Tag Archives: District of Columbia

Yup, it is all about the digital manure as some would say. This all started last night when the BBC  gave me (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65935263) ‘Binance exits Netherlands and faces France probe’. This sounded strange because exiting one nation in the EU sounds pointless to me, so what was going on? The article gives us “It follows the announcement of the company’s departure from the Netherlands after it failed to obtain a licence from the Dutch central bank.” OK, no biggie. It was “In a statement Binance confirmed French authorities visited its offices last week and will comply accordingly. “We had an on-site visit last week by the relevant authorities. Binance, as always, was fully collaborative and we met our obligations accordingly. We continue to work closely with regulators and law enforcement agencies on all ongoing compliance requirements to uphold high standards,” a company spokesperson said.” Still, not an issue (at present) but the BBC article had me piqued, as such I started to make a search for Binance and the issues started to rise. In order of timeline, I got (at https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/16/binance-france-chief-brushed-off-concerns-days-before-police-visit.html) an article by CNBC, where we see ‘Binance France chief brushed off concerns days before police visit’, which sounds like a nice party-line, but I am not buying it. You see “the crypto exchange’s top French executive dismissed concerns about U.S. regulatory charges affecting Binance’s other operations, comparing them with the flapping of a butterfly’s wings.” Is that so? You see yesterday’s news was not wholly interesting, yet only hours ago (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/06/17/binance-escapes-asset-freeze-in-exchange-for-a-raft-of-restrictions/) we see ‘Binance Escapes Asset Freeze In Exchange For A Raft Of Restrictions’ with the added text “The U.S. subsidiary of cryptocurrency exchange Binance has avoided an asset freeze that would have made it impossible to do business, but it has agreed to burdensome terms to keep operating during a civil case brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission that charged the company with evading “critical regulatory oversight.”” We now have a party. So where is that Hudie flapping? If they are referring to the SEC, it is not a butterfly, but a dragonfly hungry for substance. And lets be clear, all these accusations do not make for an issue. The SEC accuses people all the time (more often than not justified), it is the combination of the Dutch, the French and the American SEC that gives light to something going on. You see, we can make assumptions and I would too. It is “Given that Changpeng Zhao and Binance have control of the platforms’ customers’ assets and have been able to commingle customer assets or divert customer assets as they please, as we have alleged, these prohibitions are essential to protecting investor assets.” That sounds familiar. It gets too close to Sam Bankman-Fried and the FTX. As such was there an issue, or was the SEC scared it had another issue potentially coming up? I cannot tell as I do not have all the numbers and data, but I was surprised that I saw in seconds hat none of the media seemed to have. Even with all the speculations, no one seems to be on that horse. I might be all wrong, but there is too much in common to ignore it. Even if it is only to follow through and find that this was NOT the case. That is what I would have done and no Fox with their wannabe dictator statements comes anywhere close to this. So what gives?

Well, the Federal case against Sam Bankman-Fried with “Federal prosecutors in New York said they would drop several criminal charges, at least for now, against disgraced crypto executive Sam Bankman-Fried if the judge agrees to try him later on those charges.” (Source: ABC) is losing momentum, as such they aren’t willing to fail twice in a row, it makes them look bad. 

Yet is that the case? It is from my point of view and I am not disagreeing with CNBC who gives us “Prinçay insisted Binance’s US assets were separated from the international exchange, an assertion also made by the exchange’s legal team. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which charged Binance last week with 13 securities charges, disagrees, arguing that Binance user funds are at “significant risk” of flight due to founder Changpeng Zhao’s alleged ownership of an interlocking set of Binance-related companies.” But there are cogs within cogs and as I do not comprehend the machine, I will give different values to some cogs of that machine. The fact that the media isn’t looking too hard gives me the idea that they do not comprehend that machine either. So is there an issue with Binance? I think there is, but I cannot tell whether anything illegal or any criminal issues are actually in play, that matters as we are nations of laws and the law sets out what is to be and what is not to be done. 

The issue becomes larger when you consider Forbes giving us “In a June 6 motion asking the federal court for the District of Columbia to freeze the American subsidiary’s funds, the SEC said it was seeking to ensure the safety of customer assets at the U.S. operations given the companies’ “years of violative conduct, disregard of the laws of the United States, evasion of regulatory oversight, and open questions about various financial transfers and the custody and control of Customer Assets.”” And this is where the party (which I mentioned) started. You see the CNBC article is less than 24 hours old and Forbes mentions events from June 6th, that means that CNBC should have been on the ball and they apparently are not. In addition we see ‘years of violative conduct’ which is a BS argument. If there were violation it becomes criminal and they should not be in business at all, if not it is posturing which goes nowhere opting a movement from Binance to seek compensation for lost business, all in all some parties are not aware what the hell is going on (including me). I understand and accept that the SEC does not do things lightly, but is that because the US is broke? Or is that because they do not have a firm grip on the Crypto laws and settings on what is valid (read: legally allowed)? Your guess is as good as mine. What mattered to me is that the Dutch Central Bank refused licences and that counts, it implies that whatever Binance is doing is not all on the up and up (my speculated view) and the French visits are supporting that. Yet the media should have ben on top of this since June 6th and some were, but the rest were not. They are too busy calling an elected president a wannabe dictator. This is what the media has come to. For whose benefit? You tell me.

I will keep a lookout on this, just as I am on that FTX Bankman-Fired person, who is now facing two court cases. So, what’s next? Well, I will snore deep into the final part of the weekend, tht’s is how I roll this weekend.

Enjoy.