Replies to post #46560 on Impact Fusion International Inc (IFUS)

[righton21]

That is laughable.

Actually not so laughable. When all the facts come out, it will be something completely different than the interpretation you are giving it. I can see where you would conclude as such given the limited amount of DD that has been done but history will prove otherwise. I'm willing to patiently wait for that day.

[Darth Trader]

Wrong and misleading on all 4 points. 1. SA has 22+ indictments fir federal crimes against him. There is evidence, might wanna try DD and a FoIA Form to the right people and agency and you'll find it. 2. I think there's a deliberate misleading understanding of the law. There's no law broken to threaten someone with enforcing the law. For example to have SA and JS prosecuted tortious interference and leveraging this for settlement is not breaking the law. In addition what is stated in the settlement discussion process is 100% priveledged and would never be entertained in court. So there's no way "extortion" would be a factor here. Deliberate misinterpretation of the definition and how it's applied. 3. Show me once where MW has stated anything to anyone that's been unimpeachably proven to be false. This is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. As is this whole "scienter" nonsense. The judge never stated or implied anything of the sort. 4. There were 2 courts. Federal and State. Again you number 4 here is a misrepresentation of the facts. Yes charges were not considered in federal court but the State court rejected the dullard's motions (snd there were several) to dismiss evidence to their criminal behaviors and acts. This is why they went directly to hire criminal defense team....bcs they needed it AND wa the leverage necessary to push them into settlement.

Your last 2 paragraphs are also false and misleading. Please define "written evidence." The post is not "written evidence" by any stretch as it is 100% impeached with facts.

The last paragraph, please provide unimpeachable proof mw has pushed the debt onto shareholders. As a major shareholder I have found nothing to cooberate this statement because it's just not true. First, there is simply no debt. The fed case is settled and I expect the fed case file to be updated before the end of the year which will prove the fed case was terminated as part of the "amicable settlement." This only makes sense and is consistent with this term.

This is all superfluous to the fact Ifus business is in full swing. I have seen this evidence with my own eyes and that is unimpeachable. SA's cabal cannot refute this or any other person's testimony who's been to the site and reported accordingly. Again, unimpeachable. Good luck with that SA and js