December 20, 2012
Dear Esteemed Government Bureaucrats,
Thank you for publishing my comments dated December 19, 2012, on http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-07-12/s70712.shtml
According to http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/ruling-comments the Commission will make all comments available to the public, as stated on the web page that you maintain for the submission of comments: "Important: All comments will be made available to the public."
I have never submitted comments to the SEC prior to December 19, 2012, so when doing so naturally I followed the instructions that you have published on your website.
Between yesterday and today I have submitted three distinct comments. However, you have only published my first submission and you did so promptly on the day of submission.
Based on the presumption that you deemed my second and third comments to be improperly constructed, because in the form that I originally submitted them they each explicitly responded to prior comments from other people, I have re-submitted my second and third comments in revised form so that they are not responsive to any other commentator's previous submissions but instead they stand alone as valid submissions.
If you have a policy, or a legal requirement, that you believe prohibits the publication of my second submission, because it references pending litigation and potential criminal prosecution of various parties in a specific instance of issuer fraud, then please advise of this problem and I will re-submit a revised comment -- my observations on the subject of issuer fraud are extremely important to add to the discussion and debate surrounding general solicitation and capital formation in accordance with Rule 506 and Rule 144A.
With respect to my third submission, surely it should be published without further delay at least in my most recent re-submitted form in which I removed the specific reference to a member of Congress whose incorrect statement I cited in my submission.
Finally, if you have a policy of only publishing one submission per submitter then please state this policy clearly on the web page for submitting comments. You have clearly published Anonymous comments from the same commentator previously, so if you're going to publish every Anonymous comment that is on-topic then you should also publish everything that anyone else wishes to say publicly that is pertinent to the subject matter at hand. Please inform me that you have a one comment per commentator rule, if that is the case, and I will re-submit a single comment that combines all of my submissions to replace my submission dated December 19, 2012.
Although my opinions about the egregious violations of the U.S. Constitution that the Securities and Exchange Commission, Congress, and the Executive branch have engaged in since 1933 may be contentious, you will find (or perhaps you already know) that my statements are factually correct and my comments are true and correct representations of my forensic research and my own real-world experience with Federal securities law. The fact that your Commission has serious, systemic, long-term structural flaws is not news to anyone who has been paying attention. I am sensitive to the possibility that publishing my comments may cause problems for your Commission, and still I do not believe you have the right to refuse to publish them.
My comments are valuable, well-informed, and on-topic. Some people will be in disagreement with my comments, or will mistakenly believe my comments to be inaccurate factually, but there is no doubt that the publication of my comments will help to inspire additional research or deep thinking, and may help to inform this important debate and contribute to policy decisions in the future.
Respectfully,
Jason Coombs