### Comment:
My understanding is that Musk's argument centers around not needing pre-approval for Tweets that a reasonable person would not deem material. If that's how the consent decree was written, and assuming that he was therefore in compliance with that piece of it, then the argument essentially boils down to whether his '7:15 tweet' actually contained material info, doesn't it?

### REPLY:
If not that tweet, then look at the handful of other times he's done it as outlined in the SEC brief. Further, he never implemented the twitter sitter as required anyways. It probably doesn't even matter if that particular tweet is material or not. In any way you look at it he is in violation.

### END.