Replies to post #258869 on Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[Jetmek_03052]

It is a false narrative and was ordered silenced, no reference.

SCOTUS actually stated that the Company could bring in new evidence from the onset and the previous order could not be referenced in any legal context.

That is TOTAL BS!!

It was NEVER ordered “silenced”. It was simply remanded because of the impending LUCIA V. SEC decision. Remanded DOES NOT MEAN SILENCED or that no one can ever mention it again. It just means that the ruling has no effect. That’s been established and it’s ridiculous to keep stating that no one can ever mention a remanded ruling. It’s not true and that is well known.

As far as SCOTUS stating ANYTHING about DBMM? That is EQUALLY RIDICULOUS. SCOTUS hasn’t the faintest idea of ANYTHING involving little DBMM!

DBMM is a little pimple that has no significance- ANYWHERE.

[Stock_Barber]

was ordered silenced, no reference

That's just a legal thing... it isn't like it never happened!

It is absolutely true that the judge (Patil) ordered revocation for DBMM!