(PO) Read anything interesting today?

Come discus news articles of the day with a bit of an NPR focus.

Moderators: AA Admin, AA Mod

User avatar
Z is for Zangie
Posts: 10403
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 3:47 pm
Location: OH
Has thanked: 4301 times
Been thanked: 1514 times

(PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Z is for Zangie » Fri May 13, 2022 3:35 am

Don't walk under any ladders or cross a black cat's path today...lo..but, TGIF, and have a good one.
babyformula.jpg
plannedparetnthood.jpg



Randi
Posts: 686
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:58 pm
Has thanked: 927 times
Been thanked: 305 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Randi » Fri May 13, 2022 10:40 am

As the United States approaches nearly one million deaths from COVID 19. I read this: on NPR

“Nearly 319,000 COVID-19 deaths could have been averted if all adults had gotten vaccinated“

Wow.

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 10:47 am

Musk tweeted that his Twitter acquisition is on hold while bots deployed on the site are examined. Shares have fallen nearly 20 percent.

Does this all seem like massive market manipulation? Is he really going to not buy Twitter because he’s suddenly concerned about bots exercising free speech?

User avatar
Slip Shod
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2021 2:30 am
Location: Tennessee
Has thanked: 1019 times
Been thanked: 774 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Slip Shod » Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pm

What if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit

User avatar
Tarmaque
Posts: 6611
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 11:41 am
Location: Vancouver, USA
Has thanked: 1265 times
Been thanked: 2743 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Tarmaque » Fri May 13, 2022 12:38 pm

Slip Shod wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pm
What if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
It is definitely not her. She's not a member of the court yet, and so would not be privy to any of their internal communications yet. I don't know why you would think it was her.

The word on the street is it was possibly Virginia Thomas, who also shouldn't have access to internal SCOTUS documents, but also very likely does. The logic holds up. The leak is unlikely to have come from any of the sitting justices since they're pretty jealous of their power and process. Their staff of clerks are also very professional and unlikely to damage their career by doing something like this. This leaves a group of people who potentially have access to SCOTUS documents but also have a history of political theatrics and corruption. Hence Virginia Thomas, who's husband has refused to recuse himself from ruling on cases that involve her clients. In theory he shouldn't have shared the document with her to begin with, but in practice it would surprise nobody.

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 1:14 pm

Tarmaque wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 12:38 pm
Slip Shod wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pm
What if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
It is definitely not her. She's not a member of the court yet, and so would not be privy to any of their internal communications yet. I don't know why you would think it was her.

The word on the street is it was possibly Virginia Thomas, who also shouldn't have access to internal SCOTUS documents, but also very likely does. The logic holds up. The leak is unlikely to have come from any of the sitting justices since they're pretty jealous of their power and process. Their staff of clerks are also very professional and unlikely to damage their career by doing something like this. This leaves a group of people who potentially have access to SCOTUS documents but also have a history of political theatrics and corruption. Hence Virginia Thomas, who's husband has refused to recuse himself from ruling on cases that involve her clients. In theory he shouldn't have shared the document with her to begin with, but in practice it would surprise nobody.
Lessee now. Why would folks on the Right be claiming it is Brown Jackson? What would be their motivation? Even though anyone with knowledge on these things knows that, having not yet been sworn in, she is not yet a member and therefore not yet privy to the Court’s processes… why is this “I’m just asking the question” rampant across the right wing? What is their motivation? I mean, here’s our Buddy Shoddy using this conjecture as a basis to claim, and I quote, “it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit”. Clearly, the upper echelons of the Right know just how stupid their base is, how easy it is to lead them down a nonexistent path. There are hundreds of thousands of Shoddys out there now, proclaiming that this leak means Jackson is unfit to serve on the court.

But “free speech”, right? You have the right to say anything you want - no matter how demonstrably untrue - again and again and again, right? Without some nanny company labeling your speech as the lie it is, right? That’s ‘censorship’, right?

As for Ginny Thomas, I won’t speculate on a name. But I will again state what I already stated, which is to ponder which ‘team’ benefits from this. Is it the left? They’d have been better off waiting until the decision was actually official, as it would have been closer to Election Day and therefore the protest energy would have been new and fresh. For the Right, then, it would pay to release it early in order to dissipate some of that protest energy. As for any other benefits to the Left for leaking it, I can think of none.

But for the Right, especially the hard Right, the benefits just stack up. It stokes their base. It allows those states to have the legislation ready to go; the moment the decision is issued, they can outlaw abortion. It virtually locks the decision into place, and possibly at a more severe tilt than it might have after a couple months of discussion among the Justices. It also puts a bunch of bizarre ‘reasoning’ into the discussion…. lack of supply of adoptable babies? Really Alito? I don’t remember seeing anything about that in my Constitutional law classes. Especially I never heard it before from someone who claimed knowledge of original intent. And in wiping away a right (first time in our national history!), it sets the stage for a broad based attack on a slew of other rights. It says that anything not specifically protected in the Constitution is now subject to the individual states eliminating at their discretion.

User avatar
Slip Shod
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2021 2:30 am
Location: Tennessee
Has thanked: 1019 times
Been thanked: 774 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Slip Shod » Fri May 13, 2022 1:47 pm

@ Mike
If it were to be a radical 'Righty' on the Court I would equally deem them unfit.
Everyone's guessing, but what I want to know is there anything
that can be done about it .
Except for a dismal few, seems no one goes to jail in Washington. This money is there to keep them out . Our system is set up for the little guy to go to jail

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 2:09 pm

Slip Shod wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 1:47 pm
@ Mike
If it were to be a radical 'Righty' on the Court I would equally deem them unfit.
Everyone's guessing, but what I want to know is there anything
that can be done about it .
Except for a dismal few, seems no one goes to jail in Washington. This money is there to keep them out . Our system is set up for the little guy to go to jail
Nice dodge. You’ve already used this leak to take multiple shots at Jackson…. But this is again soooo typical of the right. Now that the damage is done, you feign as if your purpose is somehow higher. Meanwhile, we have United States Senators using this exact ‘reasoning’ as a basis to publicly eviscerate Jackson and undermine her. While Rand Paul claims we cannot have any official attempts to counter this rampant disinformation.

It’s your statement. You said it. Now own it. Stop lying, stop the relentless unaccountability.

User avatar
Slip Shod
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2021 2:30 am
Location: Tennessee
Has thanked: 1019 times
Been thanked: 774 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Slip Shod » Fri May 13, 2022 2:15 pm

Of course I own it I told you what I think. If it comes from one of the conservatives on the court they're unfit too or maybe a better wording would be unprincipled either way. It's flat out poor judgment -

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 2:28 pm

Slip Shod wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 2:15 pm
Of course I own it I told you what I think. If it comes from one of the conservatives on the court they're unfit too or maybe a better wording would be unprincipled either way. It's flat out poor judgment -
Slip Shod wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pm
What if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
Ahhh yes. Of course your diatribe against Jackson was not a smear! And was not even yours!! It was “put forward” in an article! So never mind all that stuff about “Jackson…. In fact the leaker…. a very poor lack of discretion and integrity…. it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit”. You were just asking the question, right?

It speaks volumes about YOU, shoddy. A lack of discretion, zero integrity. Unfit. So typical of the average rightwinger nowadays. Deplorable.

User avatar
Slip Shod
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2021 2:30 am
Location: Tennessee
Has thanked: 1019 times
Been thanked: 774 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Slip Shod » Fri May 13, 2022 2:36 pm

Oh Miguel, Miguel.
I remembered what I posted and I believe I put in a 'what if' . It's your delirious ramblings that speaks volumes. What what else could I expect from you - you're right on target and never disappoint. I believe they keep you around here just for laughs

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 2:48 pm

Ahhhh yes, “just asking the question”. Of course you are. Nothing to do with trying to tie her to a particular thing, just asking the question.
242006FC-B5EA-4171-A361-A20E4FA1D909.jpeg

User avatar
Z is for Zangie
Posts: 10403
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 3:47 pm
Location: OH
Has thanked: 4301 times
Been thanked: 1514 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Z is for Zangie » Fri May 13, 2022 2:51 pm

Slip Shod wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 1:47 pm
@ Mike
If it were to be a radical 'Righty' on the Court I would equally deem them unfit.
Everyone's guessing, but what I want to know is there anything
that can be done about it .
Except for a dismal few, seems no one goes to jail in Washington. This money is there to keep them out . Our system is set up for the little guy to go to jail
Depends on who it is...a clerk would lose their job and law license...but, it isn't a crime, so no criminal stuff..it is bad and against protocol...if it was Justice and this has about a -0 chance it was, they wouldn't jeopardize the court's integrity, or their job...but, impeachment would be one of the ways to handle that and no likely to happen

My center right lawyer favorites say it is unlikely whoever it is, that they will be caught, hardly ever happens...too many people involved etc...what is a crime though is if you are caught lying to the court officer...you can admit to the act and just get fired/possible loss of law license , but, not criminal...but, if you say it wasn't you and they find out for sure it was...that is a crime...

There are multiple reasons and people from all sides to have done this...speculating while also mentioning specific names, just creates more division and anger...

User avatar
Slip Shod
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2021 2:30 am
Location: Tennessee
Has thanked: 1019 times
Been thanked: 774 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Slip Shod » Fri May 13, 2022 2:58 pm

Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 2:48 pm
Ahhhh yes, “just asking the question”. Of course you are. Nothing to do with trying to tie her to a particular thing, just asking the question.

242006FC-B5EA-4171-A361-A20E4FA1D909.jpeg
Well Miguel, I see you're going with a video here while the context of the get together by Ms Z was interesting 'reading'.
I was basing what I proposed on some interesting 'reading' posted from a Newsmax article that was included from articles gathered from a variety of sources.
That's one of the things I do in the morning, sometimes I just cruise through articles.
But now you've jumped ship and gone video on us. It's your short-term memory - it's all you've got to work with. She asked about reading something. Mike, you went and done it again, but as long as it keeps you happy, keep rowing

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 8390
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 792 times
Been thanked: 2316 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Fri May 13, 2022 3:38 pm

Slip Shod wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 12:08 pm
What if Katanji Brown jackson, our newest Supreme Court Justice were in fact the leaker ? Wouldn't that indeed show a very poor lack of discretion and integrity? And if she were then what was to be done about it. I was reading an article in which that was put forward
What do you think should be done about it, if true. I don't think they can do anything about it, but it speaks volumes about her - I believe unfit
If any justice leaked court documents I would think they were unfit and would expect congress to impeach. There is no reason to suspect any specific with the information we have. It's a little strange to speculate about an individual in this way.

Most likely it was a staffer of a justice who saw the opinion and went full justice warrior. Justices simply have too much to lose to take that kind of chance. Although, Donald Trump was president, anything is possible.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 8390
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 792 times
Been thanked: 2316 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Fri May 13, 2022 3:40 pm

Tarmaque wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 12:38 pm
The word on the street is it was possibly Virginia Thomas, who also shouldn't have access to internal SCOTUS documents, but also very likely does. The logic holds up. The leak is unlikely to have come from any of the sitting justices since they're pretty jealous of their power and process. Their staff of clerks are also very professional and unlikely to damage their career by doing something like this. This leaves a group of people who potentially have access to SCOTUS documents but also have a history of political theatrics and corruption. Hence Virginia Thomas, who's husband has refused to recuse himself from ruling on cases that involve her clients. In theory he shouldn't have shared the document with her to begin with, but in practice it would surprise nobody.
See my comments to Slip about individuals...

as for Virginia Thomas it's not so much that I don't think she would leak it, it's just that I don't see what advantage she'd think leaking it would bring her. It feels like it has to be someone who disagrees with the decisions, but also as I said to slip, " Although, Donald Trump was president, anything is possible."

User avatar
Slip Shod
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2021 2:30 am
Location: Tennessee
Has thanked: 1019 times
Been thanked: 774 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Slip Shod » Fri May 13, 2022 3:48 pm

@ Guide
Your your reference to comments about individuals - ?
Were you referring to just above where Mike called me a liar, unfit &
being a deplorable person ?
My references to Mike have been much kinder.
Where are you coming from

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 8390
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 792 times
Been thanked: 2316 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Fri May 13, 2022 3:53 pm

Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 1:14 pm
But “free speech”, right? You have the right to say anything you want - no matter how demonstrably untrue - again and again and again, right?
Yes, that is a right and it's an important right. The problem with trying to police speech for truth is that whoever decided what "truth" is has the power to shape perception. When considering powers of government I prefer to consider how they can be abused. Could you imagine Trump as the legal arbiter of truth? I can, and I don't like the results
Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 1:14 pm
Without some nanny company labeling your speech as the lie it is, right? That’s ‘censorship’, right?
.

Companies should be free to control their platforms how they see fit. While removing information from their site is technically censorship, not all censorship is bad. Free speech means we are free to say what we want, it doesn't mean anyone else has to broadcast your speech or even listen to it. Freedom cuts both way, it has to otherwise it isn't freedom at all.
Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 1:14 pm
As for Ginny Thomas, I won’t speculate on a name. But I will again state what I already stated, which is to ponder which ‘team’ benefits from this. Is it the left? They’d have been better off waiting until the decision was actually official, as it would have been closer to Election Day and therefore the protest energy would have been new and fresh. For the Right, then, it would pay to release it early in order to dissipate some of that protest energy. As for any other benefits to the Left for leaking it, I can think of none.
I don't see how this helps the pro-life crowd either. Honestly, I fail to see how this leak helps anyone. That's why I tend to think it had more to do with someone being frustrated and reacting.

Senor Natural
Posts: 2647
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2019 1:58 am
Has thanked: 270 times
Been thanked: 279 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Senor Natural » Fri May 13, 2022 4:17 pm

reading Backlands by Euclides Da Cunha

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 4:19 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 3:40 pm
Tarmaque wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 12:38 pm
The word on the street is it was possibly Virginia Thomas, who also shouldn't have access to internal SCOTUS documents, but also very likely does. The logic holds up. The leak is unlikely to have come from any of the sitting justices since they're pretty jealous of their power and process. Their staff of clerks are also very professional and unlikely to damage their career by doing something like this. This leaves a group of people who potentially have access to SCOTUS documents but also have a history of political theatrics and corruption. Hence Virginia Thomas, who's husband has refused to recuse himself from ruling on cases that involve her clients. In theory he shouldn't have shared the document with her to begin with, but in practice it would surprise nobody.
See my comments to Slip about individuals...

as for Virginia Thomas it's not so much that I don't think she would leak it, it's just that I don't see what advantage she'd think leaking it would bring her. It feels like it has to be someone who disagrees with the decisions, but also as I said to slip, " Although, Donald Trump was president, anything is possible."
The “bad actor” hypothesis, the lone wolf. Gotta say I think it’s less likely than a calculated action. Again to tarmaque’s point, anyone involved in the Court knows enough to grasp the potentially massive ramifications of undermining the Court’s privacy. Which has me thinking of yet another advantage to the Right: the furor over whodunit functions as a smoke screen while they do such things as try to block aid to Ukraine (see the Greene/Bobert nonsense that got almost no play over the past couple days).

However, it also brings to mind this possible contextual benefit for the Left: the Right spent decades trying to undermine the legitimacy of SCOTUS. And we’ve seen them, over the past few decades but especially the past five years, actively undermining virtually every institution they can: the Congress, the FBI, the United Nations, NATO, OAS, the plethora of Federal agencies…. Given the ‘reasoning’ deployed by the Right on decisions like this (low supply of adoptable babies? ROFL!), all it takes to undermine the Court’s authority, and therefore do to it what the Right has done to all other institutions, is to show the nation what they are doing.

But isn’t that the most amusing thing. The Right has to lie and lie and lie, and go to court for the right to lie and then lie some more, to attempt to undermine the Left. (See the reference to the supposed ‘article’ that attempted to pin this all on Brown Jackson.)
All the Left has to do to undermine confidence in what the Right is doing is to show the world what the Right is actually doing.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 8390
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 792 times
Been thanked: 2316 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Fri May 13, 2022 4:21 pm

Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 10:47 am
Does this all seem like massive market manipulation? Is he really going to not buy Twitter because he’s suddenly concerned about bots exercising free speech?
It could potentially be. It seems unlikely. Musk is a very busy guy. I would expect that his time is extremely valuable. I have a hard time seeing why he would put this much effort into manipulating Twitter stock to make a few million. It doesn't seem like a good use of his time, even if he wanted more money it seems to me he could have made more a million easier ways. That being said, Musk is a different person, so he may have motivation I'm not considering.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 8390
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 792 times
Been thanked: 2316 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Fri May 13, 2022 4:33 pm

Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 4:19 pm
Again to tarmaque’s point, anyone involved in the Court knows enough to grasp the potentially massive ramifications of undermining the Court’s privacy. Which has me thinking of yet another advantage to the Right: the furor over whodunit functions as a smoke screen while they do such things as try to block aid to Ukraine (see the Greene/Bobert nonsense that got almost no play over the past couple days).
It could be a bit of a false flag event. That does seem a bit conspiracy theory leaning to me to me. If that were the case it would be almost impossible to cover up. Like I said to me this feels more like a frustrated reaction then a plan. If this was a planned event, I'd have to say the people involved are not the brightest, and I'd be concerned that such people have access to SCOTUS documents at all. At this point we know so little. An important point is that the documents were leaked to Political. This is a publication that in general is loved by the left, and by those on the far right is considered extremely biased. In your theory the person from the right would have to first be dumb enough to leak the document, but smart enough to intentionally do it to an outlet they didn't trust.

I also don't see how the someone on the right would benefit from sowing distrust in a court that has a right leaning majority. That seems exactly the opposite of what they would want to do.
Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 4:19 pm
However, it also brings to mind this possible contextual benefit for the Left: the Right spent decades trying to undermine the legitimacy of SCOTUS. And we’ve seen them, over the past few decades but especially the past five years, actively undermining virtually every institution they can: the Congress, the FBI, the United Nations, NATO, OAS, the plethora of Federal agencies…. Given the ‘reasoning’ deployed by the Right on decisions like this (low supply of adoptable babies? ROFL!), all it takes to undermine the Court’s authority, and therefore do to it what the Right has done to all other institutions, is to show the nation what they are doing.
The reality of this leak is it enraged pro-choicer and excited pro-lifers. I'm not sure it accomplished much else. It probably has the effect you described among many pro-choicers, but I don't think it moves the needle at all in general. It's hard to imagine an adult who doesn't already have a fully formed opinion on this topic.
Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 4:19 pm
But isn’t that the most amusing thing. The Right has to lie and lie and lie, and go to court for the right to lie and then lie some more, to attempt to undermine the Left. (See the reference to the supposed ‘article’ that attempted to pin this all on Brown Jackson.)
All the Left has to do to undermine confidence in what the Right is doing is to show the world what the Right is actually doing.
If you were a maga righties you'd say the same about the left. That statement is true to those who already agree with you, but do people who already agree with you need another reason to not trust the right?

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 4:40 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 4:21 pm
Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 10:47 am
Does this all seem like massive market manipulation? Is he really going to not buy Twitter because he’s suddenly concerned about bots exercising free speech?
It could potentially be. It seems unlikely. Musk is a very busy guy. I would expect that his time is extremely valuable. I have a hard time seeing why he would put this much effort into manipulating Twitter stock to make a few million. It doesn't seem like a good use of his time, even if he wanted more money it seems to me he could have made more a million easier ways. That being said, Musk is a different person, so he may have motivation I'm not considering.
Hmmm. This is a $44+ billion transaction. Even to the world’s richest man, that ain’t chump change. In fact, the purchase plan has three components:
- Musk puts up over half of the money in cash.
- Musk secures loans from banks by deploying $12 billion in Tesla stock.
- Musk leverages Twitter itself to secure loans for the remainder of the purchase.

Independent of what I consider the abhorrent practice of leveraging an asset you wish to purchase in order to purchase it, clearly a drop in the purchase price would benefit him enormously. If Twitter suddenly cost $35 billion instead of $44 billion, he could retain much of his personal outlay… or he could expose far less of Tesla. In short, he has enormous potential motivation (there’s that word again).

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 8390
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 792 times
Been thanked: 2316 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Fri May 13, 2022 4:44 pm

Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 4:40 pm
Independent of what I consider the abhorrent practice of leveraging an asset you wish to purchase in order to purchase it, clearly a drop in the purchase price would benefit him enormously. If Twitter suddenly cost $35 billion instead of $44 billion, he could retain much of his personal outlay… or he could expose far less of Tesla. In short, he has enormous potential motivation (there’s that word again).
I thought you meant he was trying to make money off the stocks, traditional stock manipulation. While the stock dropped today it's still significantly hire then when Musk first bought stock. If this was about reducing purchase price, why'd he so publicly pump the stock up in the first place?

Mike
Posts: 3795
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:03 pm
Has thanked: 49 times
Been thanked: 639 times

Re: (PO) Read anything interesting today?

Post by Mike » Fri May 13, 2022 4:57 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 4:44 pm
Mike wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 4:40 pm
Independent of what I consider the abhorrent practice of leveraging an asset you wish to purchase in order to purchase it, clearly a drop in the purchase price would benefit him enormously. If Twitter suddenly cost $35 billion instead of $44 billion, he could retain much of his personal outlay… or he could expose far less of Tesla. In short, he has enormous potential motivation (there’s that word again).
I thought you meant he was trying to make money off the stocks, traditional stock manipulation. While the stock dropped today it's still significantly hire then when Musk first bought stock. If this was about reducing purchase price, why'd he so publicly pump the stock up in the first place?
He didn’t. What pumped the stock was the rumor that a guy capable of buying out the company, a guy with motive to do exactly that, was positioning himself to DO exactly that. He then had to acknowledge it, though he at first did not confirm it (Twitter sorta did likewise).

That aside, what do you think of the allowed practice of leveraging a company’s assets in order to purchase that company? I certainly was not allowed to utilize the house I did not yet own as collateral on the loan I took out in order to buy that house….

Post Reply