Apparently this short and distort type action or the threat of it was what scared Chanos off once before in one of his public pursuits and apparent smear campaigns against a financial firm. But lets look at the surface level dynamics. If Chanos goes on a show and says Tesla is worth zero- an obvious misstatement of fact just disclaiming that he has a short interest would absolutely not clear him (common sense, not legal claim on my part) of apparent liability and if he had any coordinated effort with other entities such as those like ISS or Blackrock which has been trying to oust Musk internally that would seem like conspiratorial behavior. Any proxy relationships where he was making these claims or acting on behalf of others to do so also would seem like conspiracy type relationships in the context of short and distort type frauds- but again only coming from the common sense level of analysis that is always the start of recognition of real wrong doing. When Andrew left of Citroen factually says Musk lied and you couldn't have short selling (as if it were a great and needed service) if CEOs could just announce going private (see other thread on funding because going private was/is quite plausible and see how implausible any kind of lie was especially with prior warnings) but all the SEC can come up with is "he should have known" the deal would fall through or be postponed- so it looks like Left is engaging in Short and Distort blatantly right out in public in that statement and yet you see him back peddling in the same recent statement with: you couldn't short Tesla anymore- is that the result of a cease and desist order? Seems at the very least it should be. When you don't hear from David Einhorn anymore does it mean as petrol proxy that he finally absorbed enough losses to cease to be credible (think of the number of unintelligent or disgusting silver spoon type billionaires have popped up in the midst of a country full of he poor and the hungry) or does it mean behind the scenes he was told he was committing Short and Distort type fraud and to cease and desist? Was their a prosecution? We need the SEC and DOJ's actual record. What about the 'Montana skeptic' it was apparent he was a proxy for petrol and he suddenly deleted his account supposedly because his boss told him to after Musk called him, that sounds like Tesla presented the short and distort charges to the them but somehow let them off the hook or did it go forward behind the scenes with an NDA and prosecution? Whitney Tilson was another example did he get a cease and desist with NDA for this stuff instead of a prosecution or was it a quiet prosecution with NDA? He after all was eating his words and having to repair the damage to Tesla good with Tesla factory visits and talking about how wrong he was and how he got Tesla religion. Remember the petrol exec Todd Katz got caught trying to impersonate Musk to steal info- that is a form of sabotage and it went t court? Remember his justifications. Remember how saboteur Martin Tripp started to be spun by the short and distort group as a whistle blower whistle blower for whom- customers- ridiculous on its face and outrageous. How much of this kind of stuff is there that never got into the press? There are so many other short and distort groups petrol proxy type groups presumably to engage in behavior that is so stupid and blatantly a fraud must have the backing of a lot of petrol money power in this attempt to create a bs consensus - the SEC has harmed Tesla and in my opinion it reeks of corruption and criminality (petrol capture,) to the point that the SEC itself needs investigation and I hope in the future it will be made to reverse the apparent wrongs against Tesla and its share holders and make them whole- it appears to have been duped into being part of Short and Distort scheme. It now needs to do its job and start to go after the real culprits to be an instrument of justice and not of furthering crimes. Note this comment from the LA times on the Saudi deal: "A bigger investment to help take Tesla private would hand some part of the operating control of the world’s biggest electric-car maker to the world’s biggest oil producer." http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-tesla-saudi-arabia-20180814-story.html# But you see that comment seems quite likely to be be untrue and presumably would have been the breaking point at least temporarily as likely Musk wouldn't cede any control and the writers at Clean Technica have pointed out the amount needed to take Tesla private was much, much smaller than assumed to the point that Musk had the money alone to do it- presumably it would have been a squeeze though. Ok, so why would the SA Sovereign Wealth fund provide money without strings to an entity that could undermine SA's present core business environment? Its quite simple, based on past actions of people now out of power in SA the Kingdom now has a huge global good will gap to fill. For example, if you look at the analysis from Richard David Steel and from Michael Moore and the whole "loose change" community aside from actual US entities that were beholden but in power in the US at the time, there were two other countries that perpetrated 911 and the Kingdom has been on the consensus lists and its been at the heart of the global past we'er having to transition away from. When these realizations hit the USG bureaucracy you could 180 degree changes in Obama policy admin changes, think of the countries that fell out of favor hard during the Obama Admin. So you see the huge good will gap SA has to fill and having the fund do a straight cash for good will swap makes perfect sense. But note also the return of people like John Bolton involved with this ugly and misguided past, and have to presume the real possibility that there could have been some gagged meddling on the part of the T. Admin- but none of that would make it remotely right- and none of it on the surface would seem to justify SEC-DOJ actions. When Musk and crew pushed back on the SEC demands notice how quick the SEC acquiesced and notice the speed of the supposed resolution. Suspect the goal here in this horrid SEC action was to try to muzzle Musk to insist that Tesla go through sponsored media which would then on behalf of its sponsor petrol masters spin the company into oblivion and then also the impetus of petrol to protect its short and distort proxies by trying to preemptively blame Tesla for the fraud it had been committing through proxies because it was coming to a head because Tesla stock was about to surge over auto pilot 9 and profitability and market share taking by Tesla and because they are terrified of working AP in particular. But a surge in Tesla shares if not derailed would force the question of how could this short and distort group have been so stupid to be totally wiped out- ripping away its credibility (which was bs to begin with) and exposing the petrol fraud for what it was- success is a revenge they were presumably trying to desperately prevent. So in essence it was an effort to try to project onto Tesla itself the fraud fueled smear campaigns crimes its had been committing under short and distort as a distraction. So lets have the list of short and distort fraud entities the SEC and DOJ have been failing to go after but needs to go after. Also curious if it was the T. Admin behind this this action. Did the T. Admin block or scuttle the deal and then add gag orders? That wouldn't make it any better or any more just or acceptable as a society we can't just turn a blind eye to what may be gross abuses of power coming from any level.