Thread by @freddyriz

#XRPcommunity It was delayed, but I’ve been ½ in celebration mode and ½ in getting lawsuit against SEC ready mode, but here is my analysis on Ripple’s MSJ. TLDR is to watch @attorneyjeremy1‘s video. I will attempt to only add new analysis here (apologies for duplication). 1/22

Not what I expected, and it seems the other attys were likewise surprised. SoloMAN went right to the heart of the matter and made this as basic as possible. Normally I’m not a fan of citing case law more than 100 years old, but I get the reasoning. It will be interesting…2/22

…to see if there is solid case law that no written contract is necessary for an investment contract (what @SECgov must show). The SEC has shockingly little evidence to support its entire case. “When asked in discovery, the @secgov refused to identify a contractual basis...3/22

...for a single offer and sale of XRP.” (p30). @secgov is trying to get a district ct to overturn 2nd Cir case law on “common enterprise” (p41). A losing proposition that is not gonna happen (p43). We already knew SEC’s experts were I’ll-say-anything-for-money type, so I...4/22

...loved when one of its hacks refers to “miners” as being part of the XRP ecosystem (p41). I’m not missing anything, right? There are no miners in XRP world. Overall this is not good for @secgov for the lawsuits about to be filed against it...5/22

…by @johnedeaton1 and against Mssrs. Clayton and Hinman personally. Like, really bad. I would say the arrogance/hubris is off the charts, but sadly @secgov is not really outside the norm for rogue gov agencies. Read this article. 6/22 latimes.com/california/sto…

@secgov is doing so bad, IT DID NOT EVEN REBUT CERTAIN EXPERT TESTIMONY BY RIPPLE (pgs 53, 67, 71). This is legal malpractice level incompetence. Fortunately for the SEC lawyers, incompetence is rewarded at the federal level. 7/22

Ripple preempts SEC’s entire MSJ by addressing SEC’s only decent argument (marketing, public statements) beginning on p54. Masterful takedown using 5 reasons, complete with case law, as to why SEC fails (yet again). 8/22

I’m less inclined to buy into the pre-allocation theories @DigPerspectives based on Ripple asserting it owns 50.2B XRP (p5) ALTHOUGH there is still a chance based on the types of contracts Ripple utilizes in business, slyly noting “Custody Agreements” in a footnote (p31n20). 9/22

Add another expert to Ripple’s case: A. Schwartz (p31). This is @joelkatz‘s brother that he never talks about because of his jealousy that A. Schwartz is 10x smarter…j/k David! I don’t know who this person is. LMK if you figure it out before I do. 10/22

Looks like the reference to the Samarasinghe transcript (i.e., p7) refers to Dinuka Samarasinghe (went from Ripple to GSR to Forte). I’ve referenced GSR a couple of times previously related to the Ripple Oakland Litigation. An interesting background to say the least. 11/22

Great job really laying out how out-of-touch @SECgov is with reality: “Finally, the SEC suggests that the ‘economic reality’ language in Howey gives it a roving commission to regulate any outlay of funds in exchange for an asset that it claims may benefit from the...12/22

...registration and disclosure requirements of the securities laws.” (p26) Other sick burns to @secgov in here: Using recent 2022 SCOTUS case against SEC (p17) and referring to foreign regulators that are not so corrupt, i.e., Singapore and UK, “whose securities...13/22

...regulators have provided their markets considerably more clarity than the SEC has provided to market participants here” (p60). And the decision by @SECgov to bring charges against Brad and Chris is now, unequivocally, shown to be a pure dick move...14/22

to coerce Ripple rather than based on actual evidence. Pathetic you would use two people with families to do that @secgov. Just pathetic. Unsurprising to be sure. 15/22

Additionally, the cowardice of all US exchanges not named @UpholdInc shines brightly in this motion. Just based on @secgov’s own RFAs (which are legally binding for all future cases), there is ZERO REASON for any general counsel to fear XRP is a security. See pg33. 16/22

To wind it down, although Ripple WILL WIN at summary judgment (barring extrajudicial pressure) the fact that J. Torres allowed a Dec. 22 deadline for 3rd party filings means we ain’t getting a ruling until Feb-April 2023 in all likelihood. 17/22

Lastly, thank you @ripple for this MSJ that cost you $50M but I only paid $7.50 for (okay, I’m lying, I got it for free from @filanlaw). Every lawyer now has a master crypto-securities law analysis and you really helped fill in some blanks for the pending, non-XRP related...18/22

...lawsuit against @SECgov! As I have mentioned earlier, early October is going to be very fun. Can't wait to have the #xrpcommunity along for the ride. 19/22

PS: SoloMAN, you had a typo on p19. Be sure to dock the pay of the associate that was in charge of proofreading. 20/22

PSS: @bgarlinghouse I was going to start calling you Mr. Ripple, but can no longer do so because I found out that is the name of an actual crypto exchange (p62). Well played, sir. 21/22

PSSS: @bgarlinghouse, @s_alderoty, @JoelKatz: You all ever throw that holiday party funded with XRP (p36)?

Nuff said.

22/22