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.
I thought I would look up this Brian Rabbit since he was a Senior Advisor to Clayton and met with @JoelKatz and @bgarlinghouse.
What does Attorney Rabbit say about how the @SECGov provides guidance to market participants:
Through speeches!
Yet, the SEC claims otherwise.🤥
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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.
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
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:
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