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.
Hinman’s law firm was on the Board of the #EtherAlliance. Hinman’s firm represented clients heavily involved with the @ethereum foundation.
Hinman collected over $15 million from his law firm (the one on the Board of the #EtherAlliance) while working at the #SEC.
We know for a fact that Hinman, as Director of Corporation Finance, had a meeting with Joe Lubin and representatives from #Consensys on December 13, 2017.
This meeting with the co-founder of @ethereum took place while the SEC was aggressively investigating and prosecuting ICOs.
#KIK, #EOS, #Telegram, and dozens of others were being investigated or prosecuted during the time period of the Lubin & Hinman meeting.
Despite #XRP’s significant market cap and notoriety, investigating #Ripple wasn’t even a thought despite the SEC’s aggressive stance against ICOs and fraud within the digital asset space.
So why didn’t the SEC pursue #Ripple in 2017 with all the other unregistered securities?
In addition to #XRP being the #2 or the #3 crypto asset, prior to 2015 FinCEN and the SEC agreed to meet regularly and share information about companies.
Ripple entered into a settlement agreement with FinCEN in 2015 agreeing to register all future XRP sales “only” with FinCEN.
The point is the SEC was well aware of Ripple and #XRP by 2017.
Let’s return to the Lubin and @ConsenSys meeting in December 2017. If not about #Ether’s crowdfunded ICO, what was it about?
In his deposition, Hinman claimed he was unsure who represented Lubin and #Consensys.🤔
That’s right, Hinman testified he was unsure whether his boss and close friend, Jay Clayton’s law firm represented Lubin and #Consensys. 🤥
Six months after this initial meeting with Lubin and #Consensys, on June 14, 2018, Hinman stated #Ether was NO LONGER a security.
He ignored the #ETH ICO because it can’t be described as anything other than an unregistered securities offering.
In his speech. Hinman says “putting aside the fundraising…” 👇
Why would Hinman put aside the fundraising?
Regardless, we can all agree this is one HUGE “aside”.
Why give such a HUGE advantage to #ETH in the race for the number 2 spot behind #Bitcoin?
The above facts demonstrate HUGE conflicts of interests.
You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to seriously question the integrity of the process during the Clayton and Hinman era.
Why does @ethereumJoseph single out #XRP and state with such conviction that the other tokens will not get the same clarity that #BTC and #Ether received?👇
How does Lubin know with such certainty that the SEC won’t comment further regarding other decentralized networks? 👇
Lubin and @novogratz were roommates and close friends. Why is Novogratz so confident that he can bet “diamonds to donuts” that #ETH won’t be declared a security just 9 days before the speech👇
Novogratz with great conviction guaranteed the SEC wouldn’t declare #ETH a security👇
@HesterPeirce is a a Commissioner of the SEC and has less confidence or knowledge regarding anything the SEC will or will not do.
The SEC usually never gives clear and decisive market opinions yet these two gentlemen seemed to know exactly what the SEC would do or not do. 🤔
How could Lubin predict so accurately the SEC would refuse to comment on any other tokens? Why was #XRP singled out? Lubin literally gloats that compared to #ETH & #BTC other tokens will be “spectacularly” disadvantaged because of regulatory uncertainty?
Mike’s a very smart guy, but he wouldn’t be that confident unless he was assured by someone who had personal knowledge of what Hinman was going to say about #ETH in that speech.
In the clip below the General Counsel of Consensys Mr. Corva discusses an alliance with regulators.
We know Corva met with Hinman the day before the above clip.
Just how many times did Lubin or others from #Ether or @ConsenSys meet or talk with the SEC between December 13, 2017 and June 14, 2018?
Who reviewed, edited or helped write the Hinman speech before June 14, 2018?
Who’s on the 63 emails regarding the speech?
Who made any large purchases of #ETH leading up to the speech?
If anyone did make large purchases of #ETH leading up to the speech, do they have any connection to Lubin and Consensys or Hinman and Clayton or their law firms?
Joe Lubin was 💯 on 🎯 when he said other tokens would be spectacularly disadvantaged compared to #BTC and #ETH.
@bgarlinghouse and @JoelKatz met with Hinman and Clayton on August 20, 2018 - 9 weeks after the speech.
This is how @Ripple’s CEO described this disadvantage:👇
9 weeks after the speech Garlinghouse tells Clayton and Hinman that #Ripple is living in “purgatory” because the SEC didn’t provide the same clarity for #XRP that it did #ETH.
In response, neither Clayton nor Hinman told #Ripple’s CEO that they believed #XRP was a security.
The origination of #ETH fits the Howey definition of an investment contract much easier than #XRP ever could.
Anyone that does a cursory review of the facts above (and there is so much more), will come to only one conclusion: the lawsuit against #Ripple and #XRP was a hit job.
In a clip above, @novogratz himself predicted the SEC would pick a token or promoters and try and take them out as an example.
You don’t have to be a fan of #Ripple or #XRP to acknowledge the injustice, the selective enforcement, and deep conflicts of interests or corruption.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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
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