I registered a throwaway account to play devils advocate with what feels like a straw-man argument from yourself:

>digiforce.com directs to some random japanese site

It could be that the brand digaforce wasn't valuable to strategic link partners & they let it go.

> the Strategic Link site looks like something made from a (bad) wordpress template.

Their target market looks like military and law enforcement. You don't necessarily need shiny marketing to sell to the land of powerpoint: personal selling through established contacts works. Ex military stick together because of how bonds were forged.

>I almost wonder if he made up a company to acquire his company.

Are you suggesting he invented strategic link partners? This is probably pretty easy to validate as their management is well documented on their site - all ex military.

>Next, no way Facebook hires someone like that to lead "THE" growth team for pages.

You've built the next step of your argument assuming your previous allegations are true.

>Maybe as an entry level PM or something.

Is what you argued previously about his character true or not? If he was fraudulent (i.e. inventing companies etc.) then Facebook probably wouldn't hire at all (or he'd get washed out pretty quickly).

> He was only at facebook for 1.5 years, which also makes me skeptical he was such a high priority hire for Snapchat.

His allegation says that Snapchats intent was to gain confidential information about Facebook. Does 1.5 years matter in this case? Recent information is what's key here.

> Sounds like a bunch of hot air and resume puffing to me.

What are the facts we know for sure? He worked for Facebook. He was involved in some startups. He is ex military. He was hired by snapchat briefly and fired.

>My guess is that Snapchat realized he had an overly active imagination and had taken liberties with his resume.

Have you read his complaint? He alleges he was calling out snapchat internally on misrepresenting metrics to prospective investors - and they fired him for it.

What's more likely? He faked his way into Facebook and survived 1.5 year, generated enough demand to get noticed by Snapchat and then jumped to snapchat only to be found out to be completely incompetent in three weeks?

Or... his military / honour based mindset got him in trouble when he saw things happening in snapchat that were at odds with his value system.

There is definitely smoke here in my opinion. You have to be grossly incompetent to get fired within three weeks. If he did manage to fake his way into Facebook then he does have a level of competency. To me, it doesn't make sense that he'd screw up and get fired in three weeks. Especially given his military background.

Does this make sense?