This is significant evidence in @SECGov 🆚 @Ripple & and even more significant evidence in #XRPHolders 🆚 @SECGov.

@CRYPTOcounselo2 does a great job summarizing the relevant statements and admissions contained in the video shared. Read the thread.

Some additional thoughts:
Amy Starr is likely one of the fact witnesses from the #SEC that #Ripple elected to depose in addition to William Hinman.

Her name was brought up in the Hinman deposition. See pic 👇

In the Consensus 2019 video Amy states “we have people that really understand the technology.”
Amy Starr states that at the #SEC “we developed an expertise” in blockchain technology and that at the #SEC “we participate internationally.”

Why is this all significant? One, #XRP was internationally recognized as a non-security!

Two, the #SEC was an expert and understood
blockchain technology so well YET it chose to NOT bring a case against #Ripple or #XRP for 7.5 years even though it aggressively pursued others between 2017-2019.

This makes the decision to file the case on Clayton’s last day even more arbitrary, capricious and suspicious.
The other HUGE piece of evidence are the statements by @coinbase’s General Counsel of Business Lines & Markets, Dorothy Dewitt.

She made these comments 3 months AFTER #Coinbase listed #XRP.

Most significant is that we know #Coinbase met with the #SEC in early 2019 to
specifically discuss #Coinbase’s decision to list #XRP. It is very likely that #Coinbase met with Amy Starr who was a “senior person in the division with oversight of novel securities” and later joined the FinHub unit at the #SEC.

Bottom line: Amy Starr worked for Hinman in the
Division of Corporate Finance. She apparently set up the Hinman meeting with Joe Lubin, Co-founder of #Ethereum and founder of Consensys.

Dorothy Dewitt, a General Counsel at #Coinbase, stated that #Coinbase worked closely with the #SEC and that #Coinbase would:
“analyze each token one by
one to make sure they’re NOT securities BEFORE listing them.”

She said #Coinbase implemented a “robust analysis as possible” which “included an #Howey analysis” and that #Coinbase “felt very confident in its robust analysis.”

She said each token
listing must be “defensible before listing in the U.S.”

She made sure to point out that #Coinbase “rejected tokens” because they failed this robust #Howey securities’ analysis.

Even more significant, she stated that #Coinbase “considered the #SEC’s framework” and “found it
helpful” when developing #Coinbase’s own framework in determining
whether a token is a security.

She stated #Coinbase’s framework did something the #SEC’s framework didn’t do.

She stated that #Coinbase’s framework has weightings assigned to each individual factor.
She stated that both the #SEC’s framework and the #Coinbase
framework “reinforced Hinman’s view that a token can start out as a security but later not be.”

Bottom line: at this meeting ABOUT #XRP, the #SEC DID NOT disagree with the #Coinbase analysis - which partly relies
on the #SEC’s analysis - that #XRP IS NOT a security.

Ladies and gentlemen, in the United States 🇺🇸, there is no bigger market participant than @coinbase.

Isn’t it ironic that a HUGE piece of evidence that #Ripple will rely on to establish its Fair Notice Defense - that market
participants reasonably believed that #XRP is not a security- comes from a market participant that delisted #XRP.

Remember, the Fair Notice Defense is an objective analysis. What did market participants believe?

This is even more critical evidence for #XRPHolders.
If #XRPHolders get a chance to be heard in this case, this is some of the evidence I will be presenting on behalf of #XRPHolders to show that regardless of whether #XRP was a security in 2013-2017, it’s insane to say that today’s token itself is a security.
For more on understanding the significance of the Fair Notice defense please see @CryptoLawUS’s recent video.
#xrpwins

• • •

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

11 Sep
WHO REVIEWED & HELPED WRITE THE HINMAN SPEECH?

Who was on the 63 emails that included a draft of the speech?

Where is Hinman’s public calendar?

Who purchased large quantities of #Ether between December 2017 to June 13, 2018?

$10k in #ETH ICO = a net worth more @GaryGensler👇
@ethereumJoseph received 9.5% of #ETH as a co-founder.

Everyone knows @VitalikButerin and Lubin held an ICO through crowdfunding which was without a doubt an unregistered securities offering.

Where was @SECGov?

Where is outrage from those that attack @Ripple & #XRP?
One River bet $1 billion on #BTC and #Ether in October 2020. Two months later on his last day at the @SECGov, Clayton directs the enforcement action against @Ripple and #XRP. Twelve weeks later, Clayton joins One River.

Clayton’s law firm represented Lubin and #Consensys.
Read 25 tweets
3 Sep
Consider the following:

Clayton and Hinman worked closely together before the @SECGov. Clayton brings Hinman on board to join him and the #SEC.

Joe Lubin @ethereumJoseph is co-founder of #Ether and founder of #Consensys.

Clayton’s law firm represented Lubin and #Consensys.
Hinman’s law firm was on the Board of the #EtherAlliance and represented clients involved with the #Ethereum Foundation.

Hinman met with Lubin and Consensys prior to his June 14, 2018 #BTC and #Ether are not securities speech.

Lubin was part of the Hinman speech conference.
In October 2020 One River makes a $1 billion bet on #BTC & #Ether.

2 months later on his last day at the SEC Clayton directed the filing of the enforcement action against @Ripple @bgarlinghouse & @chrislarsensf asserting the ridiculous claim that even Today’s #XRP is a security
Read 7 tweets
3 Sep
In the Hinman deposition it is mentioned that attorney Brian Rabbit was present at a meeting between Hinman & Clayton and @bgarlinghouse and @JoelKatz.

Attorney Rabbit was Senior Policy Advisor to Chairman Clayton at the time. Meet Brian Rabbit 👇
jonesday.com/en/lawyers/r/b…
Attorney Rabbit was at this meeting wherein Brad Garlinghouse informs Clayton that @Ripple was living in “purgatory” because of the lack of clarity regarding whether #XRP is or is not a security. Of course, Clayton never responded back to Garlinghouse that #XRP is a security.
The only thing more ridiculous than the @SECGov claiming today’s #XRP is a security is the @SECGov’s argument that the Hinman speech was only his personal opinion and not meant to be guidance by the #SEC.

@digitalassetbuy found Brian Jackson discussing the Hinman speech.
Read 4 tweets
2 Sep
@digitalassetbuy and #XRPCommunity add this to the mounting evidence regarding conflicts of interest and self-dealing.

It appears Hinman sent his speech to only one commissioner - Jay Clayton.

Why wouldn’t he get input from #CryptoMom @HesterPeirce?

[see Hinman testimony]👇
He said he didn’t “feel the input was worth the extra delay.”

He didn’t seek input from the commissioner who arguably is the most interested and most familiar with the digital asset space and who recommended a Safe Harbor provision for the asset class? Yea, makes perfect sense.
We already know that Hinman’s law firm Simpson Thatcher was on the Board of the #EthereumAlliance.

And now from the testimony above we know which law firm represented Joe Lubin and Consensys during all this suspicious activity:

Jay Clayton’s law firm, Sullivan & Cromwell. Wow!
Read 4 tweets
22 Aug
A @SECGov 🆚 @Ripple 🧵

For the first time ever in a non-ICO case, the @SECGov is asserting that the digital asset itself - #XRP - is a security.

That absurd argument not only violates common sense but it’s in direct contradiction of over 70 years of case law and precedent.
In the #Howey case in 1946, there were two contracts in play between the investors and the W.J. Howey Co:

(1) a purchase and sale contract for the Orange 🍊 Groves;

(2) the investors signed a service contract hiring Howey to handle everything (from planting thru selling).
The Supreme Court found that the entire “scheme” taken together constituted a securities offering.

The Supreme Court NEVER said or implied that the oranges 🍊 were securities.

73 years later in 2019, the SDNY handed down the #Telegram case.

Telegram was a typical ICO case.
Read 16 tweets
17 Jul
One reason of many why the Hinman Deposition is a BIG DEAL:

Excerpt of Hinman Speech:

“And putting aside the fundraising that accompanied the creation of Ether, based on my understanding of the present state of Ether, the Ethereum network and its decentralized structure,
current offers and sales of Ether are not securities transactions.”

Hinman met with a founder of #Ethereum 1 week before the speech and again afterwards.

1) Putting aside the fundraising is a BIG ASIDE;

2) What did the founder say that helped form his “understanding”;
3) @Ripple’s lawyers will have him walk through his “understanding” of decentralization;

4) have him admit he communicated his understanding to market participants which created the standard within the market;

5) show that #XRP’s decentralization meets that understanding; and
Read 4 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!

:(