Jump to content

Attorney Hogan on Ripple v. SEC. Why Won't DPP DIE!!!!


HAL1000
 Share

Recommended Posts

The case is going well for Ripple, and SEC are backed into a corner but the future looks very dangerous for crypto generally.  The bit about what Gensler seems to cooking up through controlling Biden administration worried me quite deeply since it sounds as if he might be trying to close down all the cyrpto exchanges in the US.   I cannot imagine how low BTC would drag XRP in such an eventuality.  We are struggling to hold on .60!

Anyway this from Block Chain Backer.  He is asking is this story staged, and he researched it quite deeply and comes to interesting conclusion that the story is built on an article with very little of substance, and anyway the US Admin are looking at long consultative processes starting maybe in Feb. 

Block chain Backer has this theory that these negative stories are placed, and often come at moments when the markets are about to change in the opposite direction.

 

 

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thinlyspread said:

I like Hogan but if he's saying no action until SUMMER, then assum we're going to Winter minimum! I think he's been off on pretty much every single timeline prediction. Depressing, I don't blame him but he can sugar coat things a bit. 

 

1 hour ago, thinlyspread said:

I like Hogan but if he's saying no action until SUMMER, then assum we're going to Winter minimum! I think he's been off on pretty much every single timeline prediction. Depressing, I don't blame him but he can sugar coat things a bit. 

I don't think he said that.  He said the delays would take discovery way into March and that would push the trial into summer?  something along those lines?

I think the big point is that SEC really, really do not want to hand over those emails, and we surmise there is something really bad in them that they do not want Ripple to see (like a conspiracy with Eth against Ripple???) I think we might take from that the delay is about delaying handing over the docs, and that handover is much sooner than the summer.  Maybe settlement before handing over?  and Ripple will take SEC right up to the bell before settling?  I can't help thinking Ripple already know what is being hidden from them in those emails, there are too many ex employees of SEC on the Ripple team.

Ripple have a swagger these last two weeks as if they feel in control and can see how this is going to end.

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Julian_Williams said:

we surmise there is something really bad in them that they do not want Ripple to see

Yeah that and bleeding Ripple dry. 

I was relieved to see Ripple had $1b in the bank! But disappointed (as always) about how long this case could take. I am assuming the worse case scenario that Hogan says will be true, because thus far it has been, every time. So that brings us well into summer, even jury trial into winter depending on whether settlement is even raised as an option. 

If might not be if Ripple cannot find any dirt.

Edited by thinlyspread
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, thinlyspread said:

Yeah that and bleeding Ripple dry. 

I was relieved to see Ripple had $1b in the bank! But disappointed (as always) about how long this case could take. I am assuming the worse case scenario that Hogan says will be true, because thus far it has been, every time. So that brings us well into summer, even jury trial into winter depending on whether settlement is even raised as an option. 

If might not be if Ripple cannot find any dirt.

The timing of settlement of the case is pivoting on two factors. 

1.  Whether SEC really have to settle before handing over those emails for what ever reason.  There are two reasons why they might be disparate to conclude before handing over 

  1. They do not want there to be a precedent set which would provide future SEC targets with new defence strategies.  They do not future defendant's to have a right to demand SEC show internal docs. 
  2. There is something so bad in the emails SEC cannot allow them to get into the hands of Ripple. (For instance if the emails contain overt conspiracy type discussions within SEC about promoting ETH Foundation whilst at the same time hobbling Ripple)

2. SEC cannot allow this case to go as far as summary judgement because if SJ went against SEC they would become toothless regulatory authority.  Apart from anything else they make a lot of money by taking crypto companies to Court and fining them.

If the case is pivoting on No.1 we should get a settlement within a few weeks

If the case is pivoting on No2 negotiations will begin in earnest after completion of the discovery phase - ie first week of March.  Those settlement discussions could stretch over several months since it is unlikely that the judge would be ready to make summary Judgment before the Summer. 

Ripple can afford to go the full stretch, so stretching out the case will not give SEC much more leverage.  In fact the more Ripple push SEC,s back to the wall the weaker SEC's negotiating position becomes.   For instance if SEC really are worried about handing over those emails they must settle in the next few weeks. For maximum leverage Ripple will want to stretch the negotiations right up until the day before the emails must be handed over.   The same applies to the date for summary judgement

The chances of this case going to SJ, and Ripple losing and then the case going to Court are virtually zero.  The only way that would happen is if the judge decided to throw out Ripples request for a SJ without a hearing.

Edited by Julian_Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think 1 is likely but 2 is not. I don't buy this giant conspiracy thing, at least nothing that was RECORDED that helps Ripple's case by invoking something conspiracy related. The SEC are corrupt, but not totally stupid. I think it's more likely that Ripple know (through their SEC & high level connections) there is *something* *somewhere* that can help their case, but since they don't know where it is, it's a bit of a stab in the dark.

I do not like the way this is playing out for Ripple and XRP. The XRP mob is obsessed with conspiracies and hopium, so I can see why there's a lean towards no. 2, but I remain sceptical they'd write down anything so damning, even given the SEC's hubris and being so drunk on power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, thinlyspread said:

I do not like the way this is playing out for Ripple and XRP. The XRP mob is obsessed with conspiracies and hopium, so I can see why there's a lean towards no. 2, but I remain sceptical they'd write down anything so damning, even given the SEC's hubris and being so drunk on power.

You don't have to follow the morons and believe in conspiracies, but it's not impossible that messages exchanged prior to the speech contain questions from SEC members like "Why only ether and bitcoin, why not ripple too?" - or something similar that would essentially confirm in writing that internally the SEC was divided about the status of XRP and thus making the fair notice defense all the stronger. Alternatively, there might be questions about the ether ICO objecting that it be given non-security status whilst xrp was not. Something significant like that would be worth keeping from the courts - though it seems like they are trying a bit too hard to withhold the emails for something as smalll as that, but I'm no lawyer, so I can't really be sue what would be a case maker or breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jbjnr said:

Something significant like that would be worth keeping from the courts

This point begs the question, did (or will) the judge review such documentation - and if she saw clearly it undermines the SEC's case, but does also qualify as "deliberative process" dialog - would she have to make a strict interpretation and conclude it's protected ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JASCoder said:

This point begs the question, did (or will) the judge review such documentation - and if she saw clearly it undermines the SEC's case, but does also qualify as "deliberative process" dialog - would she have to make a strict interpretation and conclude it's protected ?

I'm afraid we need someone like @Pabloto comment on that, but he's gone AWOL. Any other lawyers around who can answer it? (I suspect that if it isn't part of the official chain of evidence, then the judge must "pretend" she does not have that information and make here ruling without considering it - I'm really not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JASCoder said:

This point begs the question, did (or will) the judge review such documentation - and if she saw clearly it undermines the SEC's case, but does also qualify as "deliberative process" dialog - would she have to make a strict interpretation and conclude it's protected ?

Not a lawyer but I am certain that from a legal perspective, whether it is admissible evidence (ie.  "deliberative process" or not ) would overide the fact it is damaging or helpful to one side.

Edited by johnc
typo
Link to comment
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
 Share


×
×
  • 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.