Just about every serious news anchor attacked NBC. Not a chance they could resist such force.
Donald Trump
- Thread starter kaz7
- Start date
SebastianBlue
President, International Julian Alvarez Fan Club
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 57,736
It would actually be an authorisation from the board of directors and is an extremely difficult one to pull off given the regulations for post-SPAC merger and would be subject to SEC and legal oversight, which would most assuredly drag it out (if not scuttle it entirely) given those involved and that the board would have to make a strong case such alteration of the provision was to the benefit of the company and shareholders (which, given liquidation of Trump’s position would likely tank the stock price, would be very difficult to support). The board could face hefty fines, barring of business activity (including sitting on other company boards), and potential criminal charges for undertaking such an authorisation.
That said, as we have seen with so many Trump idiot zealots the past few years, there is a small possibility he could get the board of Trump Media Group to fall on his sword. Unlikely, but not impossible.
The more likely scenario is he receives an unsecured loan, which will have a clandestine agreement of repayment via proceeds of share sales later. Which is still illegal, but less obviously corrupt (thus will take longer to scrutinise and prosecute) and much more in keeping with how he has done things up until now.
If anyone is curious, this is the standard lock-up agreement used for SPAC investment in pre-merger.
This is one of my fields of expertise (20+ years of experience in financial analytics and 10+ in fraud detection and prevention), so I am happy to answer any questions about SPACs, post-merger regulation, or legal peril in this case.
Last edited:
TinFoilHat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jan 2023
- Messages
- 26,508
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Maddow is cool and expressive. I like her.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,066
Not quite, no.
@SebastianBlue adds the detail above @ #5864. He suggests SEC would try to squash it or at least drag it out.
SebastianBlue
President, International Julian Alvarez Fan Club
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 57,736
She speaks to the concerns many of us have expressed in here of the parallels between the response to the Beer Hall Putsch and the response to the 6th January Insurrection.
When you don’t unambiguously show that such attempts at the destruction of government will not be tolerated, you only empower and embolden those that tried before (and expand their following).
The whole story of the Jan 6 riot and the subsequent attempts to negate the election or at least deny it show the fragility of democracy. If a sizeable chunk of your population withdraw consent, things get very hairy indeed.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
She's done some decent podcasts. 'Ultra' is pretty wild (Sitting members of congress planning to overthrow the government and end democracy - sound familiar?), and 'Bagman' is a really interesting story (Spiro Agnew).
Rachel Maddow Presents: Ultra | an MSNBC original podcast
Sitting members of Congress aiding and abetting a plot to overthrow the government. Insurrectionists criminally charged with plotting to end American democracy for good. Justice Department prosecutors under crushing political pressure. Rachel Maddow Presents: Ultra is the all-but-forgotten true...
www.msnbc.com
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,066
Yeah the board of directors would have to recommend it but it would have to be in the interest of all three of; the company, the shareholders as well as the share price. Not a chance that happens unless the Board want to end up in prison.