|
|
|
|
|
|
by hailwren
1425 days ago
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm not arguing they don't do that. This is one of those cases where arguing the negative without clearly stating your argument makes things easy but not particularly useful. What argument are you presenting instead? Because he was charged for 7 instances of security fraud we should assume that all 25 are securities fraud? Regardless of whether the SEC eventually charges all 25, they've clearly decided to differentiate them all on some metric (otherwise, they would've charged them all at the same time). |
|
|