Replies to post #344339 on Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[Jetmek_03052]

That's a perfect example of more pure horseshit from you.

The early revocation is totally different from the Dismissal. There is no comparability

Really Poo? It was two different judges giving orders. One for revocation, one for dismissal. NEITHER TOOK EFFECT!

The Nov 2017 was remanded and vacated 2 weeks later by SCOTUS. It could not be cited or referenced in any legal matter.

Go right ahead. Bring that up ANOTHER THOUSAND TIMES, if you like!

NO . ONE. CARES.

I'm getting sick and tired of the same old fecal material flying off your keyboard. CAN IT.

The FACT is - It is ON THE RECORD. ANYONE THAT WANTS TO can look it up and SEE IT!

Patil issued an order for DBMM revocation. YOU CANNOT HIDE IT. You CANNOT say it NEVER HAPPENED. The revocation order was remanded in light of the Lucia case.

Foelak issued an order for dismissal. It was NEVER finalized by the SEC Board of Commissioners. It NEVER took EFFECT!

DOE overreach of a PFR is an internal matter and had no legal standing .

That's the BIGGEST horseshit line of the post.

There was NO "DOE overreach"!!! That is TOTAL BS!

Either side in the OIP was able to petition Foelak's decision. The fact that the DOE seldom used the PFR option was because OVERWHELMINGLY, DOE was the winning side and never HAD to.

The PFR had no legal standing????? RIDICULOUS! Of COURSE the PFR had legal standing. It is STUPID to even suggest that it doesn't. So it doesn't surprise me to see it come off your keyboard.