Can Elon Musk Save Free Speech?

There was never any doubt, but now there is certainty: Twitter isn’t about free speech, it isn’t about shareholder value, it isn’t a market driven private enterprise and it sure as hell isn’t about democracy. It is a thought control platform.

For weeks, Elon Musk had been tweeting complaints about Twitter’s censorship policies, particularly after the Babylon Bee had their account suspended for referring to Assistant HHS Secretary Rachel Levine as a “biological male” after she was named Woman of the Year by USA Today.

On April 4th, Elon Musk announced that he had taken a 9.2% stake in Twitter, making him the largest shareholder, causing share prices to instantly shoot up 25%.

On April 9th, he was awarded a seat on the board of directors on the condition that he not own more than 14.9% of the company’s outstanding stock, after which he declined the seat.

On the morning of April 14th, Elon Musk offered to buy out Twitter for $43 billion or $54.20 per share, telling TED chief, Chris Anderson, “This is not a way to make money. My strong intuitive sense is that having a public platform that is maximally trusted and broadly inclusive is extremely important to the future of civilization.”

This was immediately met with absolute panic among Twitter’s pink-haired employees, who equate Free Speech with Fascism.


Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a large shareholder was also quick to reject the offer, which sent share prices tumbling to $25.

Bitcoin investor Cameron Winklevoss tweeted, “They would rather self-immolate than give up their censorship programs. This shows you how deeply committed they are to Orwellian control of the narratives and global discourse. Scary.” 

To which Musk replied, “If the current Twitter board takes actions contrary to shareholder interests, they would be breaching their fiduciary duty. The liability they would thereby assume would be titanic in scale.”

Normally, in the absence of a better offer, Twitter’s board is obligated by its fiduciary duty to shareholders to accept Musk’s offer. Instead, Twitter CEO, Parag Agrawal met with employees and assured them that he would not allow Musk to interfere with their “culture” (of censorship).

These same people losing their minds over Elon Musk buying Twitter had no problem with Mark Zuckerberg spending over $400 million to interfere in the 2020 Elections by paying the salaries of polling station workers and the lawyers defending his actions.


On the morning of the 15th, Vanguard announced that it had bought additional Twitter stock, giving them 10.3% ownership, thus edging out Musk as the largest shareholder.

“How long until @Twitter finds a reason to kick @elonmusk off the platform he’s trying to buy?” tweeted Madison Cawthorn.

Later that day, Twitter’s board blocked the shareholders from voting on Musk’s buying the company, choosing unanimously to tank its own stock price with a “poison pill” defense to prevent him from acquiring the company.

“Twitter won’t even let its shareholders vote. Imagine what they are doing to our elections!” Tweeted Mike Cernovich.

Twitter insiders screwed over their shareholders, crashed their stock and opened the company up to massive lawsuits in order to prevent Elon Musk from running Twitter in a way that won’t rig elections or censor their political opponents.

However, the coup de grâce, also on Friday was the announcement that the SEC and the DOJ had launched a “joint investigation” into Musk that was timed to thwart his bid for Twitter, according to insider reports.

El Salvador’s savvy young president, Nayib Bukele tweeted, “Now, the entire system is going to go after him. He showed his hand. They can’t let him be the richest man in the world anymore. Everyone interested in the future of humanity should side with him.”