July 25, 2007
What gives with the release of this approved change. we are bordering on yet another 6-weeks since the rule was approved by the Commission staff.
I can understand the delays associated with eliminating the options market making portion of the proposed law but such a decision was made well in advance of the Commission hearing in June and the draft work should have been started then.
Chairman Cox has made promises to State Legislature, State Regulators, The Chamber of Commerce, and members of Congress that the Commission is taking this issue seriously and yet it is quite apparent that the man in charge of releasing this draft, James Brigagliano, has no interest in an expedicious release. The mannerisms of Brigagliano in the SEC open session were clear as he shook his head no several times when the elimination of the grandfather clause were addressed yet showed positive affirmations when delays to changes to the options market making exemptions were being discussed. people can not hide their beliefs from their uncontrolled body movements and with respect to James Brigagliano it is clear that he is an inside shill for Wall Street
Mr. Chairman, before the Chamber of Commerce you opined that victims of this abuse have a right to be mad. Do these victims have an equal right to be disappointed in the lack of commitment by the staff to get this problem resolved? It is now over 13 months since the SEC admitted that SHO remained an issue and yet there has been little by way of enforcement and little by way of policy changes becoming effective.
At what point is the SEC liable for the losses incurred by the fraud committed during these delays? If James Brigagliano was interested in protecting the investing public such alterations would have been made and released. Instead it is clear Mr. Brigagliano is buying time for the crooks manipulating our markets.
Dave Patch
www.investigatethesec.com
BTW...On a seperate note, I submitted a FOIA request for the meeting minutes between the SEC and members of Wall Street regarding meetings the SEC admitted to having regarding the initial release of SHO. Ironically the request came back as a denial that any notes or transcripts were taken in all those meetings held. Is it standard practice for the SEC to hold meetings and never document what transpired or take notes for future reference? Is that why the SEC policies seem so screwed up - nobody can recall what was discussed because no notes or transcripts were taken?
I would suggest that the SEC is so conflicted over these reforms that they would cover up any and all notes they have regarding the deals they made with the devil (Wall Street) to protect this fraud.
Interesting read here is how Wall Street blames it all on the SEC...Motion Transcripts Overstock v. Prime Brokers
http://investigatethesec.com/20070725O.htm