China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. (fka CCME)

[bullmarkets]

Rick: (posted this on CGS board too)

1) Do you agree that MW got on the wrong buses to take video?
2) Do you agree that MW manipulated and/or distorted the meaning of the lady on the phone call?
3) Do you agree MW offered the lady a *job* or some kind incentive relationship which calls her credibility into question, in exchange for a private document?
4) Do you agree MW distorted the meaning of the document provided as well as the lady's words and obvious intent, plus the first two minutes?
5) Do you agree MW mistranslated in the first report?
6) Do you agree MW recklessly or indifferently, if not deliberately quoted from an old and unreliable website for the first report?
7) Do you agree someone concocted or manipulated a spreadsheet?
8) Do you agree Citron got the AAPL/distributor allegation way wrong?

Not being technical in the above language. Thing is, you know full well the answer to the above questions is "yes". Sure looks like a pattern that the key issues raised are bogus and misleading to manipulate the stock, very likely knowingly selected by the publisher. This pattern can show intent. Motive is obvious. Shorts are truly desperate, as nothing's panned out for them so far proof-wise. Lots of innuendo but no proof of anything except growing evidence of a scheme to manipulate a stock's price.

Let's try this another way-- NLTH Poker.

Have you ever known someone to have pocket aces and then the flop is ace, 10, 10? Conventional wisdom of 99.00% of halfway decent players holding the aces (especially in a tournament) is to knock while the others bet. That's because they have a sure thing. They don't want to spook the losers out of the hand. Similarly here, shorts have the losing hand and are trying to spook longs with words of bluff. Management's holding one amazing hand, hence no reason to dignify the taunts of the shorts.

If there was a scintilla of ACTUAL proof of fraud, you and everyone else would have named it. The dd here is intense and still no fraud revealed. Instead (see 1-8 above) there's been a street huckster three care monte game going on with bogus report after bogus report and nothing awry at all.

Meanwhile Deloitte not resigning and the GH report is certainly an ace on the flop for CCME, holding big slick at least. Shorts meanwhile think they have something with a pocket pair of sixes hoping for fourth street river card double sixes. Not likely...

Rick, when it comes out that shorts were wrong, will you agree to drag them over open and honest hot coals in an article that begs the SEC to enforce Rule 10-b-5 against block personally?

http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/646774-bullmarket/143436-investigation-of-muddy-waters-research-and-carson-block-warranted-by-sec-and-ccme

-Andrew