|
|
|
|
|
|
by zionic
1523 days ago
|
|
|
>It sounds like "the banks," who would be in an even more privileged position to know if the $420 offer was legitimately secured Speculation. What's not speculation however is that the company suffered material harm as a byproduct of malicious prosecution. If I, as a government employee, open a public investigation into someone whom I know to be innocent and cause that entity harm I have incurred liability. The SEC knew Elon had the funding, they used weasel words to imply he did not. The SEC would have lost in court. _All_ contracts have contingencies, this was no different. Saying that because a contingency existed the funds were "not secure" is horsecrap. |
|
|
Do you have proof - or even evidence - that Musk had funding, let alone that the SEC knew he had funding, other than Musk's own statements?