been associated with this organization over the last thirty years, so it’s no guarantee of anything. Take Putin for example. He is likely no longer working for or with this international tyrannical order, no matter how many domestic Russian planemic policies align with the Rockefeller lock-step plan.

Musk is also the founder of a company that is researching and developing AI and brain implants, and presumably not just for those whose disabilities could be remedied with techno-assisted chips that reactivate defunct neuro-motor functions. This path is a slippery one, adored by post-humanist technocrats seeking to play God and merge the biological and technological. All of this and more must be taken into consideration of Musk’s motivations and positions on the Global tyranny agenda.

This piece’s premise might be false, as it assumes Elon Musk is a serious man intent on exposing the lies and corruption of globally interconnected corporate states and their social engineering agendas. These agendas depend on censorship to manipulate the masses as Elon has identified, but they also require transforming democracies and republics into corrupt vassal states that march in lock-step formation to carry out new world orders.

Why does Elon assume restoring “free speech” on one dying Marxist platform will help anything? It’s possible Musk never intended to purchase Twitter, only to expose its litany of flaws including political censorship. And even if he is a puppet of global technocrats let this piece serve as a guide to how much less than $44 Billion could be utilized to smother the NWO and Great Reset agenda on the dozens of different fronts required to make a meaningful impact. It’s not the ideal people-first grassroots decentralized solution needed, but in a world where money dominates, and those in powerful positions all have a price, it might be the best thing we have at the moment. If he’s a serious man, here’s how he should spend that money instead.

Bird Brains

For those who missed it, Our Fren Elon, from 40 days ago warns of putting faith in the richest man in the world to “save free speech” on a censorious attention network platform run by Marxist lunatics that we should have all let die a public and undignified death years ago. The only good Marxist lunatic attention network platforms are dead ones.

Celebrating this as some game-changing event is misguided and myopic. This is the equivalent of missing the forest for a tiny branch, on a larger branch of a single tree. The masses who have witnessed the tyranny of mass censorship of specific political views and are now desperate for some semblance of justice, any tiny straw they can grasp. They know the state has colluded with Twitter and other platforms to control online speech and manage narratives, funneling acceptable micro-discourse into a tiny range of corporate-state approved insipid and fallacious perspectives.

The platform is part of the controlled narrative managers’ toolbox. Millions of conservatives, independents, and libertarians recognized this years ago and departed for alternatives that advertised a dedication to free speech and expression online. This resulted in the balkanization of microblogs with tribes retreating to their preferred echo chamber platforms.

Digital Balkans

Those who understood the importance of free speech online have gone to Gab, which has done its best to ensure the values it proclaims to respect are upheld on the platform. The establishment mud wrestlers did their best to associate the platform with at first the “alt-right”, then “white supremacists”, “nazis”, “fascists” and other terms that will soon be meaningless in the west when uttered by the usual liars and propagandists of the corporate state.

Gettr, one of the most boring platforms ever conceived collected the scraps of people who were booted from the corporate-state slain Parlour, and bought into a laughable slandering of Gab and so were too afraid to go there due to the taint.

The Trump fanatics were more recently swept up by the former President’s own network Truth Social, bogged down with technical issues and a slow rollout. Trump is there “truthing” his brains out to a tiny fraction of the followers he once did on Twitter.

We now have a digital universe where each platform is populated with people who all agree with each other and reinforce each other’s views. This used to happen on Twitter with algorithmically curated echo chambers, but at least the sheep were all in the same meadow, if not the same state. Being surrounded by those who constantly agree feels good but advances nothing, unites nobody, provides no stimulating debate or conversation, and only further divides an already partisan world by sealing people into tighter and narrow tunnels of accepted information. When anything challenging or contradictory penetrates this tunnel, they are overwhelmed with a range of emotions that act as a buttress to this new information, psychologically blocking it from any consideration, especially if upends months or years of previous digital performances that garnered respect from their coveted tribe of followers.

This is one of many flaws of centrally controlled and manipulated top-down, center-out networks powered by AI and algorithms written and tuned by biased if not malicious humans with no allegiance to objective truth or the free flow of ideas and opinions that might help engender an environment where truth is valued and persued over showing off for tribes, piling on, “owning”, “destroying”, and other shallow performative self-aggrandizing digital gestures to increase “reach” and followers. Another reason we should all let these networks fail as soon as possible by abandoning them and ignoring the odious people using them to control narratives. There is no greater insult in the universe than to ignore those who demand attention.

Read the Whole Article

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Pretend To Work Somewhere Else”: Elon Musk Says All Tesla Employees Must Return To The Office

Posted by M. C. on June 2, 2022

It would have been nice to know Musk’s rationale. There must be some perceived benefit to Tesla. What is it and how would other companies would benefit from said rationale.

Tyler Durden's Photo

by Tyler Durden

As some companies try and delicately walk the line between returning to the office and offering “work from home” benefits to their employees in a post-Covid world, Elon Musk has taken a stance without quite as much nuance. 

“Anyone who wishes to do remote work must be in the office for a minimum (and I mean *minimum*) of 40 hours per week or depart Tesla,” Musk wrote in a company email that was leaked this week.

“Remote work is no longer acceptable,” was the name of the email. In it, Musk put his employees to a choice: return to your desks and offices or start finding work elsewhere. The email was reported on by Fortune

#Tesla no longer allowing remote work@TeslaPodcast @SawyerMerritt @WholeMarsBlog @garyblack00 @GerberKawasaki — Sam Nissim (@SamNissim) June 1, 2022

“This is less than [what] we ask of factory workers,” Musk added, possibly in a nod to the company’s Shanhai factory, which had Chinese staff building cars during 12 hour shifts and sleeping on factory floors due to Covid lockdowns. 

“If there are particularly exceptional contributors for whom this is impossible, I will review and approve those exceptions directly,” Musk wrote. “Moreover, the ‘office’ must be a main Tesla office, not a remote branch office unrelated to the job duties…”

Musk got some pushback for his comments (what else is new?) on Twitter this week, with some users arguing that Tesla could wind up losing too many of its staff as a result of the forced requirement. 

Online, Musk confirmed the authenticity of the email and “made it crystal clear he had zero tolerance for those demanding the right to retain privileges,” Fortune reported.

“They should pretend to work somewhere else,” Musk wrote.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Elon Musk versus the Woke Cartel

Posted by M. C. on May 31, 2022

But the best indication that the woke cartel has really gone berserk is its removal of Tesla from the S&P 500’s ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) Index. This last rebuff proves that “ESG is a scam.”

I’ve argued that the ESG is a means for dividing the woke wheat from the unwoke chaff to assemble a woke monopolistic cartel, but this exclusion is especially hypocritical and ludicrous. Tesla has produced more electric vehicles than any other manufacturer,

Michael Rectenwald

Many criticisms have been leveled against Elon Musk—that he’s part of the elite, that Tesla has been the beneficiary of government handouts and exemptions, that his transhumanist Neuralink is a brain-data-mining operation. Yet his planned purchase of Twitter, his supposed free-speech absolutism, and his subsequent renunciation of the Democratic Party as “the party of hate” have put Musk squarely in the crosshairs of the woke cartel.

Vitriolic Twitter storms, a New York TimesFinancial Times biographical exposé, a slew of hit pieces and scaremongering segments in the legacy media, and allegations of sexual harassment have dogged the automobile magnate ever since his Twitter bid. In response, Musk announced on Twitter that he’s assembling a legal crew to sue defamers and defend Tesla (and likely himself) against lawsuits.

But the best indication that the woke cartel has really gone berserk is its removal of Tesla from the S&P 500’s ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) Index. This last rebuff proves that “ESG is a scam.”

I’ve argued that the ESG is a means for dividing the woke wheat from the unwoke chaff to assemble a woke monopolistic cartel, but this exclusion is especially hypocritical and ludicrous. Tesla has produced more electric vehicles than any other manufacturer, yet Exxon Mobil and JP Morgan Chase rank among the S&P 500’s top ESG performers after a recent rebalancing. JP Morgan is the world’s largest investor in oil producers and ExxonMobil ranks first among them.

The reasons given for axing Tesla from the index also prove that ESG indexing is political to the core. Writes Margaret Dorn of Indexology Blog:

A few of the factors contributing to its 2021 S&P DJI ESG Score were a decline in criteria level scores related to Tesla’s (lack of) low carbon strategy and codes of business conduct. In addition, a Media and Stakeholder Analysis, a process that seeks to identify a company’s current and potential future exposure to risks stemming from its involvement in a controversial incident, identified two separate events centered around claims of racial discrimination and poor working conditions at Tesla’s Fremont factory, as well as its handling of the NHTSA investigation after multiple deaths and injuries were linked to its autopilot vehicles. Both of these events had a negative impact on the company’s S&P DJI ESG Score at the criteria level, and subsequently its overall score. While Tesla may be playing its part in taking fuel-powered cars off the road, it has fallen behind its peers when examined through a wider ESG lens.

What we see through this “wider ESG lens” is a political spectacle. ESG grading, notes Bloomberg, is a measure of public relations imagery, not environmental performance. Tesla has been besmirched with bad press regarding supposed racial discrimination, and Musk’s South African provenance is used to support such allegations. In 2018, Business Insider claimed that Musk was a beneficiary of an apartheid emerald mine owned by his father, Errol, and worked by black South Africans. Twitter mobs and other media outlets have continued to repeat the allegation, despite Musk’s convincing refutation.

Tesla and Musk have thus been subjected to the S in ESG—the “social” or “social justice” quotient. “Diversity, equity, and inclusion” means exclusion of the politically incorrect. This applies to corporations as much as it does to individuals. Musk has been deemed a deplorable, and thus his company does not pass “social justice” muster.

As such, Musk has exposed the contradictions within the woke cartel’s measurement apparatus. Anything that can be used against a company, or its owners, will be used—

when the target runs afoul of the woke arbiters, that is. That’s because the ESG is an impressionistic, qualitative metric that subjects companies to the whims of a woke dictatorship.

I’m not suggesting that Musk is a free-market hero or a lowercase libertarian, but there is little doubt that he’s become corporate enemy number one for the state-backed woke cartel. The battle shaping up between Musk and the regime will prove to be an important one, if only because it pits the power of the latter against a high-visibility manufacturer and the reputed “richest man in the world.” What we will learn is how powerful the woke cartel is and just how far it will go to infringe property rights and eradicate any remaining legitimate (consumer-based) market criteria—no matter how much its moves reek of hypocrisy or how obvious its vendetta.

In today’s political economy, satisfying shareholders and customers has become less important than ingratiation with the woke cartel and the government that supports it. Corporations’ fealty to wokeness, state dictates, and state narratives can be explained in terms of a fully politicized economy. Corporations seek to curry favor with the clique in power, and thus they have become organs of the Democratic Party and the federal government it now runs unilaterally.

Woke corporatism is what happens when social democracy or democratic socialism grows to such proportions as to make profiting nearly impossible without political approval. Unfortunately, Elon Musk will learn much more about woke political capitalism in the not-so-distant future.


Contact Michael Rectenwald

Michael Rectenwald is the author of eleven books, including Thought CriminalBeyond WokeGoogle Archipelago, and Springtime for Snowflakes.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Who’s Afraid of Elon Musk?

Posted by M. C. on May 10, 2022

Those confused by how free speech threatens democracy should remember that for neoconservatives and many progressives democracy means allowing the people to choose between two largely identical supporters of the welfare-warfare state.

Disinformation Governance Board – Sounds like an FDR New Deal program

May 9 – Any doubt that many progressives have abandoned their commitment to free speech was erased by the hysterical reaction to Elon Musk’s effort to purchase Twitter and return the company to its roots as a free speech zone. Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and “woke” neocon Max Boot fretted that Musk’s commitment to free speech threatens democracy. Those confused by how free speech threatens democracy should remember that for neoconservatives and many progressives democracy means allowing the people to choose between two largely identical supporters of the welfare-warfare state. In this version of “democracy,” those whose views are outside the welfare-warfare mainstream — such as libertarians — are marginalized.

More ominous than the griping of ex-government officials and pundits was the threat of prominent Democratic politicians to haul Musk before Congress. These politicians likely want an opportunity to smear Musk and other supporters of free speech as promoters of hate and Russian (and/or Chinese) disinformation.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin and other Senate Democrats, none of whom seem to have read the First Amendment, are also investigating whether it would be “appropriate” for Congress to force tech companies to “moderate” content on their platforms.

President Biden is not waiting for legislation to ramp up the attack on free speech. His administration has created the Disinformation Governance Board located in the Department of Homeland Security. The board’s purpose is to coordinate government and private sector efforts to combat “disinformation,” with a focus on Russia. The focus on Russia is not surprising since “Russian disinformation” has joined racism and sexism as a go-to justification to smear and silence those whose views (and factual information) contradict the political and media establishment’s “party line.”

Biden’s choice to head the Disinformation Governance Board, Nina Jankowicz, is a spreader of disinformation herself. In 2020, for example, Jankowicz parroted the lie that Russia created the damning materials found on Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop. Jankowicz’s résumé also includes stints as an advisor to the Ukraine government and a manager of National Democratic Institute programs in Russia and Belarus. Jankowicz’s background suggests she will never call any lie peddled by the US war party “disinformation.”

The Disinformation Governance Board may not directly censor social media. However, by “encouraging” tech companies desperate to maintain good relations with the federal government to remove “unapproved” opinions from their platforms, it can achieve the same results. This is why anyone who values free speech, which should include everyone who cherishes liberty, should not fall for the claim that tech companies’ behavior is nothing to be concerned about since it does not involve government censorship.

Sadly, some misguided conservatives have joined progressives in promoting legislation imposing new regulations on big tech. Increased regulation will only empower Nina Jankowicz and her ilk to further pressure tech companies to restrict free speech. It will also hurt consumers by reducing the ability to find affordable goods and services online. The only way to protect free speech on the internet is to make online platforms truly private through a complete separation of tech and state.

The drive to censor is driven by the woke mob and authoritarian establishment’s fear that their policies could not maintain majority support if forced to compete in a free market of ideas. This shows that even enemies of liberty sense that the days of the welfare-warfare state are numbered.

Read more great articles on the Ron Paul Institute website.
Subscribe to free updates from the Ron Paul Institute.

Copyright © 2022 by Ron Paul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Elon Musk’s Twitter Gambit and What It Means to the “Clique in Power”

Posted by M. C. on April 28, 2022

Michael Rectenwald

Elon Musk’s bid to take over Twitter and turn it into a private company has apparently been successful. Now the real action begins. Musk’s buyout exposes the Big Digital media complex to unwanted and unwonted competition, while threatening to loosen its near-total control of information and opinion. Twitter has represented a vital component in an information configuration that has barred competitors and participants from the digital sphere by means of progressive criteria, including wokeness, political fealty, and obedience to official state dictates and narratives.

The response to the Twitter takeover by the arbiters of acceptable expression has been as hysterical as it has been swift. The New York Times, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Media Matters for Americamembers of the establishment professoriate, and other “experts” have rushed to fortify the defensive forces against free speech.

Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters, described the sale of Twitter to Mr. Musk as

a victory for disinformation and the people who peddle it. Musk could unleash a wave of toxicity and harassment and undo Twitter’s efforts to increase quality engagement and make its platform safer for users….

This potential deal is about much more than the future of Twitter. A sale to Elon Musk without any conditions will pollute the entire information ecosystem by opening the floodgate of hate and lies. Twitter’s board needs to take this into account now before the deal is done.

Despite the special pleading for safe spaces, Carusone is right about one thing. The deal is about more than the future of Twitter. As if it wasn’t already obvious, the Twitter board’s earlier attempt to foil Musk’s seizure of the company with a poison pill betrayed the true nature of the Big Tech cartel member. It has not operated as a for-profit, free-market competitor but rather as a vital component in a carefully curated monopolistic information bubble that it has helped to cultivate and maintain, and within which it has not needed to compete.

Musk’s commitment to free speech has raised the hackles of the establishment gatekeepers, who ironically figure free speech as a “threat to democracy.” Alluding to Twitter’s state functions, California State East Bay professor of communication and history Nolan Higdon said that Musk’s acquisition makes “democracy less and less likely to work as it’s designed.” Democracy here does not mean equal representation in the public sphere but rather the preordained domination of a particular “democratic” ideology. This ideology is defined by the imperatives of “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” which are expressed in terms of acceptable and protected identities and politics.

Human rights groups fret that Musk’s commitment to free speech will endanger supposedly beleaguered identity groups, who will be harmed by other people’s speech given the possibility that Twitter’s restrictive algorithms will be overwritten. “Regardless of who owns Twitter,” wrote digital rights researcher and advocate at Human Rights Watch Deborah Brown, “the company has human rights responsibilities to respect the rights of people around the world who rely on the platform. Changes to its policies, features, and algorithms, big and small, can have disproportionate and sometimes devastating impacts.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Empire Strikes Back! EU Threatens Musk Over ‘Free Speech’ On Twitter

Posted by M. C. on April 27, 2022

EU officials have warned Elon Musk that he faces steep fines or an outright ban if he follows a “free speech” model once his purchase of Twitter is complete. How far will authorities go to restrict freedom of expression? Also: Twitter’s top censor breaks down in tears at the thought of her reign coming to an end. And finally: Wimbledon’s racism.

Me thinks thou protesteth too much!

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

[Exclusive] Elon Musk: A future worth getting excited about | TED | Tesla Gigafactory interview

Posted by M. C. on April 21, 2022

What’s on Elon Musk’s mind? In conversation with head of TED Chris Anderson, Musk details how the radical new innovations he’s working on — Tesla’s intelligent humanoid robot Optimus, SpaceX’s otherworldly Starship and Neuralink‘s brain-machine interfaces, among others — could help maximize the lifespan of humanity and create a world where goods and services are abundant and accessible for all. It’s a compelling vision of a future worth getting excited about. (Recorded at the Tesla Texas Gigafactory on April 6, 2022) Just over a week after this interview was filmed, Elon Musk joined TED2022 for another (live) conversation, where he discussed his bid to purchase Twitter, the biggest regret of his career, how his brain works and more. Watch that conversation here:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Has Elon Musk stumbled into some scandalous truths about Twitter?

Posted by M. C. on April 16, 2022

Twitter shut down the president of the United States, which, if it’s controlled by the government, while the elites take the profits, it means the government itself shut Trump down.  What would be the implications of that, and how the heck could this scandal be corrected?  It would show the extent of the rot of the Deep State that an entity so closely connected to the federal government could carry out that kind of coup.  And that presents a constitutional crisis.  This kind of third-world behavior would have to be exposed by Musk — and Congress would need to stop it.

By Monica Showalter

Sure enough, Elon Musk pulled the trigger, handed Twitter a fat offer of a buyout, and it’s been nothing but bonkersville ever since.

According to CBS News:

Elon Musk is offering to buy Twitter for $43 billion, saying the social media company “needs to be transformed as a private company.”

The billionaire and founder of electric car maker Tesla, who earlier this month disclosed he owns a 9.2% stake in Twitter, proposed in a regulatory filing on Thursday to buy all of the company’s outstanding common stock for $54.20 per share. 

“I invested in Twitter as I believe in its potential to be the platform for free speech around the globe, and I believe free speech is a societal imperative for a functioning democracy,” he said in the filing. “However, since making my investment I now realize the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form.”

The market acted as one might expect of a company that has seen stagnant growth over recent months:

Twitter shares rose 3.6% to $47.49 in early trading. Shares in the social media platform, which was valued at $37 billion prior to Musk’s offer, had declined by roughly a third over the prior year.

It prompted huffing and puffing from the likes of the Washington Post, owned by mega-billionaire Jeff Bezos, about Musk being a threat to democracy or something.

The blue checks, meanwhile, completely beclowned themselves:

David Leavitt, the third blue check on that list, recall, is the one who tried to shake down a Target employee for an $89.99 toothbrush for a penny, called the police, and then used Twitter to doxx her when he didn’t get what he wanted.

Here’s the obvious problem on the surface:

Glenn Greenwald


Yesterday was a flagship day in corporate media. It was the day they were forced to explicitly state what has long been clear: they not only favor censorship but desperately crave and depend on it. Even if Musk doesn’t buy Twitter, never forget what yesterday revealed.

Here’s the weird stuff:

Saudi Arabia’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who owns roughly 5% of Twitter, tweeted that the bid significantly undervalues the company and that he will reject it.

Musk shot back in a tweet: “How much of Twitter does the Kingdom own, directly & indirectly? What are the Kingdom’s views on journalistic freedom of speech?”

Saudi Arabia’s richest man has a stake in Twitter? 

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »