After several weeks of tapping away at keys, and arguing, and editing, and going back and forth, and revising, and re-revising, the NCANS comment letter on Reg SHO is nearing completion.
I'm quite sure that the SEC is awaiting it with bated breath, especially given their enthusiasm in the Nanopierce case, where their last letter to the court was rejected, while NCANS' Amicus brief, as well as NASAA's, was accepted by the court.
Be that as it may, the finished product will be solutions-oriented, as opposed to rubbing the SEC's nose in their considerable mess. Dave Patch has done an extraordinarily thorough and compelling job of exposing the Commission's dishonesty in the evaluation of SHO's efficacy, as well as in enforcing its virtually non-existent rules (or the more manifest edicts of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, for that matter). I know there are other great pieces coming down the pike that do a similarly convincing job, so the NCANS letter won't go down that road.
We hope to have it finalized by early next week. I'm exploring mechanisms to allow you to sign it, so that we have hundreds of signatures on it when it is presented to the SEC. I think that will make a powerful statement, and encourage every person who is incensed about this growing crisis to sign the letter. CEOs and members of companies are also encouraged to sign. A show of solidarity is a good indicator that this issue won't just go away.
All of the credits for this process will be bestowed when the doc is done. It has been a team effort, but the absolutely most material contributor has been Tommytoyz, who spent literally weeks on it, as have I. Tommy is responsible for much of the guts and meat of it, and his contribution cannot be overstated. I know he is probably embarrassed at the public credit, however it is well deserved.
If anyone has any suggestions for easily creating a signature sheet, I'm all ears. Appreciate any and all input.
---------------------
In other news, Senator Grassley says that the SEC is impeding the Senate Judiciary's probe into the Commission's handling of Gary Aguirre, and the insider trading probe at Pequot.
This article does a good job telling the story.
Now, doesn't the SEC work for Congress? I thought Congress created them in the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, and that the SEC answered to them. Apparently, the royal elite at the Commission don't answer to anyone - they, like the DTCC, pass rules that preclude them from doing so, and then tell their overseers that they can't answer direct questions because it is against the rules.
Check this out:
"`These investigations were closed or inactive at the time Congress started its inquiry," Grassley said. ``Reopening these investigations after Congress begins to ask questions and then citing the fact that they are active as a pretext to deny or delay congressional requests is unacceptable."
Now that you want to know what is going on behind the curtain, we will stonewall you, and hope you just get tired, or bored, and go away.
Funny how consistent that is.
Is it just me, or are we heading to a showdown here? Our securities regulator is out of control, and the arrogance of the office is such as to be breathtaking. The Global Links FOIA data shows a co-opted regulator engaging in cover-ups to shield Wall Street, at investor expense. The statements of the Senators is sounding suspiciously like they believe a cover-up is going on in the Aguirre matter. Dave Patch's latest demonstrates an ongoing cover-up in the performance of Reg SHO, and a systematic series of misstatements designed to mislead and deceive.
How many cover-ups do we need to see before a special prosecutor is named, and the individuals who are making these decisions get the DOJ knocking at the door, putting cuffs on them?
------------------
To that end, for those playing along at home, the SEC was caught in yet ANOTHER lie about FTDs in Global Links.
From InvestorVillage.com's NFI message board, a poster's observation:
"The cover letter signed by Felecia Taylor on 8/7/2006 contains the statement "Please note, we were advised by the staff that there were no fails to deliver transactions from January 1, 2005 through April 17, 2005.
Since at least one attorney at the SEC (Celeste M. Murphy) had personal knowledge that trades in February and March (totaling over 1.2 million shares) were never settled, the staff advisory to Taylor is clearly false."
Yup. That's correct. Several investors made formal filings and complaints to the SEC that their large purchases of Global Links stock had failed to be delivered, BEFORE April, so the SEC had it on record that shareholders were being defrauded of the property they paid for, even before the official tally was issued. So their statement is a lie.
Again.
How much of this do we have to see? Senators? Brave NY Press Corps?