Grobow v. Perot, 539 A.2d 180 (Del. 1988).

Directors in a business should:

• act in good faith;
• act in the best interests of the corporation;
• act on an informed basis;
• not be wasteful;
• not involve self-interest (duty of loyalty concept plays a role here).

It is a legal obligation.

Nope. There are these obligations but it is not illegal for a CEO to perform sub optimally, or even make multi year losses.

Disagree. Diplomatic channels should always be open because alternative forms of communication are usually violent.

Have you not seen the videos that come out of there?

Well, the FBI have a collection of CDs and hard drives with labels like [name] + young [name] so they know about the kompramat.

I highly doubt Harris has a CD though.

What blackmail does Netanyahu have on the guy?

Ask Epstein

AIPAC is a pipeline of campaign funding directly from Israel.

Direction and Policies come from Israel, bit does money come directly from Israel?

The oil companies could fund individual agent provocateurs of JSO directly. Whoever decided to attack the general public is doing big oil a big favor.

It would be in the oil industries interest to fund agent provocateurs to become lightning rods for both willing protestors and public anger.

Just Stop Oil’s primary source of funding was donations from the US-based Climate Emergency Fund. Through that fund, a notable donor to the group has been Aileen Getty, a descendant of the Getty family which founded the Getty Oil company.

But we generally only see the characters they play.

5 years ago Will Smith may have been on that list.

And look at all of his clients now in jail.

Why so many actors?

This is the Environment Act 2021, drawn up while the tories were still in power.

It is not a win.

Friends of the Earth said it represented a reduction in protections, rather than an increase; that the proposed environment watchdog will lack teeth and instead needs full independence and enforcement powers

Are you saying the image above is fake?

Fueling a slowdown? Doesn’t sound right.

Notice the language here, he says “the reporting” was not disinformation, nothing about whether the laptop itself was part of any disinformation campaign.

What? If reporting the laptop contents is not misinformation then the laptop contents are not misinformation.

And why have you abandoned the central theme of your claim that the FBI pressured them about the laptop?

My claim that the FBI deliberately mislead Twitter and Facebook was detailed above with accompanying evidence. You’ve brought nothing new to contradict that claim.

I’m not even sure he said what you’re claiming he said

In a separate situation, the FBI warned us about a potential Russian disinformation operation about the Biden family and Burisma in the lead up to the 2020 election. That fall, when we saw a New York Post story reporting on corruption allegations involving then-Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s family, we sent that story to fact-checkers for review and temporarily demoted it while waiting for a reply. It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story.

“well, zuckerberg said it must be true!”? Please tell me we’re not there.

Well, he wrote that in a public letter to the House Judiciary committee. Let’s see the FBI disagree or arrest him for misinformation.

some emails have been verified. But not all.

The damaging ones have. In particular the “10% for the big guy” email is genuine.

Again, you’ve yet to actually establish that [Facebook censoring (incorrectly identified) misinformation] is the case.

See Zuckerberg’s statement

it could still be part of a Russian disinformation campaign

Nothing raised in that letter is relevant. There was no hacking. E-mails have been independently verified. The story is independent of Giuliani.

There is absolutely no evidence of Russian involvement between the point that the laptop was submitted for repair in April 2019 and the FBI subpoenaing the laptop in December 2019.

The FBI suggesting to facebook and twitter that the laptop was Russian Propaganda is pure misinformation.

Of course the public can only respond to a story after it has been released.

We are discussing Facebook censoring (incorrectly identified) misinformation.

The response letter of ex spies had nothing do to with Facebook’s actions, which were actually based on misleading FBI warnings.

Again, at no point have you established as a fact that it was not Russian propaganda.

You want me to prove a negative? Ok. No russians were involved in fixing Hunter’s laptop.

contradicting your claim that the public misconception about it was due to FBI planting the seeds.

I made no such claim. In fact the opposite is true. The lack of public communication by the FBI about the origins of the laptop story is what is damaging.

I gave you a letter of a bunch of intelligence officially pointing out how it has the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.

None of which were true, because it has been proven in court via serial numbers that the laptop is genuine. Claims of Russian propaganda are pure misinformation.

“the laptop is his” which we agree is not in dispute,

We agree this is true, so how then do the Russians fit into your conspiracy theory?

Again, read the fucking letter.

Again, the letter was sent 5 days after censorship began. It is not relevant.

Did you read the letter i posted? This is where the whole “Russian disinformation” public perception comes from,

Your letter is not relevant. We are discussing why Facebook immediately started censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story published on the 14th October 2020. This has absolutely nothing to do with a disinformation letter released 5 days later on the 19th.

questionable timeline

What are you questioning?

where the FBI plants some vague seeds

Referenced directly by Zuckerberg as the specific reason for censorship.

and the public is smart enough to make the connection.

No, the Facebook content team were duped into connecting the laptop story to Russian propaganda.

Maybe this is because it was Russian disinformation, which is why the FBI never corrected it.

OK. I’d love to hear you arguing this. At what point were the Russians involved in repairing Hunter Biden’s laptop?

it’s not their job to correct public opinion.

It’s not the FBI’s job to run PR interference for a politician’s son, but that’s exactly what they did. Court documents prove they had foreknowledge and proof that Hunter’s laptop was genuine.