GreenNGo EV charging

703 posts

GreenNGo EV charging

GreenNGo EV charging

@GreenNGoEV

Katılım Haziran 2024
26 Takip Edilen4 Takipçiler
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
Jordan Stone
Jordan Stone@TheJordanStone1·
🚀Want remote work paying up to $150/hr? Join the Handshake AI Program — get paid to train AI using your expertise (Software Engineering, STEM, humanities & more). Flexible part-time hours, work from anywhere, no AI experience needed! joinhandshake.com/move-program/r… #RemoteWork #AIJobs
English
0
3
2
183
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
Jordan Stone
Jordan Stone@TheJordanStone1·
@unusual_whales lol but why??!! I thought all tariffs were passed on to the consumers?!
English
0
3
2
39
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
JunkSavvy
JunkSavvy@JunkSavvy·
RUH-ROH....🌶 🌶🌶 DTCC turning over the goodies, and NASDAQ did what!?! Welcome to The MMTLP Fiasco...you can't make this sh*t up!!! MMTLP MMAT TRCH
GIF
George Palikaras@palikaras

Another win! This is a massive one vs. DTCC. One step closer to triangulate the data. Thanks for sharing @kimkep4796 For the record, I need ZERO access to the trading data information for my case (including the Nasdaq 6 month data - I was informed some are really scared I would use, but wait… is there something of value they are uniquely aware of?? -> for the dum dums 🗿🗿) The fact that NASDAQ went and hired Meta’s Nevada Counsel, Ballard Spahr, would be hilarious if it wasn’t true. (For the record the Managing Partner at the Las Vegas office R Kim, was excellent for four years) Mistake or not the laws in Nevada are clear and the options available to the trustee are very significant, for example: 1.Expedited motion to disqualify under Nevada RPC 1.9/1.10 (and 1.7 if concurrent), citing Nevada’s substantial-relationship framework. 2.In the same package, request relief that strikes/denies the motion to quash (or at least bars the conflicted firm from further participation), and sets an accelerated schedule for conflict-free counsel to appear. 3.If Nasdaq (or any subpoena target) resists after an order, escalate to compel + contempt/sanctions using §105(a)/inherent authority and, where appropriate, Rule 9011 / §1927. 4. Discovery of all privileged information between Nasdaq and Ballard Spahr (more nuanced) Example: In re Burnett (Arkansas bankruptcy court) The court found an attorney violated the Code, Bankruptcy Rules, and local rules, and ordered: •Disgorgement of fees, and •Suspension from practicing in the bankruptcy courts of that district, pending review by the state disciplinary authority.[uscourts] Takeaway: When a bankruptcy judge decides counsel abused the system, consequences can include both financial sanctions and a practice ban in that court.

English
9
170
279
9.4K
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
George Palikaras
George Palikaras@palikaras·
Another win! This is a massive one vs. DTCC. One step closer to triangulate the data. Thanks for sharing @kimkep4796 For the record, I need ZERO access to the trading data information for my case (including the Nasdaq 6 month data - I was informed some are really scared I would use, but wait… is there something of value they are uniquely aware of?? -> for the dum dums 🗿🗿) The fact that NASDAQ went and hired Meta’s Nevada Counsel, Ballard Spahr, would be hilarious if it wasn’t true. (For the record the Managing Partner at the Las Vegas office R Kim, was excellent for four years) Mistake or not the laws in Nevada are clear and the options available to the trustee are very significant, for example: 1.Expedited motion to disqualify under Nevada RPC 1.9/1.10 (and 1.7 if concurrent), citing Nevada’s substantial-relationship framework. 2.In the same package, request relief that strikes/denies the motion to quash (or at least bars the conflicted firm from further participation), and sets an accelerated schedule for conflict-free counsel to appear. 3.If Nasdaq (or any subpoena target) resists after an order, escalate to compel + contempt/sanctions using §105(a)/inherent authority and, where appropriate, Rule 9011 / §1927. 4. Discovery of all privileged information between Nasdaq and Ballard Spahr (more nuanced) Example: In re Burnett (Arkansas bankruptcy court) The court found an attorney violated the Code, Bankruptcy Rules, and local rules, and ordered: •Disgorgement of fees, and •Suspension from practicing in the bankruptcy courts of that district, pending review by the state disciplinary authority.[uscourts] Takeaway: When a bankruptcy judge decides counsel abused the system, consequences can include both financial sanctions and a practice ban in that court.
KKep@kimkep4796

🚨 MMAT / MMTLP / TRCH Bankruptcy Update FILED: 2/23/2026 (Attached) (Not legal advice — summary only) ⚖️ 📌 The Trustee filed a Protective Order re: DTCC discovery. What does that mean? It means DTCC was subpoenaed 📄 and sensitive clearing/trading data may be produced — so the court is setting confidentiality rules before it’s handed over. 🔐 This includes: • Transaction data • Trading positions • Liquidity/risk reports • Commission records • Investor identity data This is deep “plumbing level” market data. ⸻ 👉 The DTCC is preparing to produce — under seal. That’s a different posture than NASDAQ, Citadel, Virtu, or Anson…. as they are still fighting the subpoenas. 🤨 ⸻ 🧠 How this plays strategically: If DTCC produces clearing-level data: • It may show trade routing & settlement chains • It may identify participant activity • It may provide timestamps & volume context ⸻ 📂 Discovery may be moving from theory → data. And that changes the dynamics for everyone at the table. ⚠️ Not legal advice. Just analysis of procedural posture. dropbox.com/scl/fi/ze0u9pa…

English
27
286
490
36.3K
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
Jordan Stone
Jordan Stone@TheJordanStone1·
Lfg!! USA 🇺🇸
Português
0
1
2
33
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
Jordan Stone
Jordan Stone@TheJordanStone1·
@FmrRepMTG Can’t wait for you to quit X like you did congress
GIF
English
0
3
3
30
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
Ann Vandersteel™️
Ann Vandersteel™️@annvandersteel·
Can you say #MMTLP?
kristen shaughnessy@kshaughnessy2

From the Epstein Files Here it is- The playbook to destroying small public companies “From: Bruce Galloway To: "jeffrey E." gmail.com> Subject: RE: Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 23:56:04 +0000 Jeffrey, I am sorry it did not work out. Unbeknownst to me over the last 2-3 years there has been a proliferation of Naked shorting of micro crap stocks in Spain and Germany. This is illegal as hell. And if a company is bleeding, it's a no brainer to short it to oblivion from 3 to 2 to 1 to pennies. Than they have to hyper dilute when they raise money. I got stuck in that. I also got a little over zealous with the options, remember we were + 22% the 1st few months. I was also very hurt at the way you treated me , yelling and screaming at me. You dint have to rub my nose in the dirt. I lost a lot of money in these also From: jeffrey E. [mailto:jeevacation(Lgmail.corn] Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 7:28 PM To: Subject: you have never apologized for the dismal results after i trusted you….” justice.gov/epstein/files/… Courtesy @HenryLuMencken @FlyEaglesFly529

English
13
250
468
15.2K
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
Jordan Stone
Jordan Stone@TheJordanStone1·
MMTLP keep pushing!! 👀 👇🏽👇🏽👇🏽
Indonesia
1
10
18
6.2K
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
George Palikaras
George Palikaras@palikaras·
What do MMTLP FOIA handling reveals: 1) “Sensitivity fingerprinting” by subject category (This is a big one) From the category rollups and charts in MMTLP FOIA stats, we can see that delay severity tracks topic sensitivity, NOT age or volume. Certain categories have median pending times exceeding 2 years, including: •OTC Markets •Share Count / Short Interest •SEC Internal •FINRA Communications •Trading Halt Meanwhile, categories like: •Leadership communications •Enforcement / Investigation have materially LOWER medians, despite being plausibly sensitive on paper!? This lets us derive a “sensitivity”fact: Topics that would expose market mechanics, counterparties, or structural failures age the LONGEST. Why it matters: FOIA delay severity correlates with market-structure exposure, not enforcement sensitivity. @USGAO @SECGov @usgaolegal
George Palikaras@palikaras

Talking about transparency and accountability… 1. How does an #MMTLP requester fare compared to a typical SEC FOIA requester? 2. How much of the @SECGov’s FOIA activity is tied up in MMTLP? Special thanks to @f1finra @808CG1 and @Wassabi for sending me their collected FOIA stats and data. Below posts are some important facts and my take on FOIAs related to MMTLP. Congress and especially the @USGAO lead by the newly appointed Acting Comptroller General, Mrs Orice Williams Brown, needs to closely examine! GAO needs to prove to the people, now more than ever, that it still takes its role as the Federal Watchdog seriously, unlike other matters this one should be very straightforward. Otherwise @DOGE was right all along. @annvandersteel below are some interesting stats for your team that may want to look into. politico.com/live-updates/2…

English
2
180
275
7.6K
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
JunkSavvy
JunkSavvy@JunkSavvy·
💥PROPERTY💥CUSTODY💥SETTLEMENT💥 As I have said...the f^ckery is coming from the brokers, not the transfer agent. Decide accordingly w/ what works for you. "Worthless" "We will be happy to clean them out of your account" "Chilled" "Restricted" "Invisible"...wtf??? "Transfer Window" $500 fees "You will harm other investors" "Certificates are dangerous" "Shares are not DRS eligible" ...and the list goes on and on. Welcome to The MMTLP Fiasco!!! We..ARE...NOT...GOING...AWAY!!! #Relentless
Status Pay 🎄🎄🎄🎄@Status_Pay

$MMTLP Just saw this message. Sharing for awareness. I believe the brokers will test the waters to see how many people’s shares they can make disappear and they won’t notice. Especially smaller positions. Please stay vigilant and as the company has stated to best protect your position, send to the transfer agent.

English
5
154
235
5.3K
GreenNGo EV charging retweetledi
KKep
KKep@kimkep4796·
Ticker: $MMAT Case: In re Meta Materials Inc. Date Filed: February 4, 2026 Document: Order Setting Status (Provided below) Conference re: Litigation Financing Not legal advice ⚖️ ⸻ 🧾 Layman’s breakdown •💰 What this is about: The bankruptcy judge wants answers about millions of dollars in litigation funding being used by the trustee’s legal team. •📊 The amount: Court records referenced about $11–$11.8 million arranged to fund legal actions tied to the bankruptcy. •🤔 Why the judge stepped in: The court says it’s unclear how this funding works and notes there doesn’t appear to be a formal motion asking the court to approve the financing under bankruptcy law. •🧑‍⚖️ What the judge ordered: A status conference (court check-in) is set for: 📅 February 20, 2026 🕘 9:30 a.m. 👀 to explain the funding and its terms. •🧑‍💼 Who must explain it: •The Chapter 7 trustee •The trustee’s litigation law firms •🎯 What they must address: How the litigation money was arranged and the terms referenced in the legal contracts filed earlier in the case. •💻 Attendance options: Parties can attend in person or by Zoom/phone. ⸻ 🧩 Why this matters (plain English) •⚖️ The court wants transparency about who is funding lawsuits tied to the bankruptcy. •💼 Litigation funding often signals major legal actions or investigations are being pursued. •🔎 The judge is making sure everything is properly disclosed and approved before it moves forward. ⸻ Not legal advice. Just a simplified explanation of the court order. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
English
10
136
241
9.8K