Jump to content

Highlights of Pre-Trial Conference - Bombshell revealed


Recommended Posts

I have to agree with Chervinsky over Hogan re: the SEC not acting sooner and exchanges asking the SEC. That's not really a "bombshell" or convincing legally speaking, which is all that counts (NOT our opinions/feelings/hopes). The "due process" stuff doesn't add up the way XRP fans want it to. The SEC was right not to say anything if there was an investigation pending. 

As Chervinsky (who gets a lot of unecessary hate from the embarassing "XRP army") calmly explains:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, thinlyspread said:

I have to agree with Chervinsky over Hogan re: the SEC not acting sooner and exchanges asking the SEC. That's not really a "bombshell" or convincing legally speaking, which is all that counts (NOT our opinions/feelings/hopes). The "due process" stuff doesn't add up the way XRP fans want it to. The SEC was right not to say anything if there was an investigation pending. 

As Chervinsky (who gets a lot of unecessary hate from the embarassing "XRP army") calmly explains:

 

As much as I want to believe this ends in a relatively quick settlement, the Hogans and the Hynes are bag holders with bias. The SEC holds the upper hand in this case until the moment a settlement is reached that allows XRP to be relisted as a tradeable currency on exchanges. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, thinlyspread said:

I have to agree with Chervinsky over Hogan re: the SEC not acting sooner and exchanges asking the SEC. That's not really a "bombshell" or convincing legally speaking, which is all that counts (NOT our opinions/feelings/hopes). The "due process" stuff doesn't add up the way XRP fans want it to. The SEC was right not to say anything if there was an investigation pending. 

As Chervinsky (who gets a lot of unecessary hate from the embarassing "XRP army") calmly explains:

 

But they had the "evidence" already. Nothing new was used after 2019. That's where Jake's argument doesn't make sense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RipMcGillicuddy said:

As much as I want to believe this ends in a relatively quick settlement, the Hogans and the Hynes are bag holders with bias. The SEC holds the upper hand in this case until the moment a settlement is reached that allows XRP to be relisted as a tradeable currency on exchanges. 

The same can be said for every single lawyer that has a connection in the crypto space. In particular; Mr Chervinksy is a BTC maxi. He might aswell come out and say out loud he wants Ripple and XRP to die.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RipMcGillicuddy said:

As much as I want to believe this ends in a relatively quick settlement, the Hogans and the Hynes are bag holders with bias. The SEC holds the upper hand in this case until the moment a settlement is reached that allows XRP to be relisted as a tradeable currency on exchanges. 

How does the SEC get the upper hand? In my opinion, the SEC has issued a certificate of poverty. In 2019, the SEC did not answer “Yes” to an anonymous exchange asking whether XRP is a security. What has changed between 2019 and December 2020? Nothing at all! And what did the SEC prompt exchanges to continue to allow the sale of XRP? Question after question. I'm curious what the SEC has to say.

https://www.crypto-news-flash.com/ripple-vs-sec-pre-trial-conference-brings-out-a-bombshell/

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cambridge said:

But they had the "evidence" already. Nothing new was used after 2019. That's where Jake's argument doesn't make sense. 

His point is that it's a process, i's must be dotted and t's crossed, it's not as straightforward as we'd like to imagine. If there was any part of the process ongoing (seems there was), the SEC would not be able to comment until the litigation was brought (from what I understand he's saying) and that is right and proper process, legally speaking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gepster said:

In particular; Mr Chervinksy is a BTC maxi.

Yes, but I still think he's been reasonable and is entitled to a differing (and expert!) opinion, and has suffered a torrent of abuse form XRP maxis as a consequence! But most of his detractors just say nasty things and have zero or minimal legal background. I'll take his expertise of a random XRP guru any day!

Plus, you have to admit.. he was kind of right all these years, warning about the possibility of SEC action. 

I'm not saying I side with the SEC in all things here... just saying, it's more nuanced than Good vs Evil and so on. :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, thinlyspread said:

Yes, but I still think he's been reasonable and is entitled to a differing (and expert!) opinion, and has suffered a torrent of abuse form XRP maxis as a consequence! But most of his detractors just say nasty things and have zero or minimal legal background. I'll take his expertise of a random XRP guru any day!

Plus, you have to admit.. he was kind of right all these years, warning about the possibility of SEC action. 

For a maxi he's been relatively reasonable, true.  I've personally got most of the army blocked. I saw he's done the same. 

He was right not only concerning XRP, but almost all other tokens. Mostly saw him tweeting about that darn banksterscamcoin though.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, henne111 said:

How does the SEC get the upper hand? In my opinion, the SEC has issued a certificate of poverty. In 2019, the SEC did not answer “Yes” to an anonymous exchange asking whether XRP is a security. What has changed between 2019 and December 2020? Nothing at all! And what did the SEC prompt exchanges to continue to allow the sale of XRP? Question after question. I'm curious what the SEC has to say.

https://www.crypto-news-flash.com/ripple-vs-sec-pre-trial-conference-brings-out-a-bombshell/

They have the upper hand because they are suing Ripple, not the other way around. If they (SEC) lose or settle and Americans can freely and easily purchase and trade XRP again, then they will no longer have the upper hand. But until then, Ripple is piling up lawsuits to deal with, XRP is falling in market cap, and XRP is not easy to purchase as another round of stimmy checks get deposited to American accounts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gepster said:

For a maxi he's been relatively reasonable, true.  I've personally got most of the army blocked. I saw he's done the same. 

He was right not only concerning XRP, but almost all other tokens. Mostly saw him tweeting about that darn banksterscamcoin though.
 

He's been by far the best reading on digital asset legal matters and not just on xrp. Way better than any of the bagholder alwyers.

Jake really doesn't care how this lawsuit turns out either way, he doesn't have any personal interest in it and he's not biased. Of course to people who have sunk into XRP really far, anyone that is neutral will seem biased.

The lawyers on both sides will have their PR faces on what they are tweeting and such to put on a facade of confidence. What happening in reality is often very different. Just like how Brad was confident that dozens of banks would be using XRP by the end of 2019 and five household names and such while in reality, he probably knew the chances of that were pretty low. The SEC, as a government agency just chooses not to comment for PR at all until its over. They did the same thing with telegram and Kin and they won both cases.

Edited by Archbob
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.