Wrong. I said we should not neither believe not dismiss the report based on who made it but have a timely investigation to either prove or disprove it.
We can suspect, as Neil Woodford initially did, that it was unfounded but then as he did adjust our investing posture when it is not refuted by a prompt and independent investigation.
Truth is truth and falsehood is falsehood.
For instance Fox News clearly favors Republicans and makes money by pleasing its Right-leaning viewership.
MSNBC clearly favors Democrats and profits by pleasing its Left-Leaning viewership.
Does that mean that if MSNBC makes allegations against Republicans or Fox News makes them against Democrats that we should assume those allegations are lies simply because those networks make money by saying bad things about the other side and not by reporting accurate news?
Of course not. Just because Fox News and MSNBC are extremely biased does not mean they are necessarily lying.
Also and correct me if I am wrong I the disclaimer actually says that they might have either a short or long position not just a short position.
While we can reasonably assume that they are shorting NWBO that allegation is no more or less substantial than anything Phase V said.
Also and correct me if I am wrong, the claims are negotiable in U.K. Courts where libel laws favor the plaintiff something that benefits NWBO, IF the allegations are entirely false.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
