Thread by @JohnEDeaton1

So, I tweeted out the below 🧵 and w/in 30 minutes, I was getting DMs and emails at my law firm asking me how much 💰 the @Ripple executives are paying me to ✍️ my 🧵s. 🤦

https://twitter.com/johnedeaton1/status/1600568575953092611

Articles like the one below routinely state exactly what this one does:

“Crypto Law founder and pro-Ripple lawyer attorney John Deaton responded …”

I don’t defend Ripple, I defend the truth and the facts. Notice that when I do a 🧵 I cite actual facts.

thecryptobasic.com/2022/12/07/dea…

When someone tweets out that they think the Ripple executives gifted themselves too much #XRP, I don’t challenge what they say. It’s a fair criticism. When someone says Ripple owns too much XRP and that fact makes them less attracted to the token or project I don’t argue w/them.

When someone tweets out that Ripple helped create a secondary market by gifting XRP to people or selling XRP to people or offering incentives to list on exchanges, I don’t challenge them, even though almost every project has done the same. They have the right to their opinions.

But if someone like @saylor goes on a top podcast like @patrickbetdavid’s as he did recently, and he claims that Ripple or @bgarlinghouse etc. committed fraud or deceived or misrepresented the public, implying the case against Ripple involves fraud - I simply state the truth.

For example, I point out that, after a 30 month long investigation, the SEC didn’t charge fraud, misrepresentation or omission against @Ripple @chrislarsensf @bgarlinghouse @JoelKatz or any other executive - past or present.

I point out to the Ripple haters (some of them are Ripple’s competitors), to only imagine if every Crypto company, platform or project, underwent 30 months of an exhaustive SEC investigation. Would all of them be able to avoid a fraud,
Misrepresentation or omission charge? 🤔

I point out that, as a prosecutor, if you’re bringing a case against the company and its executives, and you have grounds to allege fraud or misrepresentation, you definitely charge it - b/c of criminal penalties (ie possible jail).

Charging fraud gives the government leverage.

Thus, you can bet that since the SEC had already decided to sue the two executives for aiding and abetting Ripple in the offer and sale of an unregistered security (a non-fraud charge), if there had been valid grounds to charge fraud - without question - the SEC would have.

I don’t claim Ripple is w/o criticism. I simply point out indisputable truths which cause some people to say “you’re defending these guys so you must be on their payroll.”

Trust me, after learning what Ripple’s lawyers are likely charging Ripple, I can think of worse things.

I point out these facts, not for Ripple, but for #XRPHolders, who’s property is being impacted by the fud, mistruths and false narratives promulgated by people who are intentionally misleading or, they don’t know what they’re talking about - even if technically a 🚀 scientist.

In fact, @CGasparino and @EleanorTerrett wrote in their opus: “Deaton is no Ripple fan boy.”

Now that doesn’t mean I have anything against Ripple either, b/c in full disclosure: I bought Ripple pre-IPO shares off @linqtoinc, along w/@krakenfx, @BitPay, @UpholdInc, and @SoFi.

You can be a #Bitcoin Maxi like @saylor and have you’re opinions about #XRP, even believing its a shitcoin or that the technology is inferior (even though the #XRPL has proven to be a better layer 2 solution to the #BTC problem than ⚡️ - but you don’t get to make up facts.

The way the SEC has approached Crypto in general and the way the SEC has behaved specifically 🆚 @Ripple and its executives during this case is absolutely appalling. The SEC has truly become an innovation killing cesspool of corruption.

Btw, it’s not just me, a Judge 👩‍⚖️ overseeing discovery in the case literally said the SEC was engaging in “hypocrisy” and lawyers at the SEC “lacked a faithful allegiance to the law.”

Tells you all you need to know why Saylor and others should pause before quoting the SEC.