He will grow bitter and eventually sell 'Free Speech' Twitter after 2024.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44636205)

Funny thing is he plotted with Jack to buy out the company when Jack put Parag in as CEO. Parag didn't care about anything other than his golden parachute, all he wanted was a high bid and he was sold so he jumped at the offer which Musk got trigger happy to provide after the Babylon Bee getting banned triggered him.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44636182)

If he wanted to pursue a lawsuit against Twitter on the basis of bots he could've done that, but it would've taken him years and in the mean time he wouldn't have been able to buy the company (which is what he really wanted to do to get back at the libs for banning the Bee).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44636228)

He could've pursued legal action against Twitter first on the bot issue, but he just wanted a quick acquisition so he waived due diligence.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44636405)

playing out roughly as anticipated.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44636288)

What if Elon "knew" something was weird about Twitter, but didn't know what, and he valued access to its secrets at $44bn irrespective of what he might uncover? The alternative requires believing Musk saw >$44bn face value in Twitter, which seems absurd in light of his own statements made in connection with the offer. If that was Elon's motivation, all Elon had to "know" in order for there to be a meeting of the minds was that Twitter was keeping secrets. It's like when people bid on storage lots before they know what's inside them.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44641943)

The sandbagging 'defense' seems to me in form to be a way of negating the justifiable reliance element of an action for misstatements in tort (e.g., fraud). (This is embodied in the securities laws, which stem from this common-law source, as, for example, the absence-of-knowledge element of a '33 Act S12 action). But as the case highlighted in the article Drunkard linked points out, justifiable reliance is not an element of a contract action, and Delaware appears to have adopted the contract theory of warranty. (A warranty is a promise of a particular sort, namely, that some state of the world is presently existing. A guaranty is a warranty about future events. There is thus much overlap between warranty/guaranty and the law of false statements.)

My point above was that, even putting aside that this is contract and not tort, it is unlikely that Twitter will go into court and claim that Elon knew before he signed the merger docs that Twitter was lying about its bot #'s, for to make this argument would be tantamount to Twitter admitting to securities fraud (or so enterprising securities lawyers would argue).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44642218)

You also raise a point about a meeting of the minds, but I don't think mistake or anything like that is at issue -- there's no serious argument that, objectively, Elon didn't intend to consummate and anyway, the parties drafted around that with the break fee and the like. [Also see my other poast re: the practicalities.]

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44649310)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000110465922068347/tm2217761d1_ex99-o.htm

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44636459)

not an m&amo by trade but “due diligence” isn’t a technical legal term or concept in this context - it’s not a home purchase. diligence is the research conducted before signing the acquisition docs*. the period between that formation of a binding contract and the close (actual payment and ownership change) is when u line up regulatory stuff, maybe do some transition/integration planning for vendors employment health retirement, work on finalizing the financial stuff, etc

*moron redditors and paulie think that he “waived diligence” bc he signed the merger agreement without doing the usual fine toothed comb diligence review first, which was irrelevant here bc twitter is contractually required to give the new management, ie musk, info he asks for, and *truthful* info

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44648281)

https://www.skadden.com/professionals/r/ringler-mike

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44636528)

https://www.wsgr.com/en/people/martin-w-korman.html

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44642235)

"No, here is the full story of what happened for real.

His whole entrepreneurship career was subsidized by the government (especially by the Obama/Biden admin) to start off with. Now he thinks that since for the first time Tesla is making (some but not much) money and that he is on paper the richest man in the world that he doesn't need the Libs anymore. At this point he starts watching shitcon/anti-Biden media especially after Biden passes a bipartisan stimulus bill that grants tax credits to competing electric car companies. Everything is going swell for him until Twitter libs decide to ban the Babylon Bee. At this point since he is the richest man in the world brainwashed by reptile propaganda he decides to simply impulsively buy Twitter using TSLA's shares as leverage for a loan without any hedging whatsoever.

Then the market starts to tank and Elon starts to realize that he's going to get margin called and his reptile brain causes him to 'blame the libs for making him buy twitter'."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44637075)

Overall Musk's biggest blind spot seems to be his understanding of the law. Not just corporate shit, but big ticket shit. That tweet where he invited lawyers to submit resumes was the biggest tell. At first I thought it was a honeypot to collect info on hundreds if not thousands of lawyers who might one day be on the other team. It makes no sense to have a car company pre-announce its intent to make first amendment law. Even if you have a case, you're asking courts to expand the 1A for a billionaire. The optics are shit, and every controversial ruling in his favor will create a legacy of resentment like Citizens United.

But now it looks to me like he may have been sincere about this. I've heard he takes a lot of ambien, and this is consistent with how people behave when they take ambien and stay up. They start drifting off into fantasy land and express ideas they would ordinarily censor. "I want to be like Batman but for the first amendment."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44637200)

Elon has an immediate problem in that he can only expand 1A protections for commercial speech or political speech by billionaires acting through corporate entities. A big win for this asshole will be an even bigger weak spot in 1st amendment jurisprudence than Citizens United. That case was unambiguously CORRECTLY decided and is a big win for political speech protections, but libs were able to mischaracterize it and turn it into some kind of monstrosity that must be one day overturned. Every time Musk goes to court he'll be asking the judge to become pariah in defense on the 1st amendment. Any 1st amendment lawyer worth a shit would have told him not to actually buy Twitter.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44641928)

Twitter is in the same jam though. If they say "we don't have to provide the data because the sale hasn't finalized," that gives Musk an opening to back out.

OTOH what if Twitter says "we think the deal is closed but this crazy mofo hasn't given us the money yet. We want our $44bn."? Again I'm an idiot when it comes to this corp shit and only recently learned this Delaware Chancellory court writes 90 page opinions on this shit

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44637125)

Walls are closing in

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44639140)

Good game, Elon fanbois! Take your fucking medicine!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5124975&forum_id=2#44648145)