After a year of preparation for response, key words in the SEC's cover letter:
"in anticipation of litigation" $TSLA
These documents reveal that as expected, Elon Musk's Twitter Sitter changed over time. It wasn't always Yun Huh. $TSLA
They also reveal John Hueston, Musk's former lawyer who disappeared mid-SEC case without formally withdrawing, writing in a manner consistent with someone who was fired (and also highlighting the conflict problem between Musk and $TSLA).
According to the SEC FOIA log, these requests about $TSLA never happened.
Long-since-departed General Counsel Jonathan Chang apologizes to the SEC because...they're being informed about the risk of a publicly traded company's CEO conducting himself in a manner that could lead to a civil action? $TSLA
This is just absurd. And the caption neglects to mention an entire lawsuit against Musk (not just Tesla, Inc.) the letter is connected to. $TSLA
"the Committee will continue to review past written communications"
What? $TSLA
Elon is too busy to speak with the SEC, which he would like to do *directly*, because he is *recovering from surgery* investors were never informed about. $TSLA
Before Yun Huh...
1. The SEC didn't even know who the Twitter Sitter was, and the Commission wrote the Consent Decree that created it! 2. The Twitter Sitter was apparently Jonathan Chang.
In which, as per usual, $TSLA (like all large companies) gets the opportunity to attempt to veto public records requests it doesn't like.
Huh, what could have possibly happened that would have made @samteller summarily resign from three positions as Elon Musk's right-hand man? Possibly a new SEC investigation, No. SF-4322, in which it appears that he was subpoenaed.
Care to comment, Sam?
It appears that just as the SEC closed out investigation number SF-4082, it opened a new one, SF-4322. It's unclear if that investigation is still pending, or how many others there are. $TSLA
Elon Musk's Twitter Sitter Game of $TSLA SEC Request Response Telephone
SEC -> Williams & Connolly LLP -> Hueston Hennigan LLP -> Jonathan Chang -> Yun Huh
Correction: These FOIA requests are listed in the FOIA logs, but for 2018 even though they have 2019 case numbers. They are from Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, which is handling the $TSLA "funding secured" litigation for the plaintiffs.
In which the centi-billionaire CEO wishes to bully the federal government personally.
The SEC specifically identified $TSLA lawyer Yun Huh as "Securities Counsel/Disclosure Counsel," making him a prime candidate for the official Twitter Sitter, at least at the point in time the letter was written on May 8, 2020.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman ordered $TSLA to file less redacted versions of some of the documents in its dispute with McKechnie Vehicle Components USA, Inc. They are now posted as the attachments to Document 38, here: plainsite.org/dockets/4hr0ar…
Tonight, we discovered that on March 8, 2021, a Santa Barbara County judge ruled against $TSLA, finding that a plaintiff had sufficiently alleged that its Autopilot marketing was deceptive.
There's no public access to this opinion.
...unless you visit the court in person or know to request it in advance by mail or e-mail. But how could you?
As it happens, we have been pressing the California Courts for months on records on Santa Barbara and Kern Counties. They are stalling.
Meanwhile, as the California Courts blame unspecified technical difficulties (that do not seem to plague Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Mateo, Stanislaus, Fresno, or other counties that provide electronic access), here are some of the relevant portions of the opinion.
There needs to be a new term for "technologies" like NFTs and central-bank-backed cryptocurrencies—perhaps something like "confusionware." These products are perpetual-motion-machine-type vaporware that exist *purely* based on the confusion of those who read about them.
It is disturbing when they attract the buy-in of mainstream media and government officials. But that is exactly what has been happening.
For example, this article by @macrocredit should be considered a wild joke—the article literally starts with the argument that "everybody's doing it"—but it's actually printed on Bloomberg's masthead. Key question: does Alberto Gallo know what a hash is?