Twitter adopts 'poison pill' to prevent Elon Musk takeover

[TimHauck 2,633]

39 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Did Elon realize that this guy would be vetting the emails that went out?  If not, that might answer your question.

No according to the reports, but as the general counsel it seems like something that would typically fall under his (or at least someone on his team’s) responsibilities

[jerryskids 6,593]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

No according to the reports, but as the general counsel it seems like something that would typically fall under his (or at least someone on his team’s) responsibilities

Well then, I think we have Occam's Razor, and it isn't your "not really a conspiracy but it sure is weird."  I've worked with Elon companies before:  if he asks for something, he doesn't expect someone in the middle to change the directive.

[Djgb13 2,339]

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTR4WyQmD/
 

Ah yes. “Russian disinformation story”. That’s what the retarded left is saying this is. Notice how they ALL say the EXACT same things. Almost as if it’s entirely scripted and given to every liberal media news outlet

[TimHauck 2,633]

19 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Well then, I think we have Occam's Razor, and it isn't your "not really a conspiracy but it sure is weird."  I've worked with Elon companies before:  if he asks for something, he doesn't expect someone in the middle to change the directive.

What did he ask for?  Wasn’t it just for the emails to be released?  We don’t know if Baker did anything to them before they were released, just that he apparently read them.

[TimHauck 2,633]

19 minutes ago, Djgb13 said:

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTR4WyQmD/
 

Ah yes. “Russian disinformation story”. That’s what the retarded left is saying this is. Notice how they ALL say the EXACT same things. Almost as if it’s entirely scripted and given to every liberal media news outlet

I’m not a teenager so I don’t go on tiktok, but “Russian disinformation” is not what everyone is saying. They’re saying the twitter files mostly just confirmed stuff we already knew about twitter suppressing the NY Post story.  And also apparently that the government requested twitter take down Hunter Biden d1ck pics which they did.

[nobody 2,580]

I like how it always evolves to, "it's stuff we already knew" and when people were absolutely denying that Twitter was suppressing the laptop story and people absolutely were calling it fake.

Then, of course, it's all good that Twitter gets to decide what's real or not with significant inputs from politicians.  

 

[Shooter McGavin 618]

4 minutes ago, nobody said:

I like how it always evolves to, "it's stuff we already knew" and when people were absolutely denying that Twitter was suppressing the laptop story and people absolutely were calling it fake.

Then, of course, it's all good that Twitter gets to decide what's real or not with significant inputs from politicians.  

 

Don't worry, we've all been jabbed, so we'll all be dead in a few weeks anyway.

[jerryskids 6,593]

46 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

What did he ask for?  Wasn’t it just for the emails to be released?  We don’t know if Baker did anything to them before they were released, just that he apparently read them.

Focus, Tim.  We were discussing your conundrum about how it was possible that Baker was still employed.  And we solved it with Occam's Razor:  Elon didn't know Baker was reviewing them.

Now that we've closed the book on that, we can focus on your new goalpost:  what if Baker didn't do anything but read them?  I expect that should be answered soon enough, if Elon releases data which Baker censored.

Funny, I just read a little snippet on how to avoid procrastination.  One might argue that posting here isn't consistent with that, but I've been so darn helpful at solving problems that I feel good about it.   

[jonmx 2,424]

Yeah we all know:

the fbi helped create the Trump-Russuan collusion bs. 

The fbi had numerous informants in the Proud Boys and knew everything about Jan 6th before it happened.

We all know the FBI raided homes of media personnel to suppress the Biden diary story.

We all know the FBI colluded with big tech to deplatform Republicans and suppress the Hunter laptop story.

We all know the Justice Department and the FBI conspired to suppress parents from protesting COVID, trans agenda and CRT policies.

We all know the FBI is just an arm of the DNC.

What is the big deal, it is old news.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,987]

17 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Yeah we all know:

the fbi helped create the Trump-Russuan collusion bs. 

The fbi had numerous informants in the Proud Boys and knew everything about Jan 6th before it happened.

We all know the FBI raided homes of media personnel to suppress the Biden diary story.

We all know the FBI colluded with big tech to deplatform Republicans and suppress the Hunter laptop story.

We all know the Justice Department and the FBI conspired to suppress parents from protesting COVID, trans agenda and CRT policies.

We all know the FBI is just an arm of the DNC.

What is the big deal, it is old news.  

No no, of it’s not in the Twitter dump it’s not true. 

[TimHauck 2,633]

1 hour ago, nobody said:

I like how it always evolves to, "it's stuff we already knew" and when people were absolutely denying that Twitter was suppressing the laptop story and people absolutely were calling it fake.

Then, of course, it's all good that Twitter gets to decide what's real or not with significant inputs from politicians.  

 

Denying twitter was suppressing the NY Post story and denying the laptop was real are two completely different things.

No one with half a brain denied twitter was suppressing the NY Post story.  They were doing it pretty overtly.

Yes, there was debate initially over whether it was real.

And yes, Twitter gets to decide what it thinks is real.  You can argue whether or not that should be the case, but it’s not relevant to the first amendment.

What would be relevant to the first amendment would be if the government was involved in that decision.  As Taibbi admits, there is currently no evidence that is the case with the NY Post story.

 

[Strike 5,261]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Denying twitter was suppressing the NY Post story and denying the laptop was real are two completely different things.

No one with half a brain denied twitter was suppressing the NY Post story.  They were doing it pretty overtly.

Yes, there was debate initially over whether it was real.

And yes, Twitter gets to decide what it thinks is real.  You can argue whether or not that should be the case, but it’s not relevant to the first amendment.

What would be relevant to the first amendment would be if the government was involved in that decision.  As Taibbi admits, there is currently no evidence that is the case with the NY Post story.

 

No there wasn't.  Anyone who didn't think it was real IS an idiot.  

[jonmx 2,424]

Just now, Strike said:

No there wasn't.  Anyone who didn't think it was real IS an idiot.  

The fbi had the laptop and verified contents long before they were putting out the smokescreen of Russian disinformation.  Lying colluding DNC bastards. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,987]

The FBI leaked a fake dossier and suppressed a real laptop.  These are facts, and they are not in dispute anymore.  Also, the head of the Washington field office , the guy in charge of the Trump raid, retired the other day. To “spend more time with his family”.  

[TimHauck 2,633]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

Focus, Tim.  We were discussing your conundrum about how it was possible that Baker was still employed.  And we solved it with Occam's Razor:  Elon didn't know Baker was reviewing them.

Now that we've closed the book on that, we can focus on your new goalpost:  what if Baker didn't do anything but read them?  I expect that should be answered soon enough, if Elon releases data which Baker censored.

Funny, I just read a little snippet on how to avoid procrastination.  One might argue that posting here isn't consistent with that, but I've been so darn helpful at solving problems that I feel good about it.   

I wasn’t questioning why Baker was employed for the last week.  I was questioning why he lasted longer than the first 50% of the company that was fired, particularly since Elon had apparently already called him “pretty bad.”

Sure, to your second point.  But Elon/Taibbi had already said more were coming before learning about Baker, so they would have to specifically say Baker censored them.

[TimHauck 2,633]

2 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Focus, Tim.  We were discussing your conundrum about how it was possible that Baker was still employed.  And we solved it with Occam's Razor:  Elon didn't know Baker was reviewing them.

Now that we've closed the book on that, we can focus on your new goalpost:  what if Baker didn't do anything but read them?  I expect that should be answered soon enough, if Elon releases data which Baker censored.

Funny, I just read a little snippet on how to avoid procrastination.  One might argue that posting here isn't consistent with that, but I've been so darn helpful at solving problems that I feel good about it.   

Also, here’s one of the twitter files tweets from Friday calling Baker a “former” employee, yet Elon claims to have just fired him yesterday:

 

 

[TimHauck 2,633]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

No there wasn't.  Anyone who didn't think it was real IS an idiot.  

This is revisionist history.  Hunter Biden’s laptop randomly shows up at the tiny repair shop of a weirdo in Delaware?  There was certainly reason to be skeptical, at least about the alleged Ukraine e-mails.  As evidenced by the twitter files, the backlash against suppressing the story was moreso about the fact that it was being reported by a reputable source, not that they “knew” the story was true.
 

1 hour ago, jonmx said:

The fbi had the laptop and verified contents long before they were putting out the smokescreen of Russian disinformation.  Lying colluding DNC bastards. 

The FBI was referenced as having seized the laptop in the original story, but they did not confirm its legitimacy.

[TimHauck 2,633]

6 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

The Juicy bits are in the laptop, not the Twitter dump. 

I think you’re in the wrong thread then.  This one is about twitter, not the contents of the laptop 

[jerryskids 6,593]

34 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Also, here’s one of the twitter files tweets from Friday calling Baker a “former” employee, yet Elon claims to have just fired him yesterday:

 

 

So what are our options?

1. Taibbi was wrong that Baker was already fired (Occam's Razor)

2. Musk lied about just firing him (there are about a billion Lefties including many recently fired Twitter employees who would insta-tell the world if this were the case).

3. Some new conspiracy theory of yours? 

[TimHauck 2,633]

11 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

So what are our options?

1. Taibbi was wrong that Baker was already fired (Occam's Razor)

2. Musk lied about just firing him (there are about a billion Lefties including many recently fired Twitter employees who would insta-tell the world if this were the case).

3. Some new conspiracy theory of yours? 

Yeah, Taibbi was probably just wrong. I was not implying a conspiracy.  It’s moreso interesting to me that Taibbi would assume he was already gone.  I mean if we’re talking Occam’s razor, Baker having already having been fired (or quit) would have been the logical assumption, considering 1) Elon already fired half the company and then more left on their own or were fired for not wanting to be extremely hardcore, 2) Elon apparently had already called him “pretty bad,” and 3) Elon had publicly questioned twitter’s censorship and presumably knew at least some of the contents of the twitter files.  Which makes it weird (but not necessarily a conspiracy) that he apparently wasn’t fired until yesterday.

[Strike 5,261]

50 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

This is revisionist history.  Hunter Biden’s laptop randomly shows up at the tiny repair shop of a weirdo in Delaware?  There was certainly reason to be skeptical, at least about the alleged Ukraine e-mails.  As evidenced by the twitter files, the backlash against suppressing the story was moreso about the fact that it was being reported by a reputable source, not that they “knew” the story was true.
 

No, it's not.  There has never been anything suggesting it wasn't legit.  Even Hunter and Joe never contested it being legit.   The FBI had it before any of us even knew it existed.  They never said it wasn't legit.  Just because people such as yourself look for any excuse to doubt the legitimacy of things, some of us have more common sense approaches to such cases.  It was obvious to anyone looking at the evidence objectively that the laptop was legit.  And I'm not even going to get in to you now wanting to parse specific pieces of evidence from the laptop.  Talk about moving the goalposts.

[TimHauck 2,633]

9 minutes ago, Strike said:

No, it's not.  There has never been anything suggesting it wasn't legit.  Even Hunter and Joe never contested it being legit.   The FBI had it before any of us even knew it existed.  They never said it wasn't legit.  Just because people such as yourself look for any excuse to doubt the legitimacy of things, some of us have more common sense approaches to such cases.  It was obvious to anyone looking at the evidence objectively that the laptop was legit.  And I'm not even going to get in to you now wanting to parse specific pieces of evidence from the laptop.  Talk about moving the goalposts.

So it’s “common sense” to read one article and take it as gospel? OK boss.  Well now that I think about it, a lot of the righties here probably do that so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that you do too.

And yes, I don’t think it’s that hard to fake an e-mail.  So it was certainly plausible some elements of the laptop were legitimate (hence the FBI/Bidens not denying it’s authenticity) and others weren’t.

It also wasn’t “common sense” that a drunk 18-year old in North Dakota would be expecting a ride home from his mom at 3 AM, but you believed that one too…

[Strike 5,261]

4 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

So it’s “common sense” to read one article and take it as gospel? OK boss.  Well now that I think about it, a lot of the righties here probably do that so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that you do too.

And yes, I don’t think it’s that hard to fake an e-mail.  So it was certainly plausible some elements of the laptop were legitimate (hence the FBI/Bidens not denying it’s authenticity) and others weren’t.

It also wasn’t “common sense” that a drunk 18-year old in North Dakota would be expecting a ride home from his mom at 3 AM, but you believed that one too…

One article?  WTF are you talking about?  God it's mentally fatiguing trying to have a discussion with you.  You're all over the place and constantly moving goalposts because little of what you post is rooted in facts OR common sense.

Oh, and you never answered my question about why you were posting about people's streaming habits in a thread about sexual harassment earlier......

[TimHauck 2,633]

Just now, Strike said:

One article?  WTF are you talking about?  God it's mentally fatiguing trying to have a discussion with you.  You're all over the place and constantly moving goalposts because little of what you post is rooted in facts OR common sense.

Yes, one article.  Weren’t all of the initial reports on the laptop (when the censoring happened) based on the NY Post story?

[Strike 5,261]

Just now, TimHauck said:

Yes, one article.  Weren’t all of the initial reports on the laptop (when the censoring happened) based on the NY Post story?

No.

[TimHauck 2,633]

Just now, Strike said:

No.

Link?

[Strike 5,261]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Link?

Why do you keep ignoring a simple question, even deleting it from your responses?

Quote

Oh, and you never answered my question about why you were posting about people's streaming habits in a thread about sexual harassment earlier......

[TimHauck 2,633]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

Why do you keep ignoring a simple question, even deleting it from your responses?

I didn’t delete sh1t.  You must have edited your post.  Give me a link to reporting not based on the NY Post article within 1 day of the NY Post article, and I’ll answer.

[TimHauck 2,633]

You also never admitted to being wrong in the North Dakota thread

[Strike 5,261]

Just now, TimHauck said:

You also never admitted to being wrong in the North Dakota thread

Because I wasn't wrong. 

[TimHauck 2,633]

Just now, Strike said:

Because I wasn't wrong. 

Yes you were.  You thought he was just calling his mom for a ride home, lololol

[Strike 5,261]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I didn’t delete sh1t.  You must have edited your post.  Give me a link to reporting not based on the NY Post article within 1 day of the NY Post article, and I’ll answer.

Screw you.  I asked you first.  Multiple times.  And I really don't care.  You seemed frantic at that time, posting a bunch of times trying to insult a bunch of people.  I suspect you just forgot what thread you were in insulting people, which is just really sad.  But whatever.  Do what you gotta do FauciHack.

[nobody 2,580]

30 minutes ago, Strike said:

No, it's not.  There has never been anything suggesting it wasn't legit.  Even Hunter and Joe never contested it being legit.   The FBI had it before any of us even knew it existed.  They never said it wasn't legit.  Just because people such as yourself look for any excuse to doubt the legitimacy of things, some of us have more common sense approaches to such cases.  It was obvious to anyone looking at the evidence objectively that the laptop was legit.  And I'm not even going to get in to you now wanting to parse specific pieces of evidence from the laptop.  Talk about moving the goalposts.

Tim has no common sense.  If the dude saw a tiger loose in the street, he'd say to himself, "there's no video of evidence of this particular tiger attacking anyone.  Therefore, I can't assume it will attack me." He must be horrible to work with.  It doesn't seem like he has a practical bone in his body.

 

[TimHauck 2,633]

Just now, Strike said:

Screw you.  I asked you first.  Multiple times.  And I really don't care.  You seemed frantic at that time, posting a bunch of times trying to insult a bunch of people.  I suspect you just forgot what thread you were in insulting people, which is just really sad.  But whatever.  Do what you gotta do FauciHack.

Strike: why were you talking about something that wasn’t the subject of the thread?!?!? Answer: it had come up in conversation in the thread, and was related to discussion in a different thread about people stealing their media

Also Strike: goes off topic and interrupts an unrelated thread to ask why I went off topic in a different thread

lol

Now link me an article within 1 day of the NY Post article that was not based on the NY Post article itself.

Thanks for the spirited, intellectual discussion though!!

[jerryskids 6,593]

Tim, what's your gotcha here?  The NY Post broke the story; what's so important about somebody else starting from scratch and corroborating it within one day?   

[Strike 5,261]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Tim, what's your gotcha here?  The NY Post broke the story; what's so important about somebody else starting from scratch and corroborating it within one day?   

That's Tim.  He just ignores the  FACT that no Biden has ever contested the legitimacy of the laptop, nor has the FBI who had it before it was publicly known to exist. 

[TimHauck 2,633]

12 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Tim, what's your gotcha here?  The NY Post broke the story; what's so important about somebody else starting from scratch and corroborating it within one day?   

Strike’s claim is that anyone who didn’t think the laptop was real immediately is an idiot.  My claim is that the initial reports were all based on the NY Post story, so it would seem to be jumping to conclusions to immediately have that opinion based on one source.

Apparently “not denying” something is an admission of guilt now.  Better tell the legal system that.

[Strike 5,261]

And here's the thing Tim Hack.  There was a time in this country that even the hint of this laptop would have caused EVERY media outlet in this country scrambling to confirm the legitimacy of the laptop.  In this case, they either ignored the story or actively "reported"  lies about it.   So when the rest of us talk about how biased/incompetent/corrupt the MSM is, this is a perfect example.

[jonmx 2,424]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

 

The FBI was referenced as having seized the laptop in the original story, but they did not confirm its legitimacy.

Lol....no, the lying bastards claim that.  

[Strike 5,261]

6 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Strike’s claim is that anyone who didn’t think the laptop was real immediately is an idiot.  My claim is that the initial reports were all based on the NY Post story, so it would seem to be jumping to conclusions to immediately have that opinion based on one source.

Apparently “not denying” something is an admission of guilt now.  Better tell the legal system that.

Yep, because a credible news source put out a story, with receipts.  If there had been any credible refutation of their story I would say you would be justified in discounting it.  Hunter Biden didn't question it's legitimacy.  They had his signature.  He could have sued for a lot of money if they were wrong.  And lord knows he needs the money.  The FBI had the laptop.  They sat on it.   For once, use your common sense.