mega tres You may have been tempted to believe Donald Trump when he swore, along with some of his Republican colleagues, to protect Social Security. If so, the joke may be on you. That concern emerged Monday when Rep. Mike Lee (R-Utah) uncorked a tweet thread on X labeling Social Security “a classic bait and switch” and “an outdated, mismanaged system.” Twenty-three minutes after Lee posted the first of his tweets, it was retweeted by Elon Musk , who has been vested by Trump with a portfolio to root out inefficiencies in the government. Musk led his retweet with the comment “interesting thread”; if that wasn’t an explicit endorsement, it matched his way of amplifying others’ tweets, tending to give them credibility within the Musk-iverse. Lee’s tweet thread, along with Musk’s apparent concurrence, serves as an outline of the arguments the GOP may use to undermine faith in Social Security, the better to soften it up for “reforms” that will translate into costs imposed on the retirees, disabled workers and their dependents. I recently reported on all the ways that Trump could quietly or secretly undermine his pledge to protect Social Security . Lee’s thread and Musk’s apparent endorsement are different — they amount to a frontal attack on the program. While delving into Lee’s screed, we should keep in mind that he’s a leader of the cabal with the knives out for Social Security. As I’ve reported , during his first successful Senate campaign in 2010, he unapologetically declared, “It will be my objective to phase out Social Security, to pull it out by the roots.” Lee said that was why he was running for the Senate, and added, “Medicare and Medicaid are of the same sort. They need to be pulled up.” So here he is, right out of the box. Lee’s attack has four basic components. One is to bemoan the fact that Social Security is funded mostly by a tax, which he asserts the government can use for any purpose — not necessarily to cover retirement and disability benefits. Another is to point out that the program’s reserves aren’t stored in individual accounts with workers’ names on them, but collected in “a huge account called the ‘Social Security Trust Fund.’” A third is to claim that “the government routinely raids this fund ... They take ‘your money’” and use it for whatever the current Congress deems ‘necessary.’” And a fourth is to complain that the trust fund is mismanaged: “If you had put the same amount into literally ANYTHING else—a mutual fund, real estate, even a savings account—you’d be better off by the time you reached retirement age, even if the government kept some of it!” He states: “Your ‘investment’ in Social Security can give you a return lower than inflation.” None of these is a new argument — they’ve been swirling around the conservative and Republican fever swamp like a miasma for decades. They’ve been consistently refuted and debunked. Lee can’t be unaware of that. Some of his arguments have a tiny nugget of truth at their center, but in his hands are twisted and manipulated out of recognition. Consequently, we can label his claims for what they are: Lies. Let’s examine them one by one. (I asked Lee via a message at his office to justify his tweets , but haven’t heard back.) Yes, Social Security is funded by taxes. So what? Lee’s salary as a senator is funded by taxes, too. Does that make it illegitimate? It’s true that once a tax is collected Congress can decided to spend it however it wishes. But it’s also true that the payroll tax was enacted jointly with the provisions of the Social Security Act that designated the revenue for Social Security benefits. As Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo observed in 1937, writing for the majority in a 7-2 opinion upholding the constitutionality of Social Security , it was clear that Congress intended the payroll tax to fund the benefits, for lawmakers “would have been unwilling to pass one without the other.” It’s proper to note here that no one has ever proposed diverting Social Security revenues for any other purpose without recompense — except Republicans such as Lee. George W. Bush proposed converting Social Security into private accounts, which would have been tantamount to such a diversion — and a gift to Wall Street money managers eager to get their hands on the program’s trillions of dollars. But Bush’s 2005 privatization plan was stillborn and he quickly abandoned it. It’s also true that the program’s revenues aren’t stored in individual accounts but in the trust fund. That’s right and proper: Social Security is a shared benefit; no one can know in advance what any worker’s benefits will be. They’re pegged to career earnings, but low-income workers get higher benefits relative to wages than higher-income workers. They’re also related to a worker’s personal and family situation — spouses, dependents, health and so on. It also makes sense to invest the program’s revenues in a shared account, because large investments tend to perform better over time than those under the control of individuals, not least because that minimizes transaction costs. That brings us to the notion that the government “routinely raids” the trust funds (there are two, actually — one to cover old-age benefits and the other to cover disability payments — but they’re generally treated as a single combined fund). The trust funds currently hold about $2.8 trillion in assets, all invested in U.S. Treasury securities. Holding a T-bond, as anyone with a slightest knowledge of government fiscal policy is aware, means the bondholder has lent the money to the government, which can use it for any purpose Congress chooses and which must pay interest on the bond. Over the years, the government has used the money to build roads and other infrastructure and provide services. Using the borrowed money for these purposes allows the government to do so without raising income taxes, which would hit the wealthy harder than middle- or low-income Americans. Lee should ask his well-heeled patrons if they’d prefer to pay higher taxes because the government couldn’t borrow from the Social Security reserves. Anyone have any doubts about how they’d answer? Me neither. In any event, the financial transactions related to the buying and redemption of the program’s treasury holdings are fully disclosed every year by the program trustees in their annual report . What about Lee’s assertion that investing in “ANYTHING else—a mutual fund, real estate, even a savings account,” would make you “better off by the time you reached retirement age.” This statement is as solid a compendium of financial ignorance as one might wish, even coming from a U.S. Senator. To begin with, if Lee thinks the Social Security trust fund should be invested in something other than treasuries, he can take that up with his colleagues on Capitol Hill. They’re the ones who have mandated, by law, that the trust fund can be invested only in treasuries. Over the years, proposals to widen the portfolio have been raised and abandoned, for several reasons. Some were concerned about the potential conflicts of interest inherent in a government program investing in the stock market; others that the returns from market investments are too volatile. Savings accounts? Is Lee kidding? The rate on savings accounts offered to the average customer of Bank of America, to choose a commercial bank at random, is 0.01% a year. As I write, a 10-year treasury bond yields about 4.2% annually. As for Lee’s assertion that “Social Security can give you a return lower than inflation,” the fact is that Social Security benefits are adjusted for inflation every year. They’re also lifetime benefits. Try to find an annuity plan that pays inflation-adjusted benefits for the life of the annuity holder and his or her spouse — for all but the richest people, it would be unaffordable or at least uneconomical. Lee also reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about Social Security as a program. It’s not just a retirement program, but a combined retirement and insurance program. Disabled workers — and their dependents — are entitled to benefits well beyond their contributions; the families of workers who die before retirement age receive benefits that include payments to children through age 17 — through age 18 if they’re in school. If those benefits were based on the balances in a worker’s individual account, then the families of those who have suffered untimely deaths could amount to a pittance, running out while still needing help. Lee concludes by urging his followers to “acknowledge the truth: Social Security as it now exists isn’t a retirement plan; it’s a tax plan with retirement benefits as an afterthought.” This is an outright falsehood. As it now exists, Social Security isn’t just a retirement plan, but a disability program. It’s funded by taxes, but to call retirement benefits “an afterthought” is so wrong it’s frightening. What should be think about all this? Lee is a member of the Senate majority; his proposals could be a real threat to the program. The fact that they garnered an “attaboy” from Elon Musk should be their death knell. Let’s hope so.

Jimmy Carter Dies: A Look at the Love Story Between Jimmy and Wife Rosalynn

AI's next frontier: Selling your intentions before you know themSpecial counsel Jack Smith moved to abandon two criminal cases against on Monday, acknowledging that Trump’s will preclude attempts to federally prosecute him for retaining classified documents or trying to overturn his 2020 election defeat. The decision was inevitable, since longstanding Justice Department policy says sitting presidents cannot face Yet it was still a momentous finale to an unprecedented chapter in political and law enforcement history, as federal officials attempted to hold accountable a former president while he was simultaneously running for another term. Trump emerges indisputably victorious, having successfully delayed the investigations through legal maneuvers and then winning reelection despite indictments that described his actions as a threat to the country’s constitutional foundations. “I persevered, against all odds, and WON,” Trump exulted in a post on Truth Social, his social media website. He also said that “these cases, like all of the other cases I have been forced to go through, are empty and lawless, and should never have been brought.” The judge in the election case granted prosecutors’ dismissal request. A decision in the documents case was still pending on Monday evening. The outcome makes it clear that, when it comes to a president and criminal accusations, nothing supersedes the voters’ own verdict. In court filings, Smith’s team emphasized that the move to end their prosecutions was not a reflection of the merit of the cases but a recognition of the legal shield that surrounds any commander in chief. “That prohibition is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Government stands fully behind,” prosecutors said in one of their filings. They wrote that Trump’s return to the White House “sets at odds two fundamental and compelling national interests: on the one hand, the Constitution’s requirement that the President must not be unduly encumbered in fulfilling his weighty responsibilities ... and on the other hand, the Nation’s commitment to the rule of law.” In this situation, “the Constitution requires that this case be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated,” they concluded. Smith’s team said it was leaving intact charges against two co-defendants in the classified documents case — Trump valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira — because “no principle of temporary immunity applies to them.” Steven Cheung, Trump’s incoming White House communications director, said Americans “want an immediate end to the political weaponization of our justice system and we look forward to uniting our country.” Trump has long described the investigations as politically motivated, and he has vowed to fire Smith as soon as he takes office in January. Now he will start his second term free from criminal scrutiny by the government that he will lead. The election case brought last year was once seen as one of the most serious legal threats facing Trump as he tried to reclaim the White House. He was to Joe Biden in 2020, an effort that climaxed with his supporters’ violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. But the case quickly stalled amid legal fighting over Trump’s sweeping claims of immunity from prosecution for acts he took while in the White House. The U.S. Supreme Court in July ruled for the first time that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution, and sent the case back to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine which allegations in the indictment, if any, could proceed to trial. The case was just beginning to pick up steam again in the trial court in the weeks leading up to this year’s election. Smith’s team in October filed a lengthy brief laying out new evidence it planned to use against him at trial, accusing him of “resorting to crimes” in an increasingly desperate effort to overturn the will of voters after he lost to Biden. In dismissing the case, Chutkan acknowledged prosecutors’ request to do so “without prejudice,” raising the possibility that they could try to bring charges against Trump when his term is over. She wrote that is “consistent with the Government’s understanding that the immunity afforded to a sitting President is temporary, expiring when they leave office.” But such a move may be barred by the statute of limitations, and Trump may also try to pardon himself while in office. The separate case involving classified documents had been widely seen as legally clear cut, especially because the conduct in question occurred after Trump left the White House and lost the powers of the presidency. The indictment included dozens of felony counts accusing him of illegally hoarding classified records from his presidency at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and obstructing federal efforts to get them back. He has pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing. The case quickly became snarled by delays, with U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon slow to issue rulings — which favored Trump’s strategy of pushing off deadlines in all his criminal cases — while also entertaining defense motions and arguments that experts said other judges would have dispensed with without hearings. In May, she indefinitely canceled the trial date amid a series of unresolved legal issues before dismissing the case outright two months later. Smith’s team appealed the decision, but now has given up that effort. Trump faced two other state prosecutions while running for president. One of them, a New York case involving hush money payments, on felony charges of falsifying business records. It was the first time a former president had been found guilty of a crime. The sentencing in that case is on hold as Trump’s lawyers try to have the conviction dismissed before he takes office, arguing that letting the verdict stand will interfere with his presidential transition and duties. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office is fighting the dismissal but has indicated that it would be until Trump leaves office. Bragg, a Democrat, has said the solution needs to balance the obligations of the presidency with “the sanctity of the jury verdict.” Trump was also indicted in Georgia along with 18 others accused of participating in a sprawling scheme to illegally overturn the 2020 presidential election there. Any trial appears unlikely there while Trump holds office. The prosecution already after an appeals court agreed to review whether to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis over her with the special prosecutor she had hired to lead the case. Four defendants have pleaded guilty after reaching deals with prosecutors. Trump and the others have pleaded not guilty.

BATON ROUGE, La. -- Louisiana’s GOP-dominated legislature passed tax cuts on personal and corporate income on Friday in exchange for a statewide sales tax increase, a mixed bag of success for Gov. Jeff Landry, whose original tax revision plans faced mounting resistance from lawmakers and lobbyists amid hard fiscal realities . The final passage of the bulk of Landry's proposed measures winds down a special legislative session called Nov. 6 by the governor and his allies. They said their purpose was to make the state’s tax code more business friendly, bring jobs and reverse trends of outward migration from the state. It was the third special legislative session called by Landry, a Republican, since he assumed office in January. The package of legislation includes a permanent $2,000 raise for teachers and doubles standard deductions for residents aged 65 and older. It raises the state sales tax to 5%, while granting Landry’s wish for lower personal and corporate income tax rates. It repeals the 0.275% corporate franchise tax, a levy on businesses operating on the state worth more than $500 million in annual revenue. The state's new corporate income tax rate will be a flat 5.5%, reducing the highest tier from 7.5%. Landry had wanted a 3.5% flat rate. Lawmakers approved a flat 3% individual income tax rate and nearly tripled the standard deduction for individuals. Previously, the personal income tax rate had stood at 4.25% for individuals earning $50,000 or more. “What I’m very confident in is that everyone’s going to have more money in their pocket at the end of the day with the personal income tax reductions,” said Republican Rep. Julie Emerson, who spearheaded legislation to flatten the income tax rate. With the personal income tax reductions reducing annual revenue by $1.3 billion, Landry’s original plan had called for applying sales taxes to dozens of services like car-washing, dog-grooming and lobbying. He also sought to eliminate large tax incentives for the restoration of historic buildings and the film industry. Those proposals were defeated, leading to a bigger sales tax hike than Landry initially proposed. Louisiana already had the highest combined state and average local sales tax in the country at 9.56%, according to the Tax Foundation, a think tank favored by conservatives. ___ Associated Press writer Kevin McGill contributed to this report. ___ _____ Brook is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Brook on the social platform X: @jack_brook96KRA issues amnesty to Kenyans burdened by interest, penalties

Thanksgiving is almost upon us, and given that we're fresh off one of the most contentious and politically divisive election seasons of our time, it's probably not realistic to expect a holiday totally free of drama. If you're one of the lucky few whose family is united around political issues, treasure those peaceful conversations at the Thanksgiving table; for the rest of us, it can be challenging to know how best to talk to loved ones (or, to be real, tolerated-out-of-necessity ones) about anything substantive. Beides, for many of us, these issues aren't “just politics”; they directly affect the way we live our lives and the safety and happiness of our families and friends. While tapping out of such conversations doesn't feel like a responsible or realistic option in 2024, it feels equally dismal to simply accept a tense or outright hostile environment during what should be a joyful and grateful time of year. So, for some expert guidance on this issue, Vogue spoke to Dr. Audra Nuru, a professor of communication and family studies at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota, about how to engage loved ones with differing views in a productive way (and, just as importantly, how to set boundaries when it feels like engagement is no longer good for you and your mental health). Find her thoughts—and some sample scripts she's provided for different conversations—below. Vogue : How do you recommend preparing for an event or gathering that might include viewpoints you disagree with or find harmful? Dr. Audra Nuru : It's true that those kinds of encounters can benefit from a bit of preparation. I like to think of it like packing for a trip to a new and unfamiliar place—you want to be prepared for the expected, but also pack with an open mind for the unexpected. So, before heading into that event, take some time to reflect on what topics might feel a bit sensitive for you, almost like checking the weather forecast so you can pack accordingly. Remember, everyone is coming to the table with their own unique experiences and perspectives. Embrace those differences with curiosity and kindness. And of course, it's always wise to set healthy boundaries—that's like having a good map and a reliable guide to help you navigate any unfamiliar territory. Is there a subtle, useful way to redirect a political conversation that's starting to feel upsetting? First and foremost, prioritize the relationship. Remember that the person you're talking to matters more than proving a point. Ask yourself, “How can I express my views while still showing respect and valuing this person?” Part of showing respect is acknowledging that you may have different perspectives. If a conversation starts to feel a little uncomfortable, try gently saying something like, “I hear you, and I hold a different perspective.” This lets the other person know you're listening and that their views matter, even if you don't agree. Secondly, listen with your heart, not just your head. Truly try to understand where they're coming from, even if you disagree. What experiences have shaped their beliefs? What emotions are they expressing? And remember, even when it's tough, try to see things from their perspective. Stepping into another's shoes, even for a moment, can foster understanding and empathy. Third, look for points of connection. Even in the midst of disagreement, there's often some shared experiences or common ground to connect on. It can also be valuable to sense when a conversation needs a pause. If things are starting to feel tense, it's completely fine to suggest taking a break or shifting to a different topic. Ultimately, navigating difficult conversations with respect is about how we connect, even when we disagree. It's about building bridges of understanding by making space for different perspectives. What's a respectful yet firm way to let someone know their comments have crossed a line? Using “I” language is such a powerful tool for navigating difficult conversations. Instead of pointing fingers, “I” language lets us shift the focus to our own experience. Imagine saying something like, “I felt uncomfortable when I heard that comment.” It's honest, it's respectful, and it avoids making the other person feel attacked. When we own our feelings, it invites the other person to do the same. It creates this space for empathy and understanding, even when we might disagree.The Five Steps To Drive Customer Growth With Product-Led Growth Long practiced in emerging companies, product-led growth (PLG) has been touted as one of the fastest ways for B2B firms to grow. Perhaps even more compelling than rapid growth is the lower cost of sales in PLG motions. Because the methodology is based on simplified products targeting individual users for self-serve purchase, initially, there is no need for business development reps or sales outreach. Traditional sales-driven firms, don’t despair! You can still get in on the action by adopting PLG strategies that complement your sales efforts at each stage of the customer growth trajectory — and drive faster and more profitable growth. Here are five steps to drive customer growth with PLG: Step 1: Drive user growth to seed the market. PLG can generate rapid user growth by relying on users to do the selling. Offer free trials and make sure that the product has a network effect where users gain more value the more others are using it — by collaborating within their team (e.g., Jira), across their company (e.g., Slack) or even across companies (e.g., Calendly). Create user referral programs where users are incentivized to share the product. These network and viral effects can drive “exponential growth” across markets and accounts. Step 2: Turn heavy user companies into product-qualified accounts. With users seeded across multiple companies, segments, and even regions, it’s easy for PLG organizations to identify the accounts where more users have adopted their product. Accounts with enough active users become new opportunities in the pipeline for a sales rep to close. This process is typically less costly than traditional top-of-funnel marketing efforts, and these product-qualified accounts are considered to be “better than the best” of traditional pipeline opportunities. Step 3: Leverage product telemetry to optimize the experience and build loyalty. A product that delivers fast time to value is foundational to PLG success and will help drive growth and retention for all selling motions. Build in product analytics so you can pinpoint user friction and optimize the time and effort it takes users to achieve their desired outcomes. This type of product telemetry can be used across small and simple or large and complex software modules and is instrumental in improving the user experience and building ongoing loyalty. Samsung’s Android 15 Leak—Bad News For Nearly All Galaxy Owners Dark Web Facial ID Farm Warning—Hackers Build Identity Fraud Database In Whiplash Maneuver, Court Rules Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) Reporting Requirements Are On Hold Step 4: Use in-product, personalized messaging to upsell customers to higher tiers. In PLG motions, the product is the primary marketing and selling method. Create contextual, personalized messages that both provide tips for specific activities and showcase additional offerings that could extend the value that users receive. In the context of existing workflows, alert users to new features, product extensions, or higher-tiered offerings. Offer trials for premium capabilities to make it easy for users to experience the value before expanding their purchase. Step 5: Combine product- and sales-led efforts to expand into new buying centers. Now that you’ve set up a PLG motion, use it to extend to new buying centers with the support of traditional sellers. Account teams should scout out new buyers and identify new use cases for offerings within accounts. Gain cross-sell business through PLG motions using trials and referral programs to incentivize users to share across buying centers. PLG strategies, while practiced successfully at smaller firms, have become additional arrows in the toolkit of go-to-market practices for many larger B2B firms. Pursuing a bottom-up PLG strategy in conjunction with traditional sales efforts has been shown to have the best results for rapid and scalable revenue growth. Just look at the success of Atlassian, Airtable, Dropbox, Calendly, HubSpot, and others to see how well the PLG and sales combination works. This post was written by VP, Principal Analyst Beth Caplow and it originally appeared here .

President Joe Biden said he’ll order a state funeral in Washington for Jimmy Carter, calling the former Democratic president who died Sunday “an extraordinary leader, statesman and humanitarian.” While the White House didn’t immediately announce specific plans, state funerals for presidents usually include lying in state at the US Capitol and a memorial service at the Washington National Cathedral. The US stock market has traditionally closed on the day of presidential funerals. No announcement has been made as of yet by exchange overseers. Biden, President-elect Donald Trump and former President Barack Obama were among those paying tribute to Middle East peace efforts and a long post-presidential run of humanitarian work by Carter, who died at age 100 at his home in Plains, Georgia. Obama drew an arc from Carter teaching Sunday school at the Maranatha Baptist Church in Plains “for most of his adult life” and the Camp David Accords to the former president’s appointing Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the federal bench, launching her path to the US Supreme Court. “He believed some things were more important than reelection – things like integrity, respect, and compassion,” Obama said in a statement. Biden’s statement, issued during his year-end vacation in the US Virgin Islands, included a tribute to Carter’s efforts to “eradicate disease, forge peace, advance civil rights and human rights, promote free and fair elections, house the homeless, and always advocate for the least among us.” Trump said Carter was a “truly good man” who “worked hard to make America a better place, and for that I give him my highest respect.” “While I strongly disagreed with him philosophically and politically, I also realized that he truly loved and respected our Country, and all it stands for,” Trump said on his Truth Social platform. Trump frequently brought up Carter during the 2024 election campaign, seeking to use him as reference point for Biden’s presidency. “Biden is the worst president in the history of our country, worse than Jimmy Carter by a long shot,” Trump said at a campaign stop in Manhattan in April. “Jimmy Carter is happy because he has had a brilliant presidency compared to Biden.” During Trump’s first term in office, Carter criticized Trump, at one point accusing him in a 2018 CBS interview of being “careless with the truth.” Both Carter and his wife attended Trump’s inauguration in 2017. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger — a Republican who clashed with Trump over the state’s 2020 presidential election result — called Carter “a true-servant leader.” This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.Advertisement A Delaware judge again struck down Elon Musk's $55 billion pay package. Legal experts walked BI through what the appeal process could look like for Tesla. Tesla may also reintroduce the package in Texas, a strategy that could end up costing shareholders more. Elon Musk's battle over his Tesla pay is entering a new phase. A Delaware judge ruled on Monday that Tesla's shareholder vote wasn't enough to pass Elon Musk's $55 billion compensation package. Related Video Tesla called the decision "wrong" and said it would appeal. "This ruling, if not overturned, means that judges and plaintiffs' lawyers run Delaware companies rather than their rightful owners — the shareholders," Tesla wrote in a post on X. So what happens next? Advertisement If Tesla files an appeal, Delaware's Supreme Court will review the decision of Delaware Chancery Court Judge Kathaleen St. J. McCormick , who maintained her earlier ruling that struck down the pay package on the grounds that Musk could have influenced Tesla's board members, to whom he had close ties. Mathieu Shapiro, Obermayer's managing partner and a member of its litigation department, told Business Insider that appeals processes often take a year or longer. Shapiro, who focuses on business and commercial litigation, said the case will ultimately have to balance Delaware's freedom for companies to self-govern with concerns about excessive payouts and Musk's status as one of the most successful businessmen. Advertisement While appeals are generally difficult to win, Shapiro said Musk's case is "novel" and contains unpredictable elements. One issue that may come up is whether Musk influenced the negotiations over his Tesla pay package, as the trial judge suggested in her initial ruling, he said. "Little law addresses executive compensation, let alone what seems to be the largest-ever compensation deal at a US public company," Shapiro said. Given that Musk's pay package was set to be the largest ever for a CEO, there aren't many cases to turn to for direct precedent. Advertisement Anat Alon-Beck, a business law professor at Case Western Reserve University, told BI that one case that stands out is the 2015 Delaware Chancery Court decision ruling against Mark Zuckerberg's attempt to ratify board actions related to Facebook's 2010 acquisition of Instagram. Alon-Beck, who used to work as a merger and acquisition attorney for tech companies and also specializes in Delaware deal law, said Zuckerberg didn't follow the proper procedural requirements mandated by state law. The case demonstrates that even controlling shareholders need to comply with the legal procedures for ratifying board decisions, he added. "When you know Delaware law, you know that stuff like that is just not going to fly," Alon-Beck said. Advertisement Columbia law professor Dorothy Lund used to clerk for a Delaware Supreme Court justice and US Court of Appeals judge. She told BI that Delaware is also "in a weird spot" because Tesla reincorporated from Delaware to Texas in June, and Musk has repeatedly spoken out about Delaware courts (he called the ruling "absolute corruption" on Monday). While these decisions aren't supposed to be influenced by concerns around public perception, Lund said Musk's behavior hasn't been the most strategic. "Delaware now has to worry about looking like, well, if we reverse, do we just look like we got cowed by Elon Musk?" Lund said. Advertisement Reintroducing the pay package in Texas Prior to the shareholder vote, Tesla board chair Robyn Denholm said in June that the board had considered introducing a new pay plan if the shareholder vote didn't pass — an option she said would cost shareholders. Related stories If Tesla created a new plan with the same stock grants, it would cost tens of billions in stock-based compensation today. That's because the compensation tied to the original package was worth an estimated $2.3 billion in stock, and it's already been paid out. Alon-Beck told BI that a new compensation package in Texas would make the most sense. Advertisement "I would do a new vote in Texas, under Texas law, and I would authorize a new compensation package," Alon-Beck said, adding that the old package wouldn't be able to be authorized because of a conflict of laws. Shapiro said he thinks it would be "very difficult" to draft the same package in Texas, noting that the original plan goes back to 2018 and was based on specific targets as well as Tesla's stock price in 2018. Shapiro said Musk's decision to appeal or reintroduce the package in Texas depends on multiple factors — and underlying motivations. Advertisement While it may be all about the money, the case may also signify more about public companies in the US and the way in which shareholders and courts can interfere with management's plans. "Or is it about his public persona and his reputation and how those things are understood in future business dealings," Shapiro said. "If he were my client, I would have a discussion about all of those things before deciding what path forward was best for him."

Syrian government forces have lost control of Daraa city, a war monitor said, in another stunning blow for President Bashar al-Assad's rule after rebels wrested other key cities from his grip. Daraa was dubbed "the cradle of the revolution" early in Syria's civil war, after activists accused the government of detaining and torturing a group of boys for scribbling anti-Assad graffiti on their school walls in 2011. While Aleppo and Hama, the two other main cities taken from government control in recent days, fell to an Islamist-led rebel alliance, Daraa fell to local armed groups, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. "Local factions have taken control of more areas in Daraa province, including Daraa city... they now control more than 90 percent of the province, as regime forces successively pulled out," the Britain-based Observatory said late Friday, which relies on a network of sources around Syria. Daraa province borders Jordan. Despite a truce brokered by Assad ally Russia, it has been plagued by unrest in recent years, with frequent attacks, clashes and assassinations. Syria's civil war, which began with Assad's crackdown on democracy protests, has killed more than 500,000 people and forced more than half the population to flee their homes. Never in the war had Assad's forces lost control of so many key cities in such a short space of time. Since a rebel alliance led by the Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham launched its offensive on November 27, the government has lost second city Aleppo and subsequently Hama in central Syria. The rebels were on Friday at the gates of Homs, Syria's third city, as the government pulled out its troops from Deir Ezzor in the east to redeploy towards to the centre. In an interview published on Friday, the leader of HTS, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, said the aim of the offensive was to overthrow Assad. "When we talk about objectives, the goal of the revolution remains the overthrow of this regime. It is our right to use all available means to achieve that goal," Jolani told CNN. HTS is rooted in the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda. Proscribed as a terrorist organisation by Western governments, it has sought to soften its image in recent years. According to Fabrice Balanche, a lecturer at France's Lumiere Lyon 2 university, HTS now controls 20,000 square kilometres (more than 7,700 square miles) of territory, nearly seven times as much as it did before the offensive started. As the army and its Iran-backed militia allies pulled out of Deir Ezzor in eastern Syria, Kurdish-led forces said they crossed the Euphrates and took control of the territory that had been vacated. The Observatory said government troops and their allies withdrew "suddenly" from the east and headed towards the oasis town of Palmyra on the desert road to Homs. The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, who are backed by the United States, expressed readiness for dialogue with both Turkey and the rebels, saying the offensive heralded a "new" political reality for Syria. The rebels launched their offensive the same day a ceasefire took effect in neighbouring Lebanon in the war between Israel and Hezbollah. The Lebanese militant group has been an important Assad ally, alongside Russia and Iran. Turkey, which has backed the opposition, said it would hold talks with Russia and Iran in Qatar this weekend. Ahead of the talks, the top diplomats of Iran, Iraq and Syria met in Baghdad, where Syria's Bassam al-Sabbagh accused the government's enemies of seeking to "redraw the political map". Iran's Abbas Araghchi pledged to provide Assad's government with "whatever (support) is needed". In Homs, scene of some of the war's deadliest violence, tens of thousands of members of Assad's Alawite minority were fleeing, fearing the rebels' advance, residents and the Britain-based Observatory said. Syrians who were forced out of the country years ago by the initial crackdown on the revolt were glued to their phones as they watched current developments unfold. "We've been dreaming of this for more than a decade," said Yazan, a 39-year-old former activist who now lives in France. Asked whether he was worried about HTS's Islamist agenda, he said: "It doesn't matter to me who is conducting this. The devil himself could be behind it. What people care about is who is going to liberate the country." On the other side of the sectarian divide, Haidar, 37, who lives in an Alawite-majority neighbourhood, told AFP by telephone that "fear is the umbrella that covers Homs now". The army shelled the advancing rebels as Syrian and Russian aircraft struck from the skies. At least 20 civilians, including five children, were killed in the bombardment, the war monitor added. At least 826 people, mostly combatants but also including 111 civilians, have been killed since the offensive began last week, according to the Observatory's figures, while the United Nations said the violence has displaced 280,000 people. Many of the scenes witnessed in recent days would have been unimaginable earlier in the war. In Hama, an AFP photographer saw residents set fire to a giant poster of Assad on the facade of city hall. "Our joy is indescribable, and we wish this for every honourable Syrian to experience these happy moments that we have been deprived of since birth," said Hama resident Ghiath Suleiman. Online footage verified by AFP showed residents toppling a statue of Assad's father Hafez, under whose brutal rule the army carried out a massacre in the city in the 1980s. Aron Lund, a fellow of the Century International think tank, called the loss of Hama "a massive, massive blow to the Syrian government". Should Assad lose Homs, it wouldn't mean the end of his rule, Lund said, but "with no secure route from Damascus to the coast, I'd say it's over as a credible state entity". bur-ser/rsc