This Thread discusses one of the theories that I allege in our legal action against the SEC. It’s called REGULATION by ENFORCEMENT. @HesterPeirce and the new SEC Chairman Elad Roisman have both publicly stated that it SHOULD NOT be practiced. forkast.news/sec-commission…
Former SEC Chairman Clayton stated many times when asked about XRP that the SEC can’t comment on any a specific product or company. He would only say “if it’s a security, we will regulate it.” He was asked repeatedly by CNBC reporters and at FinTech conferences specifically about
XRP. He was asked whether XRP would get the same status as BTC and ETH. He repeatedly stated that the SEC would not comment on specific products. But this runs afoul of the SEC Mission Statement which states the SEC WILL SHARE information about companies to help investors make
informed decisions. XRP has been traded on over two hundred exchanges worldwide for the past seven years with a daily volume between $10-26 billion. Clayton knew there may be investor confusion yet remained quiet until the day before he leaves office, SEVEN YEARS Later, declaring
XRP an unregistered security.
If the SEC refuses to make comments on companies and/or specific products as Clayton suggests, then that leaves the industry and investors to wildly speculate as to what the SEC may or may not do. Clayton himself seemed confused about securities.
He has publicly stated that if a person purchases a token and someone goes out and does a venture and that effort increases the value of the token, it is a security. This sole characterization of what constitutes a security is absolutely WRONG!
Clayton has also stated that if a person gets a “return” in the secondary markets from the token, it is a security. That would make everything a security including BTC. Maybe Clayton and the SEC are confused as to
what a security is in the context of Blockchain technology and
Digital Assets. Maybe the SEC
doesn’t know or understand how Digital Currencies fit in the regulatory scheme. Maybe, Clayton and the SEC have used the XRP action as a way to engage in regulation by enforcement by going after the
third largest Cryptocurrency?
It’s not likely the SEC can file suit against Satoshi Nakamato
related to BTC! Is the attack
on XRP a way to open the door on all of Crypto? The good news is that Acting SEC Chairman Elad Roisman has publicly been critical of this regulation by enforcement practice.
He has stated that he always analyzes on a case by case basis with investor welfare as his “North Star.” He stated, “when considering market
participants acting in good faith to comply with the rules, enforcement should be the last resort not a first resort.”
At SEC Speaks 2020, Roisman stated “we should not use our enforcement powers to promulgate and set new legal standards.” Roisman
expressed concern that regulation by enforcement can undermine the rule making process in the Administrative Procedure Act, which provides for
public comment.” Remember former SEC Chairman Grundfest warned Clayton not to file the enforcement action against Ripple the way it did because it would cause Unprecedented damage when no exigency existed and considering XRP has traded for 7 years. Clayton ignored this warning.
Clayton wouldn’t allow for comment by the incoming
administration that was assuming control in less than 30 days, let along wait for public comment. Let’s hope between @HesterPeirce and Elad Roisman, this practice of regulation by enforcement ends soon.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with John E Deaton

John E Deaton Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JohnEDeaton1

10 Jan
THEORY 2: PERSONAL GAIN Jay Clayton, prior to the SEC, was a partner at Sullivan & Cromwell LLP as its Head of Corporate Practice and Finance. Clayton advised the largest firms in INVESTMENT BANKING and had a long history of advising and working with Goldman Sachs (GS).
Read @Santiag78758327 Thread below for great insight. He points out GS is deeply involved and familiar with the global banking infrastructure including cross-border commodity swaps and the SWIFT PAYMENT SYSTEM. Jay Clayton’s wife has worked for and closely with GS for 2 decades.
The SEC in it’s Complaint admits that since, at least 2015,
Ripple has targeted replacing SWIFT in the international payment arena with XRP. As @sentosumosaba and others have discussed, SBI Holdings is testing the use of XRP in the Fx markets. A former GS executive,
Read 6 tweets
10 Jan
THEORY 1: POLITICAL REVENGE It is known both in the crypto community and the Gov’t that Clayton is perceived to be anti-crypto. President Trump stated that he does not favor Bitcoin OR cryptocurrency. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin has publicly stated similar beliefs. Former NSA John
Bolton stated that he was present when he heard Trump instruct Mnuchin to “GO AFTER BITCOIN.” More significant, is that Ripple and its executives, especially CEO @bgarlinghouse, Co-founder @chrislarsensf and General Counsel @s_alderoty have been very critical of the Trump
Administration and Clayton. In 2018 Garlinghouse and CTO @JoelKatz met with Clayton and Trump’s senior officials. Afterwards, Alderoty stated that the U.S. is close to losing the global edge in crypto and Blockchain technology to China. Larsen argued that China can reverse a BTC
Read 25 tweets
6 Jan
This Thread is meant to offer why I believe that Digital Assets and Cryptocurrency investors should be VERY concerned about the SEC enforcement action against XRP. Notice, I said XRP - not Ripple! I’m not here to defend Ripple or Garlinghouse or Larsen. Their lawyers can do that.
If the SEC had charged Ripple with the sale or distribution of unregistered securities in the form of XRP, in the early days, when XRP was ONLY connected to Ripple, with a limited use case, like it did with EOS/KIN, I wouldn’t have acted and I would still have 120 followers. 😂
But the SEC DID NOT limit the claim to early distributions made directly by Ripple or its executives. WHY NOT? Not a single case in the 74 years since the Howey Test was established has the Supreme Court found a security absent a contract or privity between buyers and sellers.
Read 23 tweets
5 Jan
My last thread discussed the Howey test and what factors determine a security under U.S. law. I briefly demonstrated, on its face, how XRP IS NOT a security applying those factors.This thread will show the many ways that the SEC CAN’T prove that TODAY’s XRP constitute securities.
Currencies are excluded from statutory definition of a security.
XRP has been trading in Secondary Markets since 2013. In 2015, the DOJ and
FinCen settled a case with Ripple and determined XRP was virtual currency.
Ripple was classified as a money transmitter of XRP. The settlement required Ripple’s XRP transactions to comply with
laws dealing with currencies or commodities NOT securities. Currency is generally defined as a medium of exchange, unit of account and/or a
store of value.
Read 13 tweets
5 Jan
In the SEC Complaint against Ripple, it alleges that Ripple continues to sell unregistered Securities in the form of XRP. Unlike, in the ICO cases of 2017, the SEC did not only focus on early distributions but made the ridiculous claim that XRP is a security today. Let’s review:
The controlling law on what constitutes a security was handed down in 1946 in the Supreme Court case of SEC v Howey. Howey has set the standard for over 74 years.
The underlying asset in Howey was orange groves. Thus, we must compare the orange Groves to the Digital Asset XRP.
Orange groves were plots of land that were sold to tourists. The investors purchased the lots of land, but also paid the seller money to manage the orange groves. The seller would plant the seeds, water the trees, harvest the oranges and sell the oranges to people and places.
Read 18 tweets
3 Jan
Always remember our democracy is supposed to be a a government “by the people for the people.” I filed an action against the SEC because it and our governmental officials have forgotten who they represent. Yes
The SEC’s mission statement is to “protect investors, promote fairness and share information about companies…to help investors make informed decisions and invest with confidence.” As chairman of the SEC, it was Jay Clayton’s fiduciary duty to enforce the mission statement.
He failed miserably. Instead of protecting investors and sharing
information to help investors make informed decisions about XRP he knowingly and intentionally caused multi-billion-dollar losses to innocent investors.
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!