your current location is：Home > carHomecar

Legal experts said that Twitter was looking for evidence to prove that Elon Musk had tried to sabotage the financing plan, resulting in the completion of the $44billion acquisition of the social media company. In addition, the company is also investigating Musk's motivation to abandon the transaction.

According to the documents submitted to the Delaware equity court in the past two days, twitter issued dozens of civil subpoenas to a number of international banks this week, including Morgan Stanley's departments, the joint investors in the transaction (including Brookfield asset management) and Musk's advisers.

Morgan Stanley declined to comment. Brookfield has not responded yet. Musk and twitter representatives did not reply.

These subpoenas hope to ask for documents and communications related to the transaction and its financing, as well as any information related to the concerns of false twitter accounts. They also hope to learn from relevant parties about the potential impact of changes in the stock price of Tesla, an electric vehicle manufacturer under musk, on the transaction.

These subpoenas originated from the lawsuit filed by twitter against musk. The company hopes musk can continue to complete the transaction at the previously promised price of $54.20 per share. The five-day trial will open in the Delaware Chancery on October 17.

Experts said that these subpoenas showed that Twitter wanted to know about the communication between lenders, investors and consultants after musk signed the acquisition agreement at the end of April.

"They suspected that he was plotting to screw up the whole thing behind the scenes." Said minor Myers, a professor at the University of Connecticut law school.

Musk announced on July 8 that it would abandon the acquisition of twitter on the grounds that the other party violated the agreement and failed to provide relevant information about the false account. Twitter said that the fake account is just an interface, and the only really important problem is the terms of the agreement. Musk also said that the reason why he gave up the deal was that Twitter dismissed senior executives and a third of the talent acquisition team, in violation of its obligation to "basically and completely retain an important part of the existing business organization".

Legal experts said that if the financing fails, musk cannot be forced to complete the transaction - provided that the financing failure is not caused by him alone.

The dismissal of Bob swan is the focus of twitter subpoena. Swan is an operating partner of Andreessen Horowitz, a venture capital firm, and initially led the financing of Musk's acquisition of twitter. Antonio Gracias, who had been Musk's assistant for a long time, later took his place.

Brian Quinn, a professor at Boston College Law School, said twitter seemed to want to know, "whether Gracias played any role in facilitating financing, or simply slowed down the process."

Swan has not commented. Gracias did not respond.

Experts said that Twitter wanted to know the lenders' concerns about Twitter's false account data and whether it was as worrying as musk said.

Twitter asked investors for information about their communication with Musk's cronies on the twitter transaction, including Steve Jurvetson, a former member of Tesla's board of directors and a director of Musk's Rocket Company SpaceX.

Jurvetsson has not commented.

"Haha, twitter lawyers are sending subpoenas to friends around musk." Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir technologies, a big data company, wrote, "I have nothing to do with this. I just made a few sharp comments, but I also received a 'hereby ordered' document notice."

He described Twitter's subpoena as a "highly intrusive phishing investigation".

Lonsdale has not commented.

Theodore Kittila, a Delaware corporate litigation lawyer, said that Twitter wanted to know how musk privately expressed his concern about Twitter's false account through Twitter.

"They want to dig deep behind tweets." Kittila said, "that's why they investigated the email and tried to figure out the real conversation and the reason why musk terminated the transaction."

Musk also sent subpoenas to data analysis company concetrix solutions and content review company taskus USA in the past two days, but the contents of the subpoena were not disclosed.