There is an unprecedented situation emerging in London, where the relentless hemorrhaging of one of the world’s largest stockpiles of silver is now well and truly under way.
For the last 9 months, this stockpile of silver, held in the LBMA vaults in London, has been consistently falling each and every month, and has now reached an all time low (since vault holdings records began in July 2016).
These vaults comprise the precious metals storage facilities in and around London run by the bullion banks JP Morgan, HSBC and ICBC Standard Bank, as well as the London vaults of three security operators, namely Brinks, Malca-Amit and Loomis. Since the system of vaults is administered and coordinated by the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), these vaults are collectively known as the ‘LBMA vaults’.
That article covered the vault data up to the end of June 2022, where the London silver holdings had reached the dubious milestone of having dropped below the 1 billion ounce level, specifically falling to 997.4 million ozs (31,022 tonnes).
London sub-Billion Market Association (LBMA)
Since then, however, the situation has only worsened. Latest data for July and August show that the downward trend is still very much intact. During July 2022, London silver inventories fell by another 4.66% month-on-month, with the vaults seeing an outflow of 46.5 million ozs of silver (1447 tonnes). This brought total LBMA London silver holdings down to 950.9 million ozs (29,576 tonnes), and a new all time low since records began. (Note the lowest previous low had been 951.4 million ozs at the end of July 2016).
Now that August 2022 vault data has been released (LBMA release vault data by the 5th business day of a new month), we can see that August saw no reprieve, because in August the London silver holdings fell by another 3.62% month-on-month, with the vaults seeing an outflow of 34.4 million ozs of silver (1070 tonnes). This brings the LBMA silver vault inventories down to 916.5 million ozs (28,506 tonnes).
In other words, during these two months of July and August 2022, the LBMA vaults have lost another 2517 tonnes of silver.
With consistent silver outflows over the last 9 months to the end of August 2022, the LBMA silver vaults have now lost a whopping 254.5 million ozs (7915 tonnes) of silver since the end of November 2021. In other words, from a situation where the LBMA silver inventories had been 36,421 tonnes at the end of November 2021, they are now 21.7% lower at 28,506 tonnes.
To put all of this into context, the Silver Institute estimates that world annual silver mining production will only be 843.2 million ozs this year. That’s 26,262 tonnes. So the LBMA vaults, with 28,506 tonnes as of the end of August 2022, now hold just less than one year’s mine supply of silver.
In addition, except for a blip during November 2021 in which LBMA silver inventories rose by 311 tonnes, the LBMA silver vaults have actually seen outflows for 13 of the last 14 months. This is because silver inventories in London also fell in each of the months of July, August, September and October 2021. Putting all of this together means that since the end of June 2021, the LBMA vaults in London have lost 8200 tonnes of silver (263.3 million ozs), and the vaults now hold silver representing just over one year’s mine production.
While LBMA silver inventories did rise during the first six months of 2021, the net outflow from January 2021 to the end of August 2022 is still 5102 tonnes. And people say there is no silver squeeze?
But that is actually only half the story, because as readers of these pages will know, a majority of the silver within the LBMA vaults is held by Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) and is already accounted for, and is therefore not (unless it is sold out of ETFs) available to the market. Additionally, this silver in ETFs is not, as the LBMA disingenuously claims, available to “underpin the physical OTC market."
Backing this ETF silver out of the headline figure is thus even more revealing. According to the calculations of GoldCharts’R’Us, as of the end of August there were 18,110 tonnes of silver held by silver-backed ETFs which store their silver in London. This means that of the 28,506 tonnes of silver that the LBMA claims to be held in its London vaults, 63.5% of this is held in ETFs, and only 10,396 tonnes (36.4%) is not held by ETFs. This 10,396 tonnes also represents only about 40% of annual silver mining supply.
Back at the end of June 2022 when the LBMA data claims that there were 31,023 tonnes of silver in the London vaults, the combined silver-backed ETFs which store their silver in London accounted for 19,422 tonnes (62.6%) of this total, leaving a remainder of 11,601 tonnes of silver (37.4%) not held in ETFs. Fast forward to the end of August, and you can see that ETFs now comprise a greater percentage (63.5%) of all the silver in the London vaults. This is because, while there have been outflows of ETF held silver over these two months, there have been even greater outflows of non-ETF held silver.
These calculations were done on 9 September using silver ETF bar lists dated 8 September. This ETF silver is held in the London vaults of JP Morgan, HSBC, Brinks, Malca Amit, and Loomis.
Together these 13 ETFs currently hold 17,759.7 tonnes of silver in the LBMA London vaults.
The LBMA London vaults figures also include silver held by clients of BullionVault and GoldMoney. BullionVault clients hold 491.2 tonnes of silver in the LBMA vaults in London (same as at the end of June, while GoldMoney clients hold 186.8 tonnes in the LBMA vaults (one tonne less than in June). Adding these two figures to the ETF total means that as of 8 September 2022, there were 18,437.6 tonnes of silver held by silver-backed ETFs and private client investors in the LBMA London vaults, which to reiterate, has nothing to do with “London’s ability to underpin the physical OTC market”.
This means that of the 28,506.28 tonnes of silver as of the end of August 2022, only 10,068.7 tonnes of silver is not held in ETFs. And another caveat as usual: of the London silver not held in ETFs, some of this too represents allocated silver holdings of the wealth management sector, such as physical silver held by investment institutions, family offices and High Net Worth individuals.
So as more and more silver drains out of the LBMA London vaults due to continued strong global demand, the free float (the amount of silver that is available to ‘underpin’ trading), is diminishing.
COMEX Silver also in Crisis
Over on COMEX in New York, the silver situation is also precarious, with ‘Registered’ silver inventories in the COMEX approved warehouses practically in freefall, and at a four and a half low. See the following chart. Latest figures for 9 September show that registered inventories (those that are warranted and available to back COMEX silver futures contract delivery) are now only 46 million ozs (1430 tonnes). This is insanely low. For example, more silver left the LBMA vaults during July 2022 (1447 tonnes) than there is currently in COMEX registered silver stockpiles.
Regarding the COMEX category of ‘Eligible’ silver (which merely represents silver stored in the COMEX approved vaults which could be traded if it was put under warrant, but which realistically may have nothing to do with COMEX trading), the amount of silver in the COMEX eligible category hasn’t really fluctuated much so far in 2022 and has ebbed and flowed by about 30 million ozs (930 tonnes) within the 250-280 million ozs range. See the following chart.
With so much silver exiting the London vaults, the silver holdings on COMEX cannot explain this, since the silver leaving London is not showing up in New York. So where is the silver that is leaving London going to?
A Resurgence in Indian Silver Demand
Apart from 2022’s strong global investment and industrial demand for silver which is detailed by the Silver Institute here, there is now huge new physical demand entering at the margin, a case in point being India. Indian silver imports are now seeing some of their strongest monthly figures in recent years. See chart below which includes silver imports into India up to the end of July 2022.
Reports out of India also say that July has been a record month, according to the following interview with Metals Focus India.
Conclusion
The existence of ETF silver in London is key to the ability of the LBMA bullion banks to control the market and the silver price.
LBMA bullion banks / ETF Authorised Participants appear to use London silver ETFs as a top up fund for physical silver, scaring the market by bringing the paper silver price lower and flushing out / triggering institutions and retail to sell ETF units, at which point the bullion banks pick up and convert these units, thereby obtaining extra metal that’s needed to meet physical demand. In fact, as physical silver demand rises, bullion banks will try to get the price lower so as to have access to the silver that is held by the ETFs.
But the bullion banks know that in the West, a higher silver price brings in more ETF buyers, which in turn leads to more of the silver that is in the LBMA vaults being ‘spoken for’ by the ETFs. Which is why the bullion banks have a vested interest in keeping a lid on the silver price, because they don’t want a situation (such as early 2021) where ETF investor demand gobbles up a greater and greater proportion of LBMA silver holdings, as then this silver cannot be used to supply other industrial and investor demand (i.e. global demand outside London). See BullionStar article “LBMA acknowledges “Buying Frenzy” in Silver Market and silver shortage Fears” from April 2021.
This circus trick, where the bullion banks have to keep all the plates spinning at the same time, only works when they can control the various sources of demand and borrow silver from the ETFs. Which they do via controlling the silver price.
But as demand for physical silver continues to accelerate globally and silver continues to flow out of London at an astounding rate (which are factors which the bullion banks seem to have lost control of), is this crunch time again for the LBMA?
Only time will tell, but with physical silver demand firing on all cylinders and massive amounts of silver leaving the LBMA London vaults, the bullion bank tactics of rinse and repeat in creating a ‘paper’ silver price unconnected to physical demand and supply is becoming more and more exposed.
👀 A Top Cancer Expert Wars Of A “Whirlwind Of Cancers.” 👀
Piers Morgan, once a strong proponent of mRNA vaccines, now claims a top cancer expert warned him that Pfizer and Moderna shots have triggered a “whirlwind of cancers.”
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading
Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? 🔜
The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.
👉 Here’s what you need to know:
💠 'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
💠 Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
💠 Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
💠 Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
💠 Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit
👉 What this means for the future of Crypto:
1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto 👉txns done by AI agents by 2025
🚨 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading
Recent data from the U.S. Treasury reveals that China, Japan, and the United Kingdom collectively offloaded $81 billion in Treasury bonds in December. This significant reduction in holdings raises questions about the implications for the U.S. fiscal deficit and increasing borrowing costs.
● What Do the Numbers Say About U.S. Treasury Bonds?
In a noteworthy move, China reduced its Treasury bond portfolio by $9.6 billion, marking a record low of $759 billion—the lowest since 2009. Conversely, Japan enhanced its holdings to $1.0598 trillion by selling $27.3 billion in bonds. The United Kingdom topped the list in divestments, decreasing its portfolio by $44.1 billion to $722.7 billion.
● How is China Diversifying Its Assets?
Starting in November, China began buying gold again, acquiring around ten tons in December alone, resulting in a total of 2,280 tons by the end of the year. This strategy reflects an effort to diversify away from U.S. assets.
Currently, the yield on 10-year U.S. Treasury bonds ...
XRP Price Today: How $2.50 Level Could Decide Its Next Move
Table of Contents:
◇ XRP Technical Analysis and Upcoming Levels
◇ Current Price Momentum
$21.50 Million Worth XRP Outflow
Following the Bybit hack, sentiment across the crypto market has shifted completely toward a bearish phase, weakening assets. Amid this, XRP, the native token of Ripple Labs, has once again neared a crucial support level from the ascending trendline, which it has been testing since the beginning of February 2025.
Considering the current market sentiment and XRP's outlook, the token appears to have absorbed all the bearish pressure and is now recovering.
● XRP Technical Analysis and Upcoming Levels
According to expert technical analysis, as the XRP price reached the trendline support of $2.50 level a significant buying pressure was observed resulting in the formation of a bullish candlestick pattern. Besides this, the recent price drop has not affected XRP’s past ascending triangle price action pattern which it has formed.
Based on recent price action, if XRP holds above the ...
🪙 Jaime Carrasco | Golds Comeback, Silvers Power & The US Debt Reset 🪙
Canadian metals maven Jaime Carrasco joins Denis to deliver a masterclass in decoding the future of investing through the lens of history.
From buying Bitcoin at $5 to why gold isn’t just a commodity—it’s the ultimate form of money—Carrasco lays out the case for how Trump could use precious metals to reshape the financial system.
He dives into the silver supply crunch, taps into how Mexico could flip the script on global trade, and questions whether Trump is a modern-day Roosevelt with plans to reset the U.S. debt clock.
Discover why chasing quick returns could be the biggest mistake of younger generations and why if you don’t own gold, you don’t know history or economics.
The Dawn of DeFi: The Hidden War for a Decentralized Future
👉 DON'T FADE THIS ARTICLE~ Crypto Michael AKA "The Dinarian"
The below article is NOT financial advice, it is being broadcast for entertainment purposes only. You should DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH and NEVER invest any more than you are willing to lose. On that note, THIS ARTICLE AND THE UNDERLYING ASSET DISCUSSED COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOR THE BETTER FOREVER! You SHOULD pay close attention as this MAY BE THE MOST IMPORTANT article you could ever have read, unless you were fortunate enough to read the Bitcoin whitepaper and had invested in it back in 2008. The asset I am about to present to you, COULD EASILY FLIP BITCOIN! ESPECIALLY WITH TODAYS ADMINISTRATION IN PLACE!
~ Namasté 🙏 Crypto Michael AKA "The Dinarian"
Attempted Theft of the World's Most Valuable Property, SEC Lawfare & The ETHgate Scandal
It is widely accepted that the media often spreads misinformation and hides any truth that challenge the establishments narratives. Well, this is one of those hidden truths...
Loans without Banks, Trades without Exchanges, Contracts without Lawyers. Peer to Peer Capital Markets disrupts traditional finance by removing middlemen and counter-party risk, enabling you to become your own bank by holding the keys to it all in your own privately held digital wallet.
To what lengths do you think the establishment would go to defend their control of the financial system? A system seemingly ripe with market manipulation, naked shorts, money laundering and regulatory capture.
The Myth of Open Source
For context, in the realm of open source, major corporations can engage in Intellectual Property theft by using open source projects to gain insights, technology, or legal protections without fully reciprocating to the community. Companies might contribute code to an open source project, only to later use that same code in commercial products, extending it with enhancements, essentially using open source as a low-cost R&D resource. Patents are crucial here, serving as a defense mechanism. Although open-source licenses cover copyrights, they don't extend to patents, meaning that companies holding patents can enforce legal protections against unauthorized commercial use, ensuring that any commercial application of their patented technology within open-source softwarerequires proper licensing or recognition. This protection has historically led to the hyper-growth of industries like mobile phones and the internet, where patented technologies could be safely shared and built upon, promoting innovation and market expansion.
Validating Inventorship
In fields such as technology, pharmaceuticals, and manufacturing, patents are vital for safeguarding new inventions, with Nikola Tesla's extensive patent portfolio serving as a testament to his contributions to science.
However, Tesla's revolutionary inventions, like the Wardenclyffe Tower which aimed at providing free wireless energy, faced fierce opposition due to their potential to disrupt established control over energy markets. Financially sabotaged by investors like J.P. Morgan, legally challenged through "the war of currents" by Thomas Edison's promotion of the less efficient Direct Current system, and undermined by media smear campaigns,Tesla's work was systematically suppressed. After his death, the FBI's seizure of his documents further suggests efforts to control or conceal his ideas that could disrupt centralized energy distribution, illustrating how innovation can be stifled to maintain existing power structures.
Could this type of suppression still be happening today?
The Genesis of Decentralized Finance
Reggie Middleton first introduced Distributed Finance what would later become known as Decentralized Finance (DeFi), in 2013 when he invented and patented technologies under the title "Devices, systems, and methods for facilitating low trust and zero trust value transfers." This included groundbreaking concepts like programmable Smart Contracts, Swaps, Tokenized Assets, NFTs, Stable Coins, Digital Wallets, and even underpin Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).
Trustless Peer-to-Peer Value Transfers: Systems for enabling decentralized and secure value transfers between parties without the need for intermediaries. Applicable to cryptocurrency transactions, DeFi platforms, and digital payment systems.
Decentralized Financial Systems (DeFi):Methods and devices that facilitate decentralized trading, lending, borrowing, and yield generation. Impacting decentralized exchanges (DEXs) like Uniswap, SushiSwap, and similar platforms.
Smart Contracts: Implementation of self-executing contracts on blockchain networks, used to automate agreements and enforce conditions without intermediaries. Essential for platforms such as Ethereum, Cardano, and other Layer-1 and Layer-2 blockchain protocols.
Tokenized Asset Trading: Methods for creating, transferring, and trading tokenized assets, including cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and digital securities. Platforms like OpenSea, Rarible, and asset tokenization platforms may fall within the scope.
Cryptographic Security and Wallet Systems: Systems for securing digital assets using cryptographic methods, including cold storage, multi-signature wallets, and multi-party computation (MPC). Potential overlaps with services offered by companies like Coinbase, Kraken, Gemini, and institutional custody providers.
Decentralized Identity and Verification Systems: Technologies for managing and verifying digital identities on decentralized networks, including for KYC (Know Your Customer) purposes. Likely touching on identity solutions like Civic, BrightID, and Blockstack.
Blockchain-Based Voting and Governance: Systems for implementing decentralized voting, governance, and consensus mechanisms, foundational to DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations). Relevant to governance platforms like Aragon, Snapshot, and MakerDAO.
AI Economic Agentic Computing: First introduced by the VeADIR Platform refers to the application of autonomous agents in economic systems, where software entities can make decisions, negotiate, and execute transactions independently. These agents use artificial intelligence to analyze market data, predict trends, and optimize economic activities like trading, resource allocation, and supply chain management. Used by OpenAi, Claude Sonnet, Meta and xAI.
The societal value of these patents to disrupt traditional financial models and fintech business practises, by essentially removing the banks as middlemen, create significant economic incentives to suppress his work.
True Decentralization
Current Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs) often fall short of being truly decentralized due to various practical and structural limitations. Although DEXs leverage blockchain technology and smart contracts to enable trading without a central authority, aspects like governance, liquidity, and user interface can introduce centralization. Governance tokens might be concentrated in the hands of a few, influencing decision-making unevenly. The frontend, controlled by developers, represents a centralized point of control or potential failure. Liquidity pools can be dominated by a handful of large providers, leading to centralized liquidity dynamics. Some DEXs implement regulatory compliance like KYC/AML, which inherently involves centralized oversight. The use of layer-2 solutions for scalability might also undermine decentralization if not fully autonomous.
However, patents like US11196566B2 and US11895246B2 could pave the way for true decentralization by introducing innovations in blockchain interoperability and decentralized governance mechanisms. These patents potentially offer solutions for more evenly distributed control over exchange operations, enhancing the autonomy and distribution of decision-making, thus moving closer to genuine decentralization in the DEX ecosystem, which can be expanded to other industries like Healthcare, Supply Chain, or any other industry that trades value.
Who is Reggie Middleton?
Reggie Middleton, through his BoomBustBlog, became a notable figure in financial analysis, particularly for his early and accurate predictions regarding the collapses of Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns during the 2008 financial crisis. His blog was renowned for providing in-depth, contrarian insights into economic trends, investment opportunities, and corporate vulnerabilities. Reggie won the CNBC's stock draft consecutively for two years, and appeared on major financial news networks like CNBC, BBC and Bloomberg where he discussed market trends, his forecasts, and the implications of financial strategies adopted by major firms. His track record has undeniably positioned him as a significant voice in the financial commentary space.
Reggie's work gained public attention when he appeared on the Keiser Report and CNBC in 2014, premiering his innovations built on the Bitcoin blockchain called "Ultracoin", two years before Ethereum captured the crypto limelight.
His vision was to create sound markets for a financial ecosystem where loans could be issued without banks, trades executed without exchanges, and contracts enforced without lawyers, aiming to disintermediate traditional finance by removing the middleman that doesn't add value.
In 2014, Reggie pioneered a simple Apple trade using a Pure Bitcoin Wallet: The Ultracoin Client.
Ultracoin later renamed VERI short for “Veritaseum” meaning "of truth", was the
first to market in tokenizing precious metals, offering VeGold, VeSilver and even tokenized fiat currencies or so called "Stablecoins". Veritaseum also introduced VeRent creating yield throughP2P lending, and the revolutionary VeADIR platform, an autonomous, blockchain-powered research platform that independently evaluates and acts on dynamic research in real-time, communicates in machine language, and operates by purchasing, analyzing, and distributing insights on various assets while allowing VERI token holders to access and trade this research.
In 2018 he created the worlds first Gold Denominated Blockchain Mortgage
with traditional written note, mortgage as well as a smart contract on a public blockchain, both of whom incorporate each other by reference. The transaction had traditional title insurance and the note was recorded with the county clerk. The mortgage was denominated in Veritaseum's VeGold product, a digital form of gold in bearer form, fully transferable and redeemable upon demand.
Merely a few examples of groundbreaking products offered by Veritaseum.
Coinbase's Challenge: The Patent Infringement Suit
Coinbase, a dominant force in the cryptocurrency exchange market, enlisted the services of Perkins Coie, one of the largest patent law firms, to contest the validity of Reggie Middleton's patents.
They launched an Inter Partes Review (IPR) at the Patent Trials and Appeals Board (PTAB), arguing that Middleton's patents lacked novelty. An overwhelming 85% of patents are invalidated through this process. However, Coinbase's challenge was denied along with the appeal, thereby upholding and strengthening the validity of Reggie's patents.
This IPR challenge came after Veritaseum sued both Coinbase and Circle USDC for $350 million each over patent infringement. Unfortunately, Reggie's patent attorney and close friend passed away during this suit, so the cases has been dismissed without prejudice, meaning they can be negotiated or the cases reopened at any time. This leaves Coinbase in a precarious position, especially if shareholders have not been properly informed of this risk.
This lawsuit details how Coinbase's infrastructure, specifically its Ethereum and Solana validator nodes, engage with client devices to facilitate transactions. Exhibit #3 meticulously outlines the patent's claims, detailing the roles of computing devices, the use of memory for key pair storage, network interfaces for transaction terms, and the generation and dissemination of transaction data records. It provides concrete examples such as the processing of NFT transactions on Ethereum and the management of transaction fees on Solana, supported by in-depth references to code and API interactions. Furthermore, the exhibit explains the verification of transactions through an external state, illustrating how Coinbase's technology aligns with the patent's principles for decentralized transaction processing without a central authority.
SEC's Intervention: A Turning Point
In 2019, with promising negotiations on the horizon with both the Jamaican and the Nigerian Stock Exchanges for digital asset platforms, Reggie's world was turned upside down.
The SEC accused Reggie of fraud, alleging he misled investors about the functionality of Veritaseum's VeADIR platform, which the SEC ordered to be shut down following a live demonstration. The SEC also made claims on the validity of Reggie's patent applications, which have since been approved by both the USPTO and the Japan Patent Office. Oddly enough, the SEC may actually infringe on these very patents through the disgorgement and storage of seized crypto tokens.
Despite Veritaseum's cooperation with the SEC over a two-year period, along with a detailed response addressing the SEC's allegations, and not one token holder claiming to be defrauded, these allegations still led to a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that froze millions in assets, destroying the company's operations, and forcing a consent judgment "neither confirming or denying the allegations". The SEC would top it all off with a gag order that barred Reggie from publicly discussing the matter.
Keep in mind, the SEC is claiming jurisdiction by calling Utility Tokens "Digital Asset Securities" but recently SEC Commissioner @HesterPeirce stated:
"...by using imprecise language we've been able to suggest the token itself is a security, apart from that investment contract, which has implications for Secondary Sales, it has implications for who can list it...
We've fallen down on our duty as a regulator not to be precise. So, tucking into a footnote that yes we admit that now that the TOKEN ITSELF IS NOT A SECURITY, that is something we should have admitted long ago and then started wrestling with the difficult questions."
Misleading Evidence: The SEC's use of declarations from Patrick Doody and Roseann Daniello, which contained misleading information about the personal ownership of a Kraken account used to misappropriate funds. Doody would later correct his statement, but the SEC did not update the court with this new information, potentially misleading the judicial process.
Conflict of Interest: Doody's undisclosed financial interests in the digital asset space through Lily Pad Capital LLC could suggest a bias in his testimony, which was pivotal in obtaining the TRO.
Coercion and Intimidation: Witnesses like Lloyd Cupp and John Doe provided affidavits claiming coercion by SEC attorneys to alter their testimonies, pointing towards witness tampering and intimidation.
RICO Allegations: A 95 page RICO Dossier, supported by extensive evidence, alleges that the SEC's actions could resemble an organized crime syndicate, with systemic coercion, misrepresentation, and procedural misconduct aimed at Reggie Middleton.
Comparisons with the SEC Misconduct in the DEBT Box Case
The DEBT Box case shares a troubling parallel with the Veritaseum case. In both cases a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) freezing funds was issued using dubious evidence which suppressed the ability to defend themselves. This behavior was already admonished by five US Senators
"Regardless of whether Commission staff deliberately misrepresented evidence or unknowingly presented false information, this case suggests other enforcement cases brought by the Commission may be deserving of scrutiny. It is difficult to maintain confidence that other cases are not predicated upon dubious evidence, obfuscations, or outright misrepresentations."
This parallel underscores a potential agency-wide issue that could involve either implicit biases against crypto companies or an explicit strategy to pursue aggressive, potentially misleading tactics in court.
Is The Fox Guarding the Hen House?
In a significant development, the Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) has decided to forward a complaint against SEC attorney Jorge Tenreiro to the SEC's Office of General Counsel (OGC) for investigation. This controversial move suggests a potential conflict of interest, given that the OGC is part of the SEC, the very agency where Tenreiro was recently promoted to Chief Litigation Counsel. The complaint, filed by the Veri community, accuses Tenreiro of misconduct including alleged coercion, witness tampering, and misrepresentation during SEC investigations. The Veri Community argues that this decision undermines the integrity of the legal process, as the OGC's role is to provide legal advice and defend the SEC, not to independently investigate its own employees. This raises questions about the impartiality and transparency of the disciplinary process for attorneys, especially when it involves high-profile figures like Tenreiro.
"As noted in re Rowe, 80 N.Y.2d 336 (1992), the public’s confidence in the legal profession depends on transparent and impartial disciplinary processes. Delegating oversight to the SEC, where Mr. Tenreiro remains a senior official and where the OGC has a clear institutional stake, jeopardizes this confidence and risks the appearance of protectionism.”
The legal battles would only continue for Reggie. The case of Hall v. Middleton, in which Hall, a 1% shareholder sued Reggie, raises concerns of judicial bias and procedural mishandling. In this case, Reggie was denied Due Process and barred from presenting crucial evidence or calling witnesses due to his former attorneys' "Office Failures" that missed deadlines to submit evidence without the knowledge of Reggie or the firm Brundidge & Stanger that outsourced his counsel as detailed in their affirmations.
"In my many years of practice it is a rare instance where I have witnessed an attorney intentionally not file critical documents as required by Court Order without the permission or knowledge of his client, who had an established and fully developed attorney client-relationship with said attorney, and then misrepresent that the requirements of the Court Order were being satisfied. This is one of those instances and I hope not to see another."
~ Carl Brundidge
The judge ruled that Reggie must:
Pay a $1M fine to his company Veritaseum Inc., in which he owns 99%
The plaintiff was awarded costs of $495k against Veritaseum Inc.
The Judge ordered Patents (filed before the creation of Veritaseum Inc.) to be assigned to the company without compensation.
Attorney's "Office Failures":
Sheridan England missed critical deadlines, resulting in the striking of exculpatory evidence. England’s inaction or inadequate defenseexacerbated Middleton’s legal vulnerability, directly leading to adverse outcomes.
Judge Schecter’s Conduct:
Ignoring Exculpatory Evidence: Despite knowledge of its existence, Schecter struck Middleton’s post-trial memorandum.
Procedural Bias:The judge’s decisions systematically favored Hall, including allowing him to collect attorney fees from Middleton personally, contrary to the principles of derivative law.
Forced Patent Transfers: Schecter’s order to transfer patents to an underfunded entity (Veritaseum) which were court restrained by the same judge, rendering them defenseless against attacks and IP theft.
This ordeal was compounded when Reggie was held in Contempt for using personal funds (while Veritaseum’s funds were court-restrained) to successfully defend his patents against an IPR challenge by Coinbase in the PTAB of the USPTO in an attempt to invalidate these patents. The Forced Patent Expropriation to Veritaseum without compensation or the ability to defend them could be seen as coordinated as it benefited very large competitors seeking to avoid licensing fees or infringement claims, or possibly even IP Theft.
Parallel to Middleton's struggles, "ETHgate" emerged, involving allegations by Ethereum co-creator @StevenNerayoff.Nerayoff claimed a government conspiracy aimed at controlling or monopolizing cryptocurrency development by targeting key figures. This narrative suggested that by attacking innovators (like Reggie Middleton as the Veri Community contends), the SEC might have indirectly cleared a path for Ethereum, which, despite its decentralized claim, benefited from a regulatory environment less scrutinized than its competition.
The term "ETHgate" encapsulates the belief that Ethereum's "Free Pass" from regulatory scrutiny might not just be due to its technological merits but also due to strategic regulatory maneuvers, where attacking smaller or less established DeFi projects could safeguard larger, more influential platforms like Ethereum.
Given the SEC protection of ETH and the high probability of Ethereum infringing on Reggie Middleton's patents as meticulously detailed in Exhibit #3 of the Coinbase case, is it ridiculous to believe Reggie Middleton could have been targeted?
Community Support: The Backbone of Resilience
Despite the SEC's narrative labeling them as "The Defrauded," the Veritaseum community rallied around Reggie.
SmartMetal with embedded NFT avalaible through VeriDAO.io
Financially devastated and with his funds frozen, Reggie faced foreclosure and was threatened with jail time after contempt charges for defending his patents using personal funds. In a remarkable show of support, the Veri Community rallied, raising an impressive $149,000 in less than two weeks to cover the fine while the case is under appeal.
They funded legal battles largely through donations and more recently with innovative means like NFT silver rounds called SmartMetal using Reggie's patented technologies, underscoring their belief in his vision. The first minted round was auctioned off for an astonishing $14,000 won by "M S"
"There is no better witness to the veracity of any defense than the alleged defrauded defending the alleged fraud at their own expense"
~ The Veri Community
This community support was not just financial but also moral, with efforts such as an Amicus Brief in the case against XRP, a No Action Letter (NAL) seeking clarity on secondary market sales of tokens, a Bar Complaint against the SEC's newly promoted Chief Litigation Counsel, and the @dao_veri's
Reggie Middleton's saga is emblematic of the challenges faced by pioneers in the blockchain and DeFi arenas.His patents, now granted, underscore their foundational nature, yet the path to their recognition was marred by legal battles, suggesting a systemic issue where the regulatory framework might not fully comprehend or support emerging tech. His resilience, supported by an unwavering community and the validation of his intellectual property, underscores the need for a regulatory environment that fosters rather than stifles innovation. As blockchain technology continues to evolve, Reggie's story serves as a critical reference for balancing innovation with legal and ethical governance, ensuring that the future of finance remains open to all, not just those with the resources to navigate the legal maze.
I know what everyones question is, "HOW CAN I GET MY HANDS ON THE $VERI TOKEN BEFORE EVERYTHING GETS REVERSED AND RELEASED BACK TO THE COMMUNITY?"
Your in luck: Mark is a trusted source, longtime Veri Vet that beta tested the VeADIR platform. Simply follow the thread below. I highly advise picking up a few, and tuck them away! This is the token that could literally FLIP BITCOIN $100k and beyond!
The information provided in this video, including but not limited to documents regarding legal matters, is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal (or any other) advice, and no warranties or representations are made regarding the accuracy, completeness, or fitness of the information for any specific purpose. VeriDAO and its operators do not act as attorneys or legal, financial or technical professionals or advisors and are not responsible for any actions taken or decisions made based on the content provided. Users should seek independent legal counsel for any legal advice or guidance. By watching this video, you agree that VeriDAO and its operators shall not be held liable for any damages or legal consequences arising from the use or misuse of the information contained herein.
The content provided in this document is intended strictly for informational and educational purposes only. This document constitutes a research opinion and should be regarded as such. All claims, statements, allegations, and opinions contained within are based on publicly available information and are allegations unless and until proven in a court of law. The authors expressly disclaim any representation or warranty regarding the truthfulness, accuracy, completeness, fitness for a particular purpose, or durability of the information contained herein.
The authors of this document are not licensed attorneys or legal professionals and do not claim to provide legal, financial, or professional advisory services. Nothing in this document should be construed as legal advice, legal opinion, or any form of licensed advisory counsel. If you require legal assistance or professional advice, you are strongly encouraged to consult a licensed attorney or qualified expert in the relevant field. The authors are laypersons presenting research-based opinions, and as such, this document should not be relied upon to make any decisions of legal, financial, or professional significance.
The authors make no guarantees, express or implied, regarding the completeness or reliability of the information presented. No warranties of any kind are offered regarding the accuracy, validity, timeliness, or completeness of any information within this document. The information may contain errors or inaccuracies, and any use of it is entirely at your own risk.
Furthermore, this document may contain statements of belief, criticism, or commentary, and all such statements are offered solely as opinions protected under the principles of free speech. The authors disclaim liability for any interpretation that may be construed as libel, slander, or defamation, as the document aims to present alleged facts and subjective opinions for educational research purposes only. All statements about individuals, organizations, or entities should be understood as unproven allegations, and readers are urged not to interpret them as established facts.
The authors will not be liable for any damages, losses, or legal consequences that arise from the use, misuse, or reliance on the information provided herein. No responsibility is assumed for any actions or decisions that any party may make based on this document. The reader assumes full responsibility for any and all consequences that may arise from using the information contained in this document.
By accessing and using this document, you agree that neither the authors nor any affiliated parties shall be held liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, consequential, or punitive damages resulting from your use of this information. The authors reserve the right to update or revise the information in this document at any time without notice, but they are under no obligation to do so.
Finally, any statements regarding individuals, entities, or organizations are not intended to malign, defame, or harm the reputation of those mentioned. Any resemblance to real individuals or incidents is purely coincidental, unless otherwise explicitly stated, and the authors urge readers to exercise caution and discernment when interpreting the information presented.
This document is a work-in-progress, part of an ongoing investigative process, and should not be treated as definitive or final. Readers are encouraged to independently verify the information and seek professional advice before acting on any information herein.
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has abandoned its appeal of a contentious dealer rule designed to classify digital asset operations as regulated securities dealers broadly.
A federal judge ruled that the SEC had exceeded its authority by potentially categorizing nearly any participant in buying and selling securities as a dealer.
This decision is part of a broader reset in the SEC's approach to digital assets under new leadership.
The agency’s move to drop the appeal, amid concerns that continued litigation could reduce Treasury market liquidity and increase taxpayer costs.
Additionally, the SEC recently sought to pause its enforcement actions against Binance, indicating its readiness to resolve disputes through alternative means.
Blockchain Association CEO welcomed the dismissal, expressing hope for more productive discussions between regulators and the crypto industry as the US embraces a friendlier regulatory framework for digital assets.
What’s next: With acting chairman Mark Uyeda overhauling senior staff and legal strategies, the SEC is shifting away from its historically adversarial stance, a policy long associated with former chairman Gary Gensler.
For builders and investors: The new approach encourages constructive conversations between regulators and industry players, potentially leading to clearer guidelines and a more predictable operating landscape for both builders and investors.
Tether Teams Up With US Lawmakers on Stablecoin Rules
Tether is reportedly working with members of the US House Financial Services Committee, specifically Representatives Bryan Steil and French Hill, to shape federal stablecoin regulations.
This includes contributing to the STABLE Act introduced by both lawmakers in early February, as well as offering input on two additional stablecoin bills.
According to Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino, the company wants its perspective heard during the legislative process and is prepared to adapt to US rules.
The new rules may include requirements like monthly reserve audits and 1:1 collateral backing.
Tether’s involvement comes amid broader regulatory discussions, including meetings between crypto industry leaders and the SEC, and the push to bring stablecoins onshore.
Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve is warming to stablecoins as a means of preserving the US dollar’s global dominance but remains concerned about risks such as de-pegging events and market fragmentation.
What’s Next: Tether’s collaboration with lawmakers suggests that stablecoin regulations could soon take a more defined shape and may introduce stricter compliance measures, including mandatory audits and full collateral backing.
Why it Matters: If lawmakers strike the right balance, stablecoins could cement their role in global finance, benefiting both the crypto industry and the broader economy.
Our Take: If Tether and other stablecoin issuers adapt to US regulatory frameworks, it could bring legitimacy to the stablecoin sector, encourage institutional adoption, and integrate crypto more deeply into the traditional financial system.
Sign Up for free to see more from this community or subscribe to TheDinarian for $5/month to support TheDinarian for more interaction and exclusive content.
Welcome to the Dinarian on Locals, where we discuss everything blockchain and digital asset related. We are here to learn from one another as this is a new and ever evolving space. Please post and share what you like, but be respectful to others as they are here to learn as well.
Knowledge is power, using that knowledge can be extremely powerful,
The Dinarian
