It is incorrect to say that legal shorts had to cover. They can carry the short over to the new company name, according to my broker. I called someone there and was transferred upstream to someone who was not just a guy executing trades on the phone, but was in the compliance department.

So, the claim that the excess volume was soaked up by the legal shorts covering is not true.

There is no evidence supporting any specific theory about who might be selling. Claims that it "must" be any particular entity are not based on facts, only speculation.