There may be a problem with semantics going on here.
First, consider the official SEC press release.
SEVEN INDICTED IN "PUMP AND DUMP" STOCK SCHEMES
David C. Weiss, Acting United States Attorney for the District of Delaware, announced today
the unsealing of five indictments against seven individuals as part of a two-year securities fraud
investigation into the manipulation of so-called “penny stocks” traded through the over-the-counter
stock markets. The fraud schemes described in the indictments all involve efforts to manipulate the
prices of publicly traded stocks to create the illusion of market interest in the stocks. The goal was
to induce the investing public to purchase a stock based on the artificial trading volume, and thus
increase the price of the stock. The defendants then were able to sell off significant holdings in
these stocks, generating millions of dollars in proceeds. Such a scheme is known colloquially as a
“pump and dump.”
Obviously, the SEC believes Matt Brown pumped these stocks, and there appears to be a mountain of evidence to back it up.
However, Hot Rod Phil wrote this in an earlier post:
At no point has he ever pumped an individual stock.
Why would Hot Rod take a stance that is so different from the SEC?
Because to Hot Rod, the word "pump" simply means making pump-posts on a message board. So, if you can't show an actual post by the alias IH Matt (Admin) that promotes one of the stocks in question, then Hot Rod will continue to claim there's no evidence Matt ever pumped any of the stocks, because of the narrow definition Hot Rod is using.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
