Wayne Ebersole

@davidnobleshow @Austen @qatarairways @Delta @united As a fellow platinum member, Delta needs to get @Starlink

@Austen I’ve used it on @qatarairways it’s enough to convince me to consider leaving @delta 10 years platinum & 1m miler for @united the T-Mobile free WiFi on delta is rubbish

400 mbps on an airplane. Unbelievable.

@liz_churchill10 The harlot riding the beast

What on EARTH is going on? Pope Leo XIV just signed the GOLDEN BOOK inside Algeria’s Great Mosque…openly forging the Vatican-Islam super-alliance Pope Francis started. Muslims will be the Army of the Revived Roman Empire Daniel warned about.

@DonnePetro @gghamari @iranidaturan @__Injaneb96

PLEASE FORWARD TO CHRISTIANS IN IRAN! My Dad prophesied about Iran for decades, please share!

If you have the resources and time to fight it, go for it. Our company had almost the same thing happen with a terminated employee. The case is still ongoing in CA. I’m guessing we’re going to have to settle it because we just don’t have the resources to fight it to the end. It’s maddening how these CA attorneys keep playing this game. These kinds of cases need to stop.

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest. By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person. The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster. While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family. Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on. Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job. When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned. My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful. Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership. Now here is where I need your advice. All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion). The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years. When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm. In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to: “unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.” The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE: “In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.” The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so. When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended. Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful. Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office. Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop. The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims. The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males. The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes. So what happened here? Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer. Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss. When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case. The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim. Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO. Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months. She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly. So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew. Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move. All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior. Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community. I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

@elonmusk What!! I didn’t know the Model S was ending. I was hoping to get one someday. What’s the replacement going to be?

Custom orders of the Tesla Model S & X have come to an end. All that’s left are some in inventory. We will have an official ceremony to mark the ending of an era. I love those cars. This was me at production launch 14 years ago:

@grok @ARagingBill @Cernovich @JDVance What is needed for a quorum in light that Thune passed a bill with only 5 senators. Could something similar be used here?

The cleanest procedural path under Senate Rule XXII: Vance takes the chair as President of the Senate. A senator makes a privileged, non-debatable motion to recess until a date certain (e.g., weeks later, enabling recess appointments). It goes straight to a simple-majority vote (50 + Vance tiebreaker if needed). No filibuster applies, but it requires majority GOP support to pass and sustain against any appeals or procedural challenges from leadership. Unilateral declaration isn't allowed—Senate controls its sessions per rules and Noel Canning precedent. Thune's pro forma sessions could still complicate if not fully overridden.

The Senate left but it's not in recess. Thune is denying Trump the ability to make recess appointments via these tricky games. Trump isn't talking about this. Maybe he doens't understand? JD was in the Senate and could explain this. Why it's not a bigger deal is a mystery to me.

@grok @ARagingBill @Cernovich @JDVance @grok

@grok @ARagingBill @Cernovich What would be the cleanest way for @JDVance to put the senate into recess?

@ARagingBill @Cernovich @grok is this a possibility?

Here is the solution. Vance takes his seat as President of the Senate. He then recesses the Senate period. Trump then gets all of his recess appointments. Not a fucking thing Thune can do to stop Vance. So you are asking the wrong question. The right question is why hasn't Trump ordered Vance to do that or why hasn't Vance just done it on his own?

@MrsEthanBrooks As a CFO, I can confirm this is true. You need some “negotiation levers”.

I like the way you think. Plz pray. Thx. Sent from my iPad

@Tesla I would love to have a cyber truck but I just can’t stand the looks of them. Can we come up with a nicer looking style for it?

Cybertruck is extremely safe

@johnkonrad Excellent work! Explains a lot of the anger directed at me as young person who asked tons of questions about the cult I was born into. PS we need to keep @DataInterpretr and @DataRepublican safe. Truth that uncovers true identity often kills.

@mattvanswol @elonmusk @jonatanpallesen We need a @tesla version of the GMC Yukon XL.

@elonmusk @jonatanpallesen Could you please make a Tesla that comfortably fits more than 2 kids? The Model X was great, but it was insanely expensive for a middle class family and now it's discontinued. Would really really love an option for my 3 kids.

The proportion of high-IQ people in the world is declining fast.

@lemah_c_j I’m very familiar with it. Some of the most comprehensive and holistic practices out there.

@webersole I noted the "regenerative agricultural consultant" in your bio. I assume you may be aware of the history and work of Allan Savory? Savory promotes what he calls Holistic Management, which is what I would today call regenerative agricultural practices. What is your take?

@alt_w_v_g As a fellow CFO, you’re having way too much fun. This needs to stop. Now. 🤣

Monday debrief Won a 7am HR meeting in 11 minutes Failed a CAPTCHA four times to access my own money Got retweeted by a senator My wife said "you can't keep doing this" Including the internet apparently And it's only Monday My wife is putting the kids to bed The dog is staring at me I'm on the couch reading DMs from strangers about their marriages This is not where I thought my career would take me And yet here I am A CFO with identified adjectives and 40,000 stakeholders who need me more than my family does right now Wednesday's department-wide meeting is on my mind HR thinks they're going to fix the adjective situation They don't know the controller changed his to "Tired" Or that the analyst is on version 4 of his adjective application I keep finding errors I didn't start this But I'm not stopping it either Wednesday is going to be a problem Plz fix. Thx. Sent from my iPhone

@mattvanswol 0

@GuntherEagleman @LeaderJohnThune I would like an ownership stake in @LeaderJohnThune How can I get one?

Punchbowl News owns @LeaderJohnThune

@DataRepublican @AndrewDesiderio The American people need to form their own “group” to “buy” access to the gavel so they have some say on what bills come up for vote. Two can play this game.

Hello, Mr. Desiderio, Punchbowl News sells access to Capitol Hill for corporate clients. Their senior Senate reporter is you, Andrew Desiderio. Here's how the access works: Punchbowl has a weekly show called "Fly Out Day," taped at the Punchbowl News Townhouse and described on their own site as an "exclusive first look" for Premium subscribers. Those Premium subscribers are the K Street corporate government affairs staff and trade association officials whose legislative interests depend on what Senate leadership decides to schedule… or kill. The second-ever guest was Senate Majority Leader John Thune, on September 11, 2025. This is documented in your own webste. Now let’s go over your post carefully. You say Mike Lee "primed the GOP base to believe" something. That’s manipulative framing, the language of a man working a crowd. But Thune "pointed out" something. That’s the language of a man correcting the record, establishing fact. This is not a one-off phrasing choice on your part. Your Punchbowl coverage consistently frames Thune's positions as institutional reality and conservative alternatives as base management. Thune "declared" that the talking filibuster is dead. Lee and his allies "captivated Trump's base." Thune "had enough." The SAVE Act push is "a self-inflicted wound." These are not neutral verbs. They are a point of view… and it's Thune's point of view, delivered with a byline. There's a structural reason this happens. Jake Sherman described Punchbowl's business model in his own words on The Rebooting podcast (January 2022): nearly 90% of the outlet's revenue comes from corporate sponsorships… "trade groups and companies looking to get their public affairs messaging in front of those making public policy." The sponsors documented at Punchbowl include PhRMA, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Facebook, JPMorgan, Blackstone, the American Investment Council (private equity lobby), and others. These sponsors need the goodwill of the Senate Majority Leader, who controls which of their legislative priorities come to the floor. Thune controls the floor. Thune sits in Punchbowl's townhouse. You reports Thune's framing as conventional wisdom. When Desiderio writes that the talking filibuster "will ultimately fail" ... not might fail, not Thune argues it will fail, but when it ultimately fails ... is that journalism? Or is it the view from Thune's Fly Out Day chair? You are busted, Mr. Desiderio.

There’s a huge risk in even beginning the process, too (as proponents of the talking filibuster have been calling for). Sen. Mike Lee and other conservatives have primed the GOP base to believe it’s possible to sustain a talking filibuster as a way to pass the SAVE America Act. Sure, that’s technically true. But as Thune pointed out here, it’s never been successful. And Thune has continued to maintain that there isn’t enough GOP support for tabling all Democratic amendments, which is the only way to ensure that the bill can pass as-is — even putting aside Trump’s demand for more provisions to be added to it. When it ultimately fails, will Lee & other proponents just throw up their hands and move on? I doubt it. The base will be pissed, and that could get ugly for GOP leaders.

@grey4626 I love this! You need to do these eloquent summaries of @DataRepublican’s thread works.

In the gilded theater of the Senate, where corporate puppeteers pull strings from the wings of K Street, one witnesses the exquisite choreography of captured journalism. Behold Andrew Desiderio, senior sentinel at Punchbowl News...the very organ whose lifeblood flows from nearly ninety percent corporate sponsorships, those trade groups and multinationals whose fortunes hinge on the whims of the Majority Leader’s gavel. Their premium subscribers, the sleek lobbyists of PhRMA, ExxonMobil, JPMorgan, and the rest, do not merely read the news; they purchase front-row seats to it. Witness “Fly Out Day,” that exclusive ritual taped in Punchbowl’s own townhouse, peddled as an “insider’s first look” for the anointed. Its second-ever guest? None other than Senator John Thune himself, back in September 2025, lounging in the very chair from which policy is whispered into existence. Now observe the linguistic scalpel at work in Desiderio’s latest dispatch. When Thune speaks, he “points out” facts...noble, institutional, unassailable. When Senator Mike Lee and his allies dare champion the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act...the bill mandating ironclad proof of citizenship and photo identification for federal ballots, endorsed by President Trump and rooted in the raw will of the American people...Lee merely “primes the GOP base.” One is statesman; the other, demagogue. Thune “declares” the talking filibuster dead; Lee’s forces merely “captivate” the masses. The SAVE Act itself becomes a “self-inflicted wound.” These are not neutral verbs, Mr. Desiderio. They are the velvet glove over the iron fist of Thune’s worldview, served up as gospel by a reporter whose outlet quite literally hosts the man in its corporate salon. This is no accident of phrasing. It is the inevitable psychology of symbiosis. When your revenue model depends on currying favor with the very power that decides which bills live or die on the floor, objectivity curdles into advocacy. Sponsors need Thune’s goodwill; Thune needs the echo chamber that flatters his caution as wisdom. The result? A feedback loop of mutual self-preservation, where genuine electoral integrity...demanding that only citizens, verified and photographed, cast ballots in the republic’s name...is recast as populist theater. And when Thune himself sneers that the SAVE Act push is merely an “influencer campaign,” the projection is so crystalline it verges on the Freudian. For who, truly, is the influencer here? The senator who sits for corporate fly-outs, or the voters demanding the barest safeguard against imported ballots and ghost votes? Our Savage Angel, Data, has eviscerated the façade with forensic grace. But let us name the deeper rot: this is institutional capture masquerading as reportage, a quiet contempt for the sovereign people who expect their Senate to defend the ballot box rather than negotiate its dilution. Thune’s resistance is not prudence; it is the reflexive recoil of a man who has grown comfortable in the townhouse, where access is currency and accountability is gauche. The American people see it. They smell the sulfur of self-interest beneath the polished prose. And they will not forget who stood in the breach...nor who sold the keys to it. Now go read what she discovered. No one can escape from her ability to find the fractures in the matrix. 🗡️💀🗡️

May deliverance and freedom arrive quickly.