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
Lubin proclaims how other projects are “spectacularly” disadvantaged.
#BTC and #Ether have a HUGE advantage because the other projects must now deal with the @SECGov. He argues how the other tokens are basically securities.
When you consider the pass that #Ether was given by Clayton, Hinman and the SEC, you would think he would have more grace.👇
You simply cannot overstate the significance and advantage that the Hinman Speech provided to #Ether and #BTC
I’ve said for months it makes no legal or common sense to claim today’s #XRP itself is a security and that there must be an ulterior motive behind the #Ripple lawsuit.🤔
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.
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.
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