When the SEC sued @Ripple and #XRP tanked and people got liquidated and lost their life savings, some people said “they deserve it for being stupid” or “for investing in a shit coin.” I see similar comments regarding #Luna / #UST. People make mistakes. We all have at some point.
Financial education, especially in the United States 🇺🇸, is nonexistent. Unless your an evil human being, you don’t “deserve” to be financially devastated. Some very successful financially savvy people were high on #Luna, just as some were / are on #XRP.
Hell, @novogratz got a #Luna tattoo and he is as sophisticated as investors come. The point is smart people were invested. I’m not excusing laziness and I’m not suggesting that you should feel sorry for anyone b/c they made a bad decision or what you consider a stupid decision.
No one is entitled to your sympathy. That’s yours freely to give when you deem it appropriate.
There’s a significant difference from not being sympathetic and celebrating the pain of innocent people.
There are lives behind the grave statistics. There are good people behind the massive losses. You can call people naive, lazy, greedy, etc., and maybe some of it is true. You wanna say “I told you so?”
That’s fine.
But cheering or celebrating or making fun of the the fact that people lost everything is shameful. If you’re an #XRPHolder I’m sure you recall those that celebrated at your loss.
Just now I learned 8 people have taken there life over the shame and terror of losing it all. 💔
The violations are in regards to the regulation of cryptocurrencies and possible financial conflicts of interest involving former Director of Corporation Finance William Hinman.
On May 9, 2022, @EMPOWR_us sent a referral of this evidence to the Office of the Inspector General at the SEC.
@HesterPeirce has a tough and frustrating job. I get now exactly what she meant when she told @ThinkingCrypto1 that she spends some of her time trying to get her colleagues at the SEC to STOP viewing the token as the security. Read the comment below. 👇
“Something can transform from a security to a non-security.”
Although not incorrect, it is not the proper way to evaluate investment contracts. Any commodity or asset can be offered as a security. There was a case where #BTC was declared a security b/c of how it was offered.
Stanford Law Professor Joseph Grundfest in the video below in 2015 says sometimes #BTC is a security and sometimes it is not.
The fundamental concept seems to be lost on the SEC. they focus on the underlying asset too much. It’s intellectually lazy.
I probably have 100 DMs asking the above question and many others are frustrated and wondering why I or others aren’t moving forward with a lawsuit against Hinman for his blatant ethical conflicts. Everyone wants justice today. I get it. So do I.
The truth is anyone could file a suit today. But, as of right now, the case would get dismissed with prejudice based on the qualified immunity Hinman enjoys as a former government official.
I have said if Hinman knew his law firm was a member of the EEA and he didn’t get approval from the Ethics Office (which he couldn’t), it would, IMO, constitute a violation of criminal conflict laws. But we must PROVE Hinman had actual knowledge that STB was a member of the EEA.
Some have criticized me, claiming I have no idea what the SEC’s June 13, 2018 #XRP Memo or the Hinman emails say; and, therefore, should not comment. I reject such criticism and here is why.
We know exactly what the Memo doesn’t say! Judge Netburn made a very important comment in her Order finding the Memo 📝 protected by the deliberative process privilege.
She noted the Memo 📝 DID NOT make any recommendations. This means no enforcement action was recommended.
We know it doesn’t conclude #XRP is a security (even without an enforcement recommendation).
Some might be now thinking 🤔:
“Deaton you don’t know that for sure.”
Of course I do, and here’s how:
1) If it concluded #XRP was clearly a security, it would recommend enforcement.
Everyone knows that part already. But what I didn’t realize until @TigerMike15 pointed it out to me, was that Ripple was still providing both FinCEN and the DOJ Independent Audit Reports of #XRP sales until 2020 - the same year it was sued by the SEC.
You can read for yourself that Ripple was subject to an external audit requirement clause as part of the 2015 settlement wherein FinCEN declared #XRP “convertible virtual currencies.” Ripple had to hire an independent auditor that the DOJ and FinCEN didn’t object to.
I’ve read Jimmy’s 🧵 👇 and reviewed Judge Torres’ Local Rules related to Summary Judgement scheduling. As usual, when Jimmy Filan tweets or speaks we should listen. Read his 🧵 👇
The issue right now, as Jimmy points out, is w/r the parties have to comply w/ her normal process?
This is important for our amicus brief b/c if they file pre-motion letters, it will provide us w/ a lot of information each side is relying on (evidence, exhibits, deposition testimony, etc). After reading those pre-motion letters, I will know what info to ask to review.
If the parties ask and she agrees to waive her normal process and there are no pre-motion letters and the Court sets dates, we won’t get to see any information until the motions are filed. If that happens, I will have to figure out the best approach to gain access to information.