SEC Reply in Further Support of Motion to Quash Hinman's testimony.

[HAL1000]

Jeremy Hogan tweet on this:-

The SEC is presupposing what Hinman's testimony will be and basing its argument on such. "He will testify X,Y,Z and we will object, and it will be a waste of time." If that argument works, why even take testimony? Trials could just be based on what the lawyers say will be said!

What I don't get (this is me talking, aka HAL) is why is taxpayer's money being used to defend this guy, as he no longer works there?

Edited July 9, 2021 by HAL1000

[yezu]

3 hours ago, HAL1000 said:

What I don't get (this is me talking, aka HAL) is why is taxpayer's money being used to defend this guy, as he no longer works there?

Why? Because his deposition will be harmful for his former employer.

[Danny]

 

[RipMcGillicuddy]

Scheduled for July 19th then. Gives the ****** a few more days to rehearse his untruths. 

[Roux]

 

21 minutes ago, RipMcGillicuddy said:

Scheduled for July 19th then. Gives the ****** a few more days to rehearse his untruths. 

I hate to say this, but won't it be a waste of time once he's done lying through his teeth?

[RipMcGillicuddy]

17 minutes ago, Roux said:

 

I hate to say this, but won't it be a waste of time once he's done lying through his teeth?

I think that's exactly what the SEC tried saying in its latest letter: he's not going to tell you anything anyway so why bother?

[HAL1000]

Sorry I have no recollection of those events your honour, followed by I take the 5th, A LOT

Which eventually will be turned into a Monty Python type sketch by the SNL team, the 5th a lot... it sounds a lot like spam a lot. You have to be old to get that, LOL.

[Julian_Williams]

Will his rehearsed lies be tailored to protect himself or to protect SEC?  Are they the same thing?  For instance he will say "I checked out my speech with others at SEC HQ and they agreed that my speech was OK to give"...but SEC are saying it was just a personal off the cuff opinion...but then Clayton himself started sending copies of the transcript of Hinman's speech to Congress as evidence of the transparent processes of SEC.  The more they talk the more the lies conflict with the truth, and the worse it gets for SEC's due notice case. 

SEC have still not handed over the internal documents/summaries about ETH and BTC and XRP that they were ordered to give by the Court to Ripple by mid June.   I wonder if they plan to settle before they are forced to hand them to Ripple, and Ripple are refusing a deal until after they have seen these documents?  Just my personal thoughts.  Do the documents include evidence of a conspiracy inside SEC against Ripple and on behalf of BTC/ETH?

Edited July 9, 2021 by Julian_Williams

[RipMcGillicuddy]

27 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

Will his rehearsed lies be tailored to protect himself or to protect SEC?  Are they the same thing?  For instance he will say "I checked out my speech with others at SEC HQ and they agreed that my speech was OK to give"...but SEC are saying it was just a personal off the cuff opinion...but then Clayton himself started sending copies of the transcript of Hinman's speech to Congress as evidence of the transparent processes of SEC.  The more they talk the more the lies conflict with the truth, and the worse it gets for SEC's due notice case. 

SEC have still not handed over the internal documents/summaries about ETH and BTC and XRP that they were ordered to give by the Court to Ripple by mid June.   I wonder if they plan to settle before they are forced to hand them to Ripple, and Ripple are refusing a deal until after they have seen these documents?  Just my personal thoughts.  Do the documents include evidence of a conspiracy inside SEC against Ripple and on behalf of BTC/ETH?

I wouldn't expect there to be explicit evidence of conspiracy against Ripple, but considering all of the stalling on them, I do expect there to be enough in there to drastically weaken the power of the SEC to go after crypto. 

If only there could be a call-in line for the Hinman deposition...

[Julian_Williams]

52 minutes ago, RipMcGillicuddy said:

I wouldn't expect there to be explicit evidence of conspiracy against Ripple, but considering all of the stalling on them, I do expect there to be enough in there to drastically weaken the power of the SEC to go after crypto. 

If only there could be a call-in line for the Hinman deposition...

it depends on what you call a conspiracy?  A structured written down plan to do down XRP and help ETH and BTC?  I think they might have been doing that, but you will not find a paper trail.  But biased behaviour at meetings, biased preferential agendas that happened again and again over a time period, and opinions that were irrationally in favour of ETH and BTC but against XRP - I think you will find evidence for that.  They might not even be aware that they are doing it.

They were employees of outside companies that wanted them to help ETH and BTC, and do down XRP.  They inherited the mindsets and values of their employers.  They might have thought they were being fair minded and logical, even as they were behaving as puppets.  It is called conflict of interest.  

The very fact of their employment by outside parties with agendas makes them part of an agenda, which is what a conspiracy is......

Edited July 9, 2021 by Julian_Williams