• EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    As I noted elsewhere, the latter argument about him having to sell to bail out x is a compelling argument. That their values are inherently tied together by virtue of him being owner I’m less convinced about because people claim the stock prices are linked, but have no provided no evidence that it is the case, despite it being a relatively easy thing to prove mathematically.

    • NotNotMike@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      The mathematical proof is that Elon owns several hundred million Tesla shares and his holding or selling of those shares will impact the share price of the judge’s shares. Up or down, the price will be impacted, that’s just how markets work. If he is forced to sell those shares to fund X, the judge will be impacted.

      Also, you shouldn’t really need an exact proof for the judge’s recusal. There is a chance he is impacted by the result of the case in a significant monetary way, so why not pass the case to a judge who doesn’t have these connections. This isn’t the last judge in Texas (just one of the most partisan) so there is far greater upsides to recusal than downsides.

      Why risk the optics of impropriety when you don’t have to?

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah the other comment reeks of “just asking a question” everyone with two braincells knows the companies are related. They just want you to waste your time doing the reading they should be doing of they’re actually curious.