MORE PROOF THAT THE SEC CASE 🆚 @Ripple IS DANGEROUS TO ALL CRYPTO: 👇
The above language is not John Deaton’s interpretation of the SEC’s Complaint. The above is from Judge Torres herself. She acknowledges that the SEC claims Ripple created the secondary market for #XRP - including all sales - whether between individuals or sold on exchanges.
Judge Torres recognizes the SEC’s claim that b/c Ripple undertook efforts to create a secondary market for XRP, that, therefore, ALL #XRPHolders must have entered into a common enterprise with Ripple - regardless of whether they acquired #XRP directly from Ripple.
It is b/c of this over-broad far-reaching allegation related to secondary sales that allowed the Court to grant #XRPHolders amicus curiae status. IMO it’s why she said she wanted to hear our “meaningful perspective.”
Could the SEC claim @VitalikButerin@ethereumJoseph or the @ethereum foundation helped create a secondary market for #ETH? What about the Stellar Foundation and #XLM? What about #ALGO? #ADA? Hell, one could make the same claim against the #BTC foundation in 2012-2015.
Wake up!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The following email and open letter was sent to @GaryGensler:
Dear Chairman Gensler,
My name is John Deaton and I am an attorney who represents over sixty-thousand XRP Holders. Judge Torres granted us amicus curiae status in the SEC versus Ripple case.
The SEC, under your predecessor, didn’t limit its allegations to only include sales of XRP made by Ripple. Incredibly, the SEC lawyers are alleging the token itself is a security per se. This argument is akin to claiming the oranges were the securities in the Howey case.
With all due respect, it’s an absurd claim and its caused significant damage to retail holders of XRP - many whom utilize the token as a transfer/bridge asset - not as an investment. Over one-half of all XRP Holders purchased XRP for the first time unaware of the company Ripple.
I think it’s time to Connect to Congress again. The crypto industry is floating many proposals for clarifying the federal rules, but U.S. digital asset holders have a more fundamental question for our lawmakers. Let’s put them on the spot. (1/5)
(2/5)
The SEC is practicing regulation by enforcement, setting policy with lawsuits and picking winners and losers rather than leveling the playing field. It’s unclear for investors and unfair to everyone.
(3/5)
To do this, the SEC is relying on a 1940s court case to set crypto policy. This is like using horse & buggy rules to regulate jet planes. It makes no sense, and it needs a solution.
Despite @CGasparino being unbiased and giving Clayton the benefit of the doubt, Clayton has refused to speak to Gasparino and @EleanorTerrett regarding his decision to file the most significant enforcement action in recent history 🆚 @Ripple & #XRP - as he walked out the🚪
2/6
Instead, Clayton chose to go on air with @andrewrsorkin@BeckyQuick and @JoeSquawk. Andrew offered up a 🥎 question and asked Clayton if he wanted to address the serious conflicts of interests and gross appearances of impropriety that have been alleged against him.
3/6
Clayton stated he would not comment on the Ripple case. Regarding the conflicts of interest related to his current employers, Clayton incredibly said:
“I did not know these companies while I was in the government. I was introduced to them after I exited.”
The SEC repeatedly argues #XRP is a speculative investment. Yet, the very next line in Howey is:
“If that test be satisfied, it is immaterial whether the enter-prise is speculative or non-speculative or whether there is a sale of property with or without intrinsic value.”
Howey was decided in 1946 so one might argue there’s no precedent related to cryptocurrencies. NOT TRUE.
In 2019, the federal court in the SDNY handed down the #Telegram case.
Telegram was a pure ICO and money was raised PRIOR to the blockchain technology being developed.
The SEC claims that today’s #XRP including the #XRP traded in the secondary market are all investment contracts with Ripple. 👇👇👇
Does the SEC truly believe that all #XRP are securities - even the XRP sold by exchanges independent of Ripple?
If it truly believed all #XRP are securities, why didn’t the SEC order @JedMcCaleb to cease and desist from selling his billions of #XRP?
Why didn’t it seek a preliminary injunction to stop Ripple from selling any of its billions of escrowed #XRP?
If all #XRP are securities - as alleged by the SEC - why didn’t it attempt to stop anyone who was paid millions or billions in XRP from selling once the case was filed?
THE SEC CLAIMS THAT NO SIGNIFICANT NON-INVESTMENT USE EXISTS FOR #XRP.
What about the thousands of #XRPHolders who acquire the minimal amount of XRP to utilize the #XRPL and the DEX to purchase #CSC or other tokens? Or the thousands that utilize it as a bridge / transfer asset?
THE SEC MAKES THE ABSURD CLAIM THAT #XRPHOLDERS ENTERED INTO A COMMON ENTERPRISE NOT ONLY WITH RIPPLE BUT ALSO WITH ALL OTHER #XRPHOLDERS.
For those of you who think I’m making this 💩 up, read for yourself what the SEC alleges: 👇👇👇