The SEC has filed its Opposition to the Ripple defendants’ Motion to Compel the SEC to produce documents showing whether SEC employees were permitted to trade XRP and other digital assets.

[HAL1000]

 

[Julian_Williams]

From the summaries I have read SEC have come up with no reasonable reason for withholding this information. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. SEC lost the moral high ground from which to prosecute this case.

[Danny]

One great delaying tactic. I more and more start to believe that's all the SEC is doing. 

[B088IN]

So do we think this will go to trial or settlement after discovery, the more this plays out the more I think settlement. 

[Julian_Williams]

2 hours ago, B088IN said:

So do we think this will go to trial or settlement after discovery, the more this plays out the more I think settlement. 

The SEC are terrified of summary judgement on Fair Notice.  They will do everything in their power to avoid that.  Giving ripple everything they want is almost as bad for SEC, but the compromise will still be better than losing to summary judgement.

The initiative is with Ripple about what compromise it is willing to accept to settle sooner for settlement before summary judgement.

Edited September 4, 2021 by Julian_Williams

[RipMcGillicuddy]

This Lubin slimeball has got to go. 

 

[Valhalla_Guy]

1 hour ago, B088IN said:

So do we think this will go to trial or settlement after discovery, the more this plays out the more I think settlement. 

Viewing from a neutral perspective, the chances of settlement (in favor of Ripple Labs) is zero (almost zero)

Yes the burden of proof is with the SEC but the bar for proof is low.
Basically the SEC has to establish 2 points, to win their case, claiming XRP is a security:

1) XRP distribution is centralized, and RL controls the distribution. (Thats a no brainer, and why the wiser folks have been advocating for them to dump the escrow for many years now)

2) Prove that the entity that controls XRP distribution (RL) has made public statements claiming that the token has value and could appreciate over time, based on RL performance.

The second standard is open ended and subjective, but there is a treasure chest of public statements/interviews and social media postings that will be used against RL execs.

To this point: Mr. Garlinghouse and team believed that changing the logo for XRP would distance RL from the token… 🤔😟

(Also Im an old man, so please dont tell me XRP was a “gift” lest I pee my pants laughing)

Finally the court order to compel RL to produce all “Slack” communications is huge, and will be the reason RL will look to settle without conditions.

It takes a well disciplined person to run a successful business and avoid the lure of shining under a public spotlight simply for the ego boost.
RL execs adored the spotlight and could not help but bask in it daily for 18 months. 
Remember how quickly Elon Musk had to step down from his position on the board of Tesla, simply for tweeting about the price of his company’s stock? He learned the difference between a twit and a tweet.

Those believing that the SEC fears a trial are simply blinded by their love of the project and the celebrity presence of the leaders.

Stating “Others did it also” or “The enforcing agency is corrupt” is not a legal defense, for one’s own actions. The law is written, and not subject to the conduct of the enforcers. RL will be judged on RL’s actions, compared to the laws that govern those actions. 

Even if Hinnman is prosecuted for insider trading or favoritism, it will have no legal bearing on whether or not RL’s actions fell inside the laws. They will forever be 2 separate cases.

Keep in mimd that this all started in 2018, with the Ryan lawsuit, and has been well orchestrated since. They know very well what they are doing.

[brianwalden]

8 minutes ago, Valhalla_Guy said:

Basically the SEC has to establish 2 points, to win their case, claiming XRP is a security:

1) XRP distribution is centralized, and RL controls the distribution. (Thats a no brainer, and why the wiser folks have been advocating for them to dump the escrow for many years now)

2) Prove that the entity that controls XRP distribution (RL) has made public statements claiming that the token has value and could appreciate over time, based on RL performance.

This is not in accord with the Howey Test, the actual legal standard for determining what is and isn't a security in the US.

 

[B088IN]

6 minutes ago, Valhalla_Guy said:

Viewing from a neutral perspective, the chances of settlement (in favor of Ripple Labs) is zero (almost zero)

Yes the burden of proof is with the SEC but the bar for proof is low.
Basically the SEC has to establish 2 points, to win their case, claiming XRP is a security:

1) XRP distribution is centralized, and RL controls the distribution. (Thats a no brainer, and why the wiser folks have been advocating for them to dump the escrow for many years now)

2) Prove that the entity that controls XRP distribution (RL) has made public statements claiming that the token has value and could appreciate over time, based on RL performance.

The second standard is open ended and subjective, but there is a treasure chest of public statements/interviews and social media postings that will be used against RL execs.

To this point: Mr. Garlinghouse and team believed that changing the logo for XRP would distance RL from the token… 🤔😟

(Also Im an old man, so please dont tell me XRP was a “gift” lest I pee my pants laughing)

Finally the court order to compel RL to produce all “Slack” communications is huge, and will be the reason RL will look to settle without conditions.

It takes a well disciplined person to run a successful business and avoid the lure of shining under a public spotlight simply for the ego boost.
RL execs adored the spotlight and could not help but bask in it daily for 18 months. 
Remember how quickly Elon Musk had to step down from his position on the board of Tesla, simply for tweeting about the price of his company’s stock? He learned the difference between a twit and a tweet.

Those believing that the SEC fears a trial are simply blinded by their love of the project and the celebrity presence of the leaders.

Stating “Others did it also” or “The enforcing agency is corrupt” is not a legal defense, for one’s own actions. The law is written, and not subject to the conduct of the enforcers. RL will be judged on RL’s actions, compared to the laws that govern those actions. 

Even if Hinnman is prosecuted for insider trading or favoritism, it will have no legal bearing on whether or not RL’s actions fell inside the laws. They will forever be 2 separate cases.

Keep in mimd that this all started in 2018, with the Ryan lawsuit, and has been well orchestrated since. They know very well what they are doing.

So do we think that Ripple will still settle and avoid the ambiguity of XRP being a security from this point forward but have a fine to pay for previous years. Or will a fine be paid and still no clarity for XRP. 
It seems that if there is confusion in the market about what is and isn’t a security that’s win win for the SEC. why would they want clarity, means they chase anyone they want, or am I being a cynic and by the end of this, either way, XRP will have clarity. 

[Valhalla_Guy]

16 minutes ago, brianwalden said:

This is not in accord with the Howey Test, the actual legal standard for determining what is and isn't a security in the US.

 

You must interpret the definition of Howey differently than myself, as well as the SEC.

Good luck with that. 😉 

(Also I should add that we disagree on the definition and relevance of “legal standard” as well)

[RipMcGillicuddy]

54 minutes ago, Valhalla_Guy said:

Viewing from a neutral perspective, the chances of settlement (in favor of Ripple Labs) is zero (almost zero)

Yes the burden of proof is with the SEC but the bar for proof is low.
Basically the SEC has to establish 2 points, to win their case, claiming XRP is a security:

1) XRP distribution is centralized, and RL controls the distribution. (Thats a no brainer, and why the wiser folks have been advocating for them to dump the escrow for many years now)

2) Prove that the entity that controls XRP distribution (RL) has made public statements claiming that the token has value and could appreciate over time, based on RL performance.

The second standard is open ended and subjective, but there is a treasure chest of public statements/interviews and social media postings that will be used against RL execs.

To this point: Mr. Garlinghouse and team believed that changing the logo for XRP would distance RL from the token… 🤔😟

(Also Im an old man, so please dont tell me XRP was a “gift” lest I pee my pants laughing)

Finally the court order to compel RL to produce all “Slack” communications is huge, and will be the reason RL will look to settle without conditions.

It takes a well disciplined person to run a successful business and avoid the lure of shining under a public spotlight simply for the ego boost.
RL execs adored the spotlight and could not help but bask in it daily for 18 months. 
Remember how quickly Elon Musk had to step down from his position on the board of Tesla, simply for tweeting about the price of his company’s stock? He learned the difference between a twit and a tweet.

Those believing that the SEC fears a trial are simply blinded by their love of the project and the celebrity presence of the leaders.

Stating “Others did it also” or “The enforcing agency is corrupt” is not a legal defense, for one’s own actions. The law is written, and not subject to the conduct of the enforcers. RL will be judged on RL’s actions, compared to the laws that govern those actions. 

Even if Hinnman is prosecuted for insider trading or favoritism, it will have no legal bearing on whether or not RL’s actions fell inside the laws. They will forever be 2 separate cases.

Keep in mimd that this all started in 2018, with the Ryan lawsuit, and has been well orchestrated since. They know very well what they are doing.

Nevermind that pesky old fair notice defense huh?

[WarChest]

1 hour ago, Valhalla_Guy said:

Viewing from a neutral perspective, the chances of settlement (in favor of Ripple Labs) is zero (almost zero) etc etc

That’s why this forum is so important, it gives daylight to all opinions.
 

I thank you for posting an alternative and not leaving this to be an echo chamber.

[HAL1000]

17 minutes ago, Valhalla_Guy said:

You must interpret the definition of Howey differently than myself, as well as the SEC.

Good luck with that. 😉 

(Also I should add that we disagree on the definition and relevance of “legal standard” as well)

Wow - your opinion is all fair and good, my opinion is different, the SEC may have more to lose than win, if this goes to court I will be amazed, the judge will get the crayons out for the SEC, before she rules in the SEC's favour. Also keep in mind ninety-six percent of all SEC cases are settled before trial and in that sense, who's winning this case right now in almost every sense, Ripple. All the BS in the world from the SEC is showing massive and systemic corruption, unlike times gone by, the world is watching, which means the court and the legal system is under more scrutiny than it has ever been, the old days of a back page newspaper article mentioning this are gone. The world is watching and, even the old powers that be, know that this type of thing is not a vote winner.

The XRP party is about to kick off, not be buried in a SEC BS ash pile, oh and trust me, I am at least as old as you, in my opinion. This has all been in the works for a very long time and keep in mind, "The train has already left the station.... One of the few cryptocurrencies out there that has a credible and legitimate use." - Rosie Rios.

I am not an echo or a chamber, I am somebody who works at understanding this stuff at a high level, so I say GG is a pawn and there are much bigger pieces and players at play, than just the old guard and their SEC puppets. By the way Valhalla_Guy do you still hold XRP or have you got of this train?

Anybody reading this thinking I'm attacking Valhalla_Guy, I'm not, this is just two old dudes having a pint in the back of a pub, expressing their opinions

[WarChest]

20 minutes ago, HAL1000 said:

am not an echo or a chamber, I am somebody who works at understanding this stuff at a high level, so I say GG is a pawn and there are much bigger pieces and players at play, than just the old guard and their SEC puppets.

I agree and have posted before, GG had a brief when he was offered the job IMHO, that he must stall the march of crypto from taking the bread and butter from the existing banking hierarchy. They need time to get their house in order so that they can use Crypto in a way that keeps their profits.

crypto is truly disruptive.

[HAL1000]

1 minute ago, WarChest said:

I agree and have posted before, GG had a brief when he was offered the job IMHO, that he must stall the march of crypto from taking the bread and butter from the existing banking hierarchy. They need time to get their house in order so that they can use Crypto in a way that keeps their profits.

crypto is truly disruptive.

Yep, the SEC reminds me of a guy standing on a beach shaking his fists at a tsunami, good luck stopping or controlling it, the world is about to change and guess what GG and incumbents THAT CHANGE IS US, BILLIONS OF US.

This is them:-

Westpac an Australian Bank is Freezing More and More Australians Bank Accounts for No Reason – Is Money Safe in Banks Anymore??"

Europe’s new framework for resolving banks includes a ‘bail-in’ mechanism that aims to ensure that banks’ shareholders and creditors pay their share of costs, and which was first used to resolve the 2013 banking crisis in Cyprus.

The above is what WE would call THEFT plain and simple, WE need a new system so:-

DEFI is US - THEY can not stop ALL of us, and we will move past THEM and this kind of BS, as the world transcends into a fairer, better world, not defined by have-nots and have everything's, if WE make sure THEY don't control us the way THEY have, via generational ignorance and unfair financial debt based economic manipulation.

Rant over.