Rare DD
@RareDealsHere • 3,353 subscribers
By robbing me of my trading days you've also hired me to expose you. $MMTLP Beware of imitations!
Videos
New Video 🎥 " $MMTLP: The Red Flags Ignored By The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission". We know the SEC moves slow, but we also know that MMTLP has been on their radar since at least 2021! Is the SEC taking the investigation seriously? Have they noticed the links between FINRA, Ari Rubenstein & those that attempt to disparage the MMTLP Community? One, two, or even three of these links could've been written off as a coincidence, but 1 by 1, after doing some digging they all appear to lead back to Ari Rubenstein & his companies. Don't believe me? Just watch this short 10 minute video & see for yourself! FBI Los Angeles FBI Washington Field Criminal Division U.S. Department of Justice U.S. Secret Service DTCC Rep. Ralph Norman Senator Mike Crapo Dennis Kneale MARDÜK the META Guy😎🦋 #MMTLPFiasco
Rare DD192,450 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren
When you look at communications from brokerages before the U3 halt of MMTLP, they contradict FINRA's rationale for issuing the halt. The FIF emails confirm that broker-dealers were put in a compromised position, once again contradicting FINRA's claim that the halt was to protect investors from buying after December 8th. The meeting between FINRA and the DTCC (without the issuer) makes it seem pretty obvious that the halt was necessary to protect the clearing agency. We need a resolution!
Rare DD40,396 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten
The Financial Information Forum (FIF) is a place where financial entities can have their concerns heard by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Due to an abundance of unchecked manipulation, followed by the U3 halt of $MMTLP, many of these entities including TradeStation found themselves in a bind due to the proposed subscription rights S-1 from Next Bridge Hydrocarbons. But after multiple meetings with the SEC, the SEC found a reason to get Next Bridge to withdraw the request! Investors have sent thousands of letters/complaints through the official channels but the SEC is yet to formally address MMTLP. The FIF and similar groups have a direct access to the SEC because clearly the SEC is not here to protect investors! Paul Atkins Full video 🎥 linked in the quote post below 👇🏾
Rare DD38,124 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten
If there's nothing damning in the MMAT / MMTLP trading data, why is FINRA trying to keep it private? Will the data contradict what Robert W. Cook told Rep. Ralph Norman and the other 70+ members of Congress? How then can Congress entrust the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate? The SEC surely has the data, if it proves FINRA wasn't truthful, why hasn't the SEC called them out yet?
Rare DD12,380 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten
"Why else do you halt something, unless it was expected to trade?" Both $MMTLP Corporate Actions informed the reader that positions needed to be settled by 12/12/22. Investors didn't need to understand this! It was the fiduciary responsibility of the Corporate Action Department of each brokerage, to read and make sense of the Corporate Action. This is why we have multiple messages from brokerages informing their clients that AFTER 12/8/22, trading in MMTLP would be limited to position-close (closing transactions) ONLY!!! There was no threat to unsuspecting investors seeking to "OPEN" a new position in MMTLP after 12/8/22, because there are no messages from brokerages informing clients that this would've been a possibility! The Corporate Action Department of each brokerage, likely read what FINRA included in BOTH Corporate Actions, that informed the reader that purchases of MMTLP executed after 12/8/22 would not be entitled to the distribution. Link to full video 🎥 in the quote post below 👇🏾, further evidence included in the post to follow.
Rare DD18,080 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Excuse me, Paul Atkins How do you conduct a 1-for-1 exchange, $MMTLP for Next Bridge Hydrocarbons, if FINRA deletes the MMTLP trading symbol 40 hours beforehand, forcing all brokerages holding MMTLP to conduct a mandatory exchange/reorganization? Wouldn't it have made more sense to just "EXCHANGE" MMTLP for Next Bridge Hydrocarbons shares 1-for-1? Maybe you can ask Hester Peirce or Gary Gensler! Full video linked in the quote post!
Rare DD14,287 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten
FINRA made a conscious effort to no longer mention "December 14th" after their first $MMTLP FAQ. Whats the significance of December 14th? It was the most important date in the MMTLP/Next Bridge Hydrocarbons spin-off/exchange! It was the "Pay/Distribution Date" for the Next Bridge shares... after the close of business. It was the MMTLP "Share Cancellation Date"... after the close of business. Which meant that it also should've been the overall "Effective Date" for the Corporate Action. But after FINRA met with DTCC, FINRA unilaterally revised the MMTLP Corporate Action, removing "December 14th". Then, after mentioning "December 14th" 7 times in the initial FAQ, FINRA didn't mention it once in the Supplemental FAQ... And in Robert W. Cook's 32 page response to Ralph Norman and the 70 plus members of Congress, he didn't mention "December 14th" at all! This is not a coincidence! The video 🎥 linked in the quote post below 👇🏾 explains in great detail why FINRA distanced themselves from the most important date of the Corporate Action. Where's Paul Atkins and Hester Peirce? Why isn't the SEC addressing this? Attorney General Pamela Bondi
Rare DD12,820 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten
🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨 The Metamaterials spin-off S-1 was made effective by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The S-1 was the governing document for the "corporate action". It layed out the precise steps/timeline for the 1-for-1 exchange after the close of business on 12/14/22 that was to result in the automatic cancellation of $MMTLP. This was a legally binding process that both the issuer and the market had to follow. Any deviation from this plan would be a serious breach of the approved "corporate action" outlined in the S-1. By FINRA's decision to delete the trading symbol early, effective 12/13 (zero hour), they acted outside of the issuer's SEC-effective plan. This action disrupted the planned process and caused significant market confusion and harm to investors. It forced brokerages to perform a reorganization or mandatory exchange on an altered timeline, which led to errors, the inability to settle trades, and financial losses for investors. (There was a mandatory exchange BEFORE the alleged 1-for-1 exchange took place, FINRA NEVER addressed this in their FAQs) Symbol deletion is a consequential step, not a discretionary one, in many corporate actions. For a 1-for-1 exchange where the original shares are cancelled, the symbol for those shares would naturally be deleted after the shares are no longer tradable. This was a technical step that followed the main corporate action. (☝🏾 FINRA and the SEC know that this is the correct procedure) The S-1 described the legal and financial aspects of the transaction (the exchange ratio, the cancellation of shares etc), while FINRA handled the technical and logistical aspects, like managing the trading symbols and CUSIPs. (NOT CHANGING OR INCORPORATING EXTRA DATES) Yet when you observe the 12/8/22 MMTLP Corporate Action, FINRA made "EARLY DELETION OF THE MMTLP TRADING SYMBOL" the MAIN COMPONENT, effective the zero hour of 12/13/22, 40 hours before the exchange set to take place after the close of business on 12/14/22. This was in direct conflict to FINRA's mandate to maintain fair and orderly markets. The outcome and the chaos these past (almost) 3 years is proof! How long can Paul Atkins ignore this? Hester Peirce The full video 🎥 linked below explains even more regulatory shortcomings 👇🏾
Rare DD13,531 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten
The SEC has seemingly been trying to hide the crime that is $MMTLP becoming tradable (with fraudulent information) since November 2021. (In addition to trying to preventing settlement) If it weren't for the FOIA, the SEC and FINRA wouldn't have been transparent concerning their communication behind the scenes. Proof is the fact that the emails never came up in FAQ! DOGE SEC
Rare DD16,513 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Why the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission appears to be an even bigger culprit than FINRA in the $MMTLP Fiasco is... The SEC suspected that Brda and Palikaras were guilty of a scheme since at least September 2021. A scheme that according to the SEC, means that neither man should be able to run or presumably be involved with a publicly traded company if found guilty of the charges filed 3 years after the initial subpoenas. So if investors needed to be protected from Brda & Palikaras, how does the SEC justify allowing investors to invest in $MMAT & $MMTLP (TRCH also if the SEC suspected a scheme leading up to the reverse merger), and also making effective the S1 for the Next Bridge Hydrocarbons spin-off? How is it that the SEC has shared oversight of the Options Clearing Corporation (OCC), but they haven't lifted a finger to show the party(s) responsible for getting options started in TRCH directly before the reverse merger? Coincidentally, the SEC has oversight of FINRA, but the SEC hasn't formally addressed the many ways FINRA violated their Rule 6490 when processing the MMTLP Corporate Action, Nor have they lifted a finger to show the party(s) responsible for getting MMTLP tradeable. It's almost like the SEC tried to enact their own form of justice to punish Brda and Palikaras for the alleged scheme, but at the same time, investors were treated like justifiable casualties. This is only part 1 of 5, full video 🎥 linked in the quote post below. Paul Atkins Hester Peirce
Rare DD10,801 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten
There's a message from TD Ameritrade indicating they contacted FINRA to verify the "effective December 13th" $MMTLP Share Cancellation Date. Neither party is subject to FOIA. But what if the SEC was copied on an email or contacted separately? And if not TD, what if another brokerage or bank contacted the SEC? Full video 🎥 linked in the quote post below 👇🏾
Rare DD10,169 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten
The strange thing about Pete Sessions' involvement with $MMTLP is that he was already in contact with FINRA concerning the Corporate Action on 12/6/22 (or earlier, he lies). Why was he contacting FINRA? Why haven't we seen the letter? Why did FINRA do him the courtesy of responding the same day, and why hasn't FINRA published the correspondences like they did with Next Bridge? FBI Los Angeles Full video 🎥 linked in the quote post below 👇🏾
Rare DD10,800 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Keine weiteren Inhalte verfügbar