Court appears to boot the SEC!

  • Thread starter Thread starter 101101
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 0
  • Views Views 860

101101

Well-Known Member
Look at the SEC's moronic position. Oh, well anything Musk says "that isn't obviously immaterial must be pre-approved." And now backing way up, according to the SEC the penalty for any further offense should be increasing fines (an infraction basis- so no moral culpability) so if Musk finds a way to cost the criminal shorts a billion dollars the SEC will be like: pay a 30 million dollars transaction fee. Musk could be like, its worth it lets do it! So basically they were fangless when it came down to it and they didn't have anything but BS. So the Judge apparently said the parties have two weeks to come up with an agreement to address the SEC's apparently non-existent concerns. Presumably this was to help save face for the SEC. What damage have those supposed concerns done in the meantime given that they were apparently frivolous and malicious?

As to the SEC's contention "that anything that isn't obviously immaterial must be pre-approved" Well first off no one is going to sensor his speech, there is no gag order (beyond being a citizen and member of the human race he is a member of the founding crew or remaining member of the crew that brought the firm to critical mass, largest share holder, CEO and director and rightly still chair- outrageous what the SEC already did with regard to the fine and the involuntary loss of the chair- Tesla, Musk, the share holders and public have already been harmed by this) and no one is going to be able to veto what he says. He is going to able to say it consequences be damned. All that could be asked is that another person put consensus skin in the game on reasonableness and representativeness but there is no one 'approving it.' There is just someone saying "yeah I think this is reasonable to say" but its only going to be on the things that would cause any other CEO a question about materiality that would move the needle on the stock in a way that wasn't just informational (everything is material so that line is utterly arbitrary) and it will matter about when it is said as well with regard to whether it would have that potential of undue needle moving. Musk could parrot what is in the financial statement and that could move the needle in a material way- that already has approval!!!! Nothing else makes any sense, you don't have to be a legal scholar to see this stuff it is just the rules of common sense and reasonableness otherwise the recognizability and enforceability start to come into serious question.

Addressing the public is not a matter of addressing a group of specialists on a sub, sub specialty requiring irrefutable accuracy to stand the test of time and where nothing outside of the field's peer reviewed insular consensus can stand.

Tesla has to be able to represent the organization with the public in a way that is accurate and meaningful. It has to be able to represent it position in a manner that is timely, fair and reasonably accurate. It doesn't have to be unreasonably correct, it has to be able to represent it position reasonably. It can't be behind the ball or be beholden to sponsored media in order to have a correct representation in the public sphere. To do this Tesla should not be having to pay off worthless, backwards corrupt highest bidder, drown out, censor, lie, spin, slander, libel and defame 'sponsored' media. No, no, no, there is no speech toll road here. They can get pissed off all they want about bypassing their criminal (society destroying) filter but that is how it is! The SEC needs a new organizational head, the SEC head should be fired for this bs. Its is so prejudicial and obviously corrupt as to totally undermine trust in government. Maybe the Administrative Procedure Act can provide recourse against the SEC head. It appears the SEC righteously came to the aid of a criminal element in a super entitled way!!! This undermines faith and trust in the the government. The SEC was interceding on behalf of shorts, how ridiculous!!! In this case the same as interceded on behalf of vandals and robbers. A former SEC chair said the whole case was ridiculous and never should have been brought. And then the SEC gets all wadded up over it not being able to trash the 1st Amendment. Who could sympathize with this nonsense?/

And we go back to the key claim, he must have had a reason if he said it, it wasn't stuff that was just lined up overnight so there must have been some heavy and corrupt intervention for it not to have happened! One would have to be clinically insane to say it off the cuff but it was clearly the result of protracted deliberation and a lot of work. They were warned, so it wasn't like they were even clued in to be paying attention, they were told to be paying attention so it is not like it wasn't par for the course. Warned that there would be short burn of the century months ahead and surely he had it lined up. And as for other types of investors he's told the day traders to stay away and told people with out tolerance for volatility to stay away, said you have to be in it for the long term and been more than willing to state when he thinks the stock is over valued. What have Shorts already lost- 25 billion(
?) attempting to short Tesla- most losses ever against a stock? That was warning enough, protracted notice enough! But if this episode ever gets investigated you'll probably see national security gag orders and all sorts of other BS involved. Because here's what it looks like: Musk, Larry Ellison and SA wealth fund (not a public entity but a state) had what it takes to take the firm private. Done! So what would have stopped that? Well an insane intercession on the part of an ultra -corrupt pro petrol part of the administration because they didn't like the optics and the tea leaves for petrol. So based on that someone is supposed to just absorb arbitrary fraud charges (by an agency gambling that a CEO in the midst of trying to save the company would be too busy to fight back and stand up for justice) because captured government felt it wasn't consulted or didn't like what the move said about the future of petrol which post Paris is obvious to everyone? Stuff is so out there obvious for anyone that can think! And further this supposed to allow an arbitrary but in practice binding defacto gag order that allow shorts working to deny the company a free hand so shorts can misrepresent the company and profit by denying the company access to needed capital. Then came the disgusting article with Leslie Stahl where she was like they told you to shut up, tell us how you're grateful for being told shut up and will comply to the letter- gleefully- entitled sponsored media!

Shorting needs to be straight up illegal. The claim that it helps with volatility is irrelevant, a Tobin tax would do that better. The need to hedge against losses is slightly more legitimate as a kind of insurance but but it is not worth the protection type racket costs that shorting create. It is a fact that shorts were used to profit from 911. Where was the prosecution of that? No where, and curiously the SEC head-quarters was destroyed in 911. Presumably shorting, shorts helped finance or make possible 911. Right before 911 the building owner took out a huge insurance policy on the buildings for far more than they were worth- apparently the same sort of thing- socializing the losses due to crimes. This is the kind of stuff shorting enables. Its like someone who suddenly says I bet an insurance premium's worth of pay out that my neighbor's house burns down tomorrow. Ok look the house burned down right after taking out the policy on the neighbor's house but no one can prove there was wrong doing so pay up!!!

What needs to happen is as soon as we get a better administration in place is the FBI needs to go after the SEC and these shorts and investigate this down to the bottom of all of its tendrils and make it all public and follow it with a 1000 criminal and civil cases seeking prosecution in each case to the maximum extent of the law. And at the same time we need new laws that make shorting a felony with confiscatory strict liability and burden of proof shifted to the accused entity. Set some precedents for white collar enforcement and justice.

Tesla legal team apparently said the SEC was wrong on virtually every level. Why not say the SEC was wrong on every level (period.)
 
Back
Top