Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter has spurred a lot of salty takes on corporate media, and some of the saltiest takes of all have come via CNN En Español and anchor Juan Carlos López.
Watch the report in its entirety, as López seemingly auditions for the 9PM hour on the main network
JUAN CARLOS LOPEZ: Elon Musk has come to terms on the acquisition of Twitter. But he’s not the owner yet. Look at what he published today. He says that Truth Social, which is former President Trump’s social media outlet- “a terrible name”, he says- exists because Twitter censored free speech.
That’s a huge debate and Musk is an expert at triggering these arguments. But let’s talk about the deal that Elon Musk made in order to purchase Twitter. He’s already closed the deal in order to acquire that company but he’s not its owner yet, nor does he have control of the firm.
The transaction was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and contains 73 pages. It establishes that the deal must be closed- must be finalized, by October 24th of this year. To wit, within six months. And it provides for an additional six-month continuance if regulatory requirements in the U.S. and the E.U. have not been met by that date, or if Twitter stockholders reject the final deal. They would then have to pay one billion dollars to the firm created by Musk in order to conduct the transaction, called Parent, and if it is Elon Musk who does not comply with the agreed upon terms, if it were the case that all requirements were met and he no longer wants to purchase, then he would have to pay (Twitter) one billion dollars.
This is to say, so that we’re all clear, for those who are thrilled because they think that Twitter will now change hands overnight, well- Twitter does not yet belong to Elon Musk, it is not under his control, and will not be for at least another six months.
The deal also includes a clause according to which the investor, this would be Musk, can tweet about the transaction so long as he does not disparage the company or its representatives, something which has already happened. Musk has already published messages which have led to attacks against the chief legal counsel, and who herself decided the censorship, for example- the restriction against the incendiary language of such individuals as Donald Trump or the case of the laptop (belonging to) President Biden’s son- Hunter Biden.
It bears noting that this is the same Juan Carlos López that found The New York Post’s exposé on the Laptop From Hell to be “slanderous”, dismissed the story as Russian disinformation, and was quick to justify its censorship when he said:
Doubts over the veracity of the material have led to their diffusion being limited by Facebook and Twitter, although Twitter has since modified their position.
We’ve not yet seen any corrective reporting from López as to the provenance of the laptop, the veracity of the Post’s reporting as confirmed by The New York Times and The Washington Post, or of any subsequent revelations emerging from the consensus-authenticated Laptop From Hell.
The rest of the story is just comical, from the excessive observations that Musk isn’t owner yet to the generous redefinition of “disparagement” down to Musk’s mild criticism of the decision to suspend the New York Post and stifle sharing of the Biden laptop story. What, exactly, did Musk say that triggered López in such a manner? Here it was:
Suspending the Twitter account of a major news organization for publishing a truthful story was obviously incredibly inappropriate.
Take note that López didn’t show a tear sheet of that tweet.
This…is CNN En Español.