I'm a regulatory compliance atty and have handled state and federal demands, exams, and investigations of various scope over the last 10+ years. A few thoughts on the Hburg/Clover matter. Highlights only. @DipDeity @MrZackMorris

The Report cites to a DOJ civil investigative demand ("CID") and links to a redacted copy. All dates on the CID and recipient info have been redacted. Without this information, it's unknown how old the CID is or who responded. The CID does mention ...

...the pandemic so it had to have been issued sometime after Feb 2020. The contents of the CID seem perfunctory and request only an "oral exam", not a mass production of documents. Regardless, it's concerning that DOJ is investigating at all because ...

... DOJ does not scattershot its resources. Conversely, we don't know the current status of the investigation and it's likely that Clover isn't allowed to comment publicly on it. Thus, p. 57 of the Soc Cap HS S-4 (linked below) discloses the ...

possibility of investigations but not the existence. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1801170/000119312520272347/d69158ds4.htm
Still, generally speaking, heavily redacted docs should be taken with a grain of salt.

Hburg takes issue w/ Seek Insurance, which it characterizes as "thinly disclosed". The use of ...

adverbs (and adjectives) such as "thinly" and "totally", found throughout the Report, is associated with weakness in either the author's rationale or the evidence offered to support the position. Since it seems the relationship was disclosed, it's used to support both. ...

A review of some of the 18 questions and Clover's reponses:
1. Did Chamath know of investigation and why no disclosure? Fair question. Clover's response doesn't fully address the matter, but that may be due to confidentiality. The CID was clearly provided to an individual ...

familiar w/ Clover, though. Clover DOES acknowledge receipt of an RFI, which is not as "serious" as a CID, and addresses other compliance issues.

4. Use of the word "blatant" tells you all you need to know about this question.

5. Clover's response that Seek isn't "literally [owned]" by Clover is huge -- so huge it should make an objective reader look more critically at the Hburg piece.

Clover's responses on Qs 6, 7, 8, and 9 "literally own" Hburg's assertions.

Q 10 is pointless and does nothing to advance Hburg's position. Stated differently, "Is Clover aware that investors like to know things?" Who would say no??

11. Addressing the problem w/ upcoding unprompted is something Chamath NEEDED to do. Hburg shouldn't have asked this -- they grooved a pitch to Clover for a nice shot over the left field wall. I don't understand it.

Q12 is meh. Looking for info? Clover clarifies. Good reply.

13. re: incentives to use Clover Assistant software. Another question with no thought. Companies want vendors to use their products because there's an efficiency angle: streamlining data flow. While $200 per visit seems generous, Clover obv has its reasons for the amount.

14. Hburg grasping now, asking about whether Assistant is user-friendly. "Multiple doctors explained" ... could be just 2 or 3 doctors. Any co. will look to improve the usability of software provided to third parties.

15. "A former employee" said the last employer did something illegal. Grain of salt. No evidence to support the claim. If there is anything to this, it should have been Question #2 instead of 15.

16. Why CEO's hospitals charge highest rates? Yikes. Even though Clover separates itself from the hospital entity, the reply is a stonewall. Fair: can't comment on CarePoint. NJ isn't cheap, though, and healthcare is expensive as-is.

17. Asks about Garipalli's donation to mayor through PAC. You want a seat at the table? You pay for it. Backs need scratched. That said, I'm not familiar enough with campaign contribution laws to take a position on this, esp as it relates to shell contributions. It's worth ....

noting the article cited by Hburg was in the "Opinion" section and says so at the top of the screenshot. Good disclosure, but more grains of salt.

18. Executive turnover. Implies instability due to ... conscience? Leadership? Fair question, but offers little without context.

The Hburg piece uses "Chamath" 59 times. Hburg has no position in $CLOV. What about other Chamath SPACs? Just a thought.
Disclosure: I hold $CLOV. The Report didn't change my mind on it. Please advise if someone else has fully critiqued. Would love to read.

PS -- I may not reply to posts on this. No disrespect intended by either this write-up or responses/non-responses. Good luck to all, and please remember to contribute to your favorite charity. I strongly recommend @StJude