There is no doubt Mr. Kidd argued the wrong point,
Post# of 7802
Posted On: 04/20/2016 12:06:16 PM
Re: Coat Tail Rider #2094
There is no doubt Mr. Kidd argued the wrong point, which was Huffman LIED about ClearTrust being required to retain documents. Huffman even acknowledged that in his response. In other words, Mr. Kidd was arguing the wrong issue.
BUT HE DID NOT LIE like Kyle did. Anyone can check the Ihub board and click "View Posters". The Defendant last posted on 9/25/14.
And the point wasn't to get him to stop lying about the company. The point was to shut him up about what the FBAR told him.
If it was just about posting false information, anyone including the company could refute it with documentation. The Judge even suggested as much. The stock price can't be held hostage to false information. Market forces are much stronger than that.
But all thes folks that "allegedly" sold based on false information posted by the Defendant can explain to the Judge why they didn't buy back lower when it was shown the posts were false, as Kyle claimed, which would have created buying pressure.
Could it be nothing has been proven false?
Why doesn't anyone show the 3 items?
Why doesn't anyone show salvage rights? It would be on the permit?
Why does this POS keep falling?
Anyone?
The Judge wrote a book about this topic. He needs to be alerted to these latest LIES by Kyle.
Hopefully he will.
Also, if the Injunction is all they wanted, why are they seeking damages?
BUT HE DID NOT LIE like Kyle did. Anyone can check the Ihub board and click "View Posters". The Defendant last posted on 9/25/14.
And the point wasn't to get him to stop lying about the company. The point was to shut him up about what the FBAR told him.
If it was just about posting false information, anyone including the company could refute it with documentation. The Judge even suggested as much. The stock price can't be held hostage to false information. Market forces are much stronger than that.
But all thes folks that "allegedly" sold based on false information posted by the Defendant can explain to the Judge why they didn't buy back lower when it was shown the posts were false, as Kyle claimed, which would have created buying pressure.
Could it be nothing has been proven false?
Why doesn't anyone show the 3 items?
Why doesn't anyone show salvage rights? It would be on the permit?
Why does this POS keep falling?
Anyone?
The Judge wrote a book about this topic. He needs to be alerted to these latest LIES by Kyle.
Hopefully he will.
Also, if the Injunction is all they wanted, why are they seeking damages?
(0)
(0)