Twits Running Twitter

Uncle Gizmo said:
Chowdhury noted that:-

“It would be interesting to see how he’d (Musk) run a company with no employees.”
Click to expand...

Well Chowdhury, here's your first insight:-


If you are one of the people types described, that produce nothing, and just manipulate, twist and politic your way to the top of the tree, then I think you definitely should leave Twitter!!!
 
Uncle Gizmo said:
I liked your speculation....
Click to expand...
I just hope that I don't have to turn-in my membership card to the conspiracy club and give-up my tinfoil hat.
tinfoilhat.gif
 
Last edited:
The Twitter employees can go join all those people who moved to Canada when Trump got elected:) They need to get out there and shop their resumes before the crowd does or there won't be any jobs left. and they'll have to stay if Musk has a place for them.
 
Watch the crocodile tear's in Twitter head office:- time index 3:40...


Am I witnessing snowflakes coming to terms with something they don't like?
 
Anthony D. Romero, ACLU executive director, had the following reaction:

“While Elon Musk is an ACLU card-carrying member and one of our most significant supporters, there’s a lot of danger having so much power in the hands of any one individual. In today’s world, a small handful of private tech companies — including Twitter — play a profound and unique role in enabling our right to express ourselves online. Social media is a critical tool used to share ideas, express opinions, and consume information that has real-life impacts in discourse in the offline world. We should be worried about any powerful central actor, whether it’s a government or any wealthy individual — even if it’s an ACLU member — having so much control over the boundaries of our political speech online.” (emphasis added)
Click to expand...
Seems the ACLU, a supposed protector of free-speech, has not apparently expressed similar concerns about the power of billionaire individuals controlling the likes of the Washington Post, Atlantic, Bloomberg, etc. This would also apply to the New York Times and Twitter (pre-Musk) which have been managed by a left leaning cabal suppressing conservative thought.

The NAACP on Monday issued a statement from its president, Derrick Johnson, calling for former President Trump to remain off the social media platform Twitter following Elon Musk’s purchase of the company.

“Mr. Musk: free speech is wonderful, hate speech is unacceptable. Disinformation, misinformation and hate speech have NO PLACE on Twitter,” the statement said, shortly after it was announced that the Tesla CEO had reached a deal to purchase Twitter.

The article goes on to state the following:

“Do not allow 45 to return to the platform. Do not allow Twitter to become a petri dish for hate speech, or falsehoods that subvert our democracy,” the civil rights group’s memo added, referencing Trump and saying that “lives are at risk, and so is American democracy.”
Click to expand...
So the NAACP believes that it can tell Musk what should and what should not be allowed on Twitter. Furthermore, the NAACP continues with the mindless tired Democratic mantra that Twitter must "suppress" free speech under the guise that anything the NAACP does not like constitutes: "hate speech, or falsehoods that subvert our democracy". As with the ACLU, where was the NAACP on Twitter being used to promote left wing causes while suppressing, at the same time, conservative thought? It is those on the left who are suppressing "our democracy".
 
The corporate board of Twitter and Musk have reached a deal. But as a last-gasp questioning, Twitter today is trading in the vicinity of $49.69. Theoretically, the stock should trade at only one price $54.20 pending Musk's actual acquisition of the company. So, it you feel brave, you can make nearly $5 a share by buying and holding. The fact that it is not trading at $54.20, is worth pondering.
tinfoilhat.gif
 
Last edited:
AccessBlaster said:
The ACLU is a TOOL of the left, like BLM they have their own agenda that has nothing to do with fairness or equity.
Click to expand...
Very sad. The same with the NAACP. King would also be "turning over in his grave" since the NAACP is no longer about civil rights, but is now promoting decision making based on skin color (racism).
 
Maybe Musk should rethink the "charities" he supports. I did, long ago. With the exception of St. Jude, the only charities I support these days are the ones that have a local footprint and whose effects I can see. The ones that provide food, shelter, clothing, and training for local people in need. I stopped supporting Catholic Charities years ago when I realized that they were actively facilitating illegal immigration. How can I give money to an institution involved in facilitating criminal activity? I donate replaced appliances and serviceable furnishings to Habitat for Humanity. Other household goods to Good Will.
 
Last edited:
www.boston.com

Elizabeth Warren calls Elon Musk's Twitter deal 'dangerous for our democracy'

Soon after Elon Musk reached a deal on Monday to buy Twitter for about $44 billion, Sen. Elizabeth Warren blasted the business arrangement.
www.boston.com
The comments by Elizabeth Warren are especially egregious. Jeff Bezois, another billionaire bought the Washington Post for a mere $250 million. The Washington Post is essentially the propaganda arm of the Democratic party. Micheal Bloomberg spent over $100 million on an ant-Trump vendetta. Not to be outdone, Mark Zuckerberg spent approximately $419 million to manipulate the 2020 election process to favor Biden. I suspect that Elizabeth Warren has nothing negative to say about these actions as being dangerous to democracy.
 
Steve R. said:
www.boston.com

Elizabeth Warren calls Elon Musk's Twitter deal 'dangerous for our democracy'

Soon after Elon Musk reached a deal on Monday to buy Twitter for about $44 billion, Sen. Elizabeth Warren blasted the business arrangement.
www.boston.com
The comments by Elizabeth Warren are especially egregious. Jeff Bezois, another billionaire bought the Washington Post for a mere $250 million. The Washington Post is essentially the propaganda arm of the Democratic party. Micheal Bloomberg spent over $100 million on an ant-Trump vendetta. Not to be outdone, Mark Zuckerberg spent approximately $419 million to manipulate the 2020 election process to favor Biden. I suspect that Elizabeth Warren has nothing negative to say about these actions as being dangerous to democracy.
Click to expand...
That's because Pocahontas speaks with forked tongue.
 
AngelSpeaks said:
That's because Pocahontas speaks with forked tongue.
Click to expand...
Coincidentally, on the Tucker Carson show tonight; Jimmy Fallon, a comedian, had a great Warren one-liner.--> "Warren sold me a red Cherokee, but it turned out to be a white Suburban".
 
And the winner is?
Perhaps the dumbest observation yet. Ari Melber is "concerned" that Musk's control of Twitter (at the 1 minute mark), may sway a future election. Melber must have missed that social media did exactly that to sway the prior 2020 election to favor of Biden. I suspect that once Melber becomes aware of that, that he will never apologize for that clueless diatribe.
video.foxnews.com

Gutfeld: Welcome to the freedom party lefties | Fox News Video

'Gutfeld!' panel reacts to the 'insane' media response to Elon Musk buying Twitter.
video.foxnews.com video.foxnews.com
www.theblaze.com

MSNBC host brutally mocked for lack of self-awareness when expressing concern over Elon Musk buying Twitter | Blaze Media

MSNBC host Ari Melber was slapped with a brutal lesson in self-awareness on Monday after expressing fear that Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter would result in election manipulation. What are the details? Melber, speaking on his show "The Beat With Ari Melber," complained that Musk could...
www.theblaze.com www.theblaze.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Steve R.
Musk's Acquisition of Twitter Drags On
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
4,430
SachAccess
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom