Jail for Jack Dorsey? If Elon Musk's charge that Twitter lied about the prevalence of bots in its traffic proves true, that would constitute securities fraud

American Thinker ^ | 07/11/2022 | Thomas Lifson

[ptsal]

Ya think?

Evergreen Airlines of social media. Psyop

[CodeJockey]

Around two years ago I had a real Twitter account. My real mug showing on the profile along with my real name. I lasted around a month. Got suspended for being critical of Fauchi.

So I set up a new profile with one of my stealth email addresses. I have a BLM image with Black Lives Matter banner. Next friended some leftist types. I’ve been able to tweet at will although my tweets probably seem counterproductive to the narrative. Maybe they think I’m being sarcastic.

Never been suspended, but maybe shadow banned. lol

[glorgau]

This whole thing is great entertainment and a wonderful learning experience as to legal issues involved and strategies deployed.

Much better than any made up television show.

[bert]

I think you are right.

Judges like settlements. The mention of jail makes it nasty and encourages settlement.

Unmentioned is the fact that if Musk does go ahead and forced to accept the original deal, he will be handed all the evidence and the existing management is still guilty with Musk owning the evidence.

I don’t see that in the final analysis he can be the loser.

[libstripper]

"Maybe Twitter is a FedGov operation."

Winner, winner, you get a chicken dinner!! Sundance, at Conservative Treehouse, has pointed out all along that the business model of Twitter is unsustainable without Twitter receiving vast governmental subsidies. That's why I think this case will be settled. Once the discovery gets going Musk will be able to unravel Twitter's entire financial structure and how it manages to keep going even though it would be financially unsustainable without government subsidies. The problem Twitter has with the governmental subsidies is that it's receipt of those subsidies, in an apparently apparently speech related activity, renders it a quasi governmental entity. Once it's rendered a quasi governmental entity, it doesn't have the right generally to censor posts by its participants. That totally undermines its idea that had it has free speech protections under the Constitution. The litigation is going to be fascinating and the disclosures remarkable.

[Jim Noble]

If you look at the names on the Twitter board - you have to wonder if they are even real people.

[null and void]

If you look at the names on the Twitter board - you have to wonder if they are even real people.

What bots?

[Vaduz]

LOL Twitter sprung their own trap.

[nesnah]

Once the discovery gets going Musk will be able to unravel Twitter's entire financial structure and how it manages to keep going even though it would be financially unsustainable without government subsidies our income tax dollars.

[Candor7]

What twitter s seeking as a remedy against Musk is called “specific performance” under the law of contract.They want to court to force Musk to perform the written letter of the contract instead of claiming damages for breach of contract.

Specific performance is a remedy in equity. That is to say that a party who seeks the remedy of specific performance must pass to tests in order to receive a remedy in equity.

1) The claim of specific performance must be made as soonas possible, without prevarication. This is called the Doctrine of Laches. ( There does not appear to be a problem with Twitters claim of specific performance in this regard.)

2) The party claiming specidfic performance must have “clean hands” within the four corners of the contract. That means that Twitter must show it has performed all of its contractual duties in good faith. This is Twitters problem It does not oass the “clean hands” test, because it has refused or failed to disclose details of the true number of fake , duplicate or BOT accounts. Therefore Twitter does not pass the clean hands test and likely will not qualify for a remedy of specific performance , and it can only claim damages pursuant to the contract.

As it stands now the court will likely order Twitter to disclose the proper information to Musk as agreed pursuant to the contract of purchase.Musk will then have the right to move forward, terminate or revise the contract if the information is contrary to the description and representation of the subject business being purchased. If the court finds fraud on the part of Twitter in its observation of its contractual obligations, then Musk may claim punative damages.

This case promises to be interesting.

Pass the Musk oil and the Popcorn.

[minnesota_bound]

Elon Musk gets discovery and Twitter goes out of business.

See his post.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1546344529460174849

[ctdonath2]

Yeah, that.
Elon himself posted it. That’s telling.