
BREAKING🚨 SEC Chairman Paul Atkins Discusses $MMTLP with Charles Payne When asked if there might be future updates, Chairman Atkins replied, “We’ll see.” ⬇️
Glitch
1.6K posts


BREAKING🚨 SEC Chairman Paul Atkins Discusses $MMTLP with Charles Payne When asked if there might be future updates, Chairman Atkins replied, “We’ll see.” ⬇️




NEW FOIA reveals 5 SEC Commissioners (including Gensler) corresponded re: MMTLP in 13,177 emails in the days immediately preceding FINRA's U3 Halt on December 8/9, 2022. Former Chairman Gensler testified to Congress that FINRA did not seek advice from the SEC regarding the trading halt which occured 2 days before the published and promoted end of trading, trapping 65k+ investors. What do you think they discussed???.... #FOIA Credit: @thedocespo

If there is a winning argument to deny TRANSPARENCY to tens of thousands of defrauded investors, don't you think the best attorneys money can buy would be making it??? They tried, THEY FAILED!!! 1 Down, 4 to go.... #Discovery "And why do they want to know whether our client caused a spike? Because they want to name us as a defendant in the lawsuit." ~Peter Fountain, Counsel for Citadel, VIRTU, Anson Funds NONE of you can stop what is coming... MMAT MMTLP TRCH NBH





🔫This is one of several smoking guns. The 1st $MMTLP Corporate Action stated shareholders would receive one (1) share of Next Bridge Hydrocarbons on 12/14/22, while simultaneously declaring MMTLP shares cancelled effective 12/13/22. As written, that is logically impossible. A security cannot be cancelled before the date required to receive the distribution. Had this Corporate Action been properly reviewed under @FINRA Rule 6490, it never should have appeared on the Daily List. Meanwhile, the SEC was engaged in email communications with FIF, a broker-dealer trade organization, regarding concerns over synthetic (fake) shares and uncovered short positions being carried by broker-dealers. Rather than force reconciliation or require shorts to cover, FINRA, the regulator overseeing those same broker/dealers, ensured they never had to. FINRA later claimed it relied on language from a December 23rd press release, yet still failed to include the correct 12/14/22 (after market close) share cancellation date. Instead, FINRA doubled down by deleting the MMTLP symbol on 12/13, an action that typically coincides with share cancellation. By doing so, FINRA, not Meta Materials or Next Bridge, forced a Mandatory Exchange/Reorganization on December 13, regardless of issuer intent. Every brokerage was compelled to comply because it was FINRA’s Corporate Action, not the issuer’s. Then, just three days before the position was set to close, FINRA invoked a U3 halt, an extraordinary measure reserved for industry preservation emergencies, to halt a security that was never supposed to trade in the first place. The result: short positions were frozen in place, reconciliation was avoided, innocent investors were locked out, and entire #MMTLP portfolios were effectively wiped out leaving a path of destruction and despair for over 65,000 #MMTLPFAMILY members. FINRA later removed the requirement that MMTLP be held through 12/14/22, a change that appeared only months later in its first FAQ, after the damage was already done. This is a clear example of regulatory coordination and FINRA acting outside its scope of duty. Unless someone can point to where FINRA is authorized to rewrite an issuer’s Corporate Action in a way that causes settlement failure and protects broker/dealers, this was regulatory misconduct. Perhaps representatives from FINRA and the @SECGov or @SecScottBessent would like to comment at the upcoming Press Conference in front of the SEC? Will the @TheJusticeDept send anyone? The #MMTLPARMY will be there...💪

The 1st $MMTLP Corporate Action said "...will receive one (1) share of Next Bridge Hydrocarbons Inc. for every one (1) share of MMTLP held on Pay Date of 12/14/22." It then goes on to say that "MMTLP shares will be cancelled effective 12/13/22." As written, it was impossible to receive shares of Next Bridge on 12/14/22. If the Corporate Action was properly reviewed according to @FINRA Rule 6490, this Corporate Action never would've made it to the Daily List! The 2nd image includes wording from the December 23rd PR that FINRA claims to have used to create the MMTLP Corporate Action. Observe that using the correct December 14th (after market close) share cancellation date would've prevented the issue that FINRA created. But FINRA didn't include the correct December 14th Share Cancellation in the revised Corporate Action either. They instead included that FINRA would be Deleting the MMTLP SYMBOL on December 13th. SYMBOL DELETION is an action that usually coincides with SHARE CANCELLATION. So essentially they were doubling down on December 13th being the SHARE CANCELLATION DATE because they didn't include the correct SHARE CANCELLATION DATE until 3 months later in their first FAQ. FINRA also removed that part about having to have held MMTLP on December 14th in their revised Corporate Action. Whether the MMTLP SYMBOL was Deleted on December 13th or not, every brokerage had to take part in a Mandatory Exchange/Reorganization on December 13th because it was always FINRA's Corporate Action, it didn't matter what Metamaterials or Next Bridge wanted to do! A clear example of FINRA acting outside of their scope of duty! (Unless someone can comment below where it says that FINRA is allowed to modify/revise/amend an issuer's Corporate Action in such a way that it CAUSES settlement issues.) I'll wait! Investor Protection Market Integrity @SECGov @SECEnfDirector @GaryGensler @HesterPeirce @FBI @FBIWFO @FBILosAngeles @NewYorkFBI @DOJCrimDiv @TheJusticeDept @SecretService @RepRalphNorman @MikeCrapo #MMTLPsetaDate

So in the 7 days leading up to the $mmtlp halt, the 5 chairs of the SEC had a combined 13,177 pages of correspondence ONLY pertaining to MMTLP. Let that sink in for a minute. Unbelievable. #mmtlp Sign the letter @POTUS



Sure … the problem they have now is the justification to release some things related to MMTLP and not other things. Judges don’t like inconsistency. Especially in light of the release of these emails and that the focus here is on the very “investigation” there were using to justify withholding information. Funny how the information here is centered on that … and yet they can’t release the Blue Sheets. Everyone should be sending FOIAs again. I have.

I wonder if the SEC knew before the halt? Gensler said no.


FINRA is claiming that providing data to the MMAT Bankruptcy Trustee is too burdensome but... 1. Since FINRA already investigated, the majority of the requested data should already be available. 2. The podcast linked in the quote post below features FINRA's Sam Draddy. He's the guy that told the SEC on 12-5-22 that FINRA was actively Blue Sheeting (investigating) MMAT & MMTLP. In the podcast he talks about how AI dramatically decreases the time it takes to conduct investigations. FINRA is lying, they didn't protect investors, the data will prove this. MMAT traded for a good amount of time AFTER MMTLP was U3 halted. If FINRA discovered manipulation in MMAT during their Blue Sheet investigation, why wasn't the SEC altered to do something about it? @SECPaulSAtkins @SECGov @TheJusticeDept


Based on this podcast featuring FINRA's Sam Draddy, it should be easier than ever for FINRA to provide data to a Bankruptcy Trustee. @palikaras "...investigations that historically may have taken up to six tc eight months are now being completed in less than half that time, with many being completed in a matter of days and weeks as opposed to months." finra.org/media-center/f…



MMAT MMTLP TRCH NBH ⚖️ Estimated Legal Spend – FINRA (Meta Materials Bankruptcy Only) (⚠️Not legal advise) 💰 1. What FINRA Itself Says (Baseline) From its own declaration: •E-discovery (one-time): 👉 $457,000 – $556,000 •Monthly hosting: 👉 $13,312/month •Data scope: 👉 ~4.9 million messages 👉 ~2.56 TB ⸻ 🧾 2. Realistic Cost Breakdown (What’s Missing from Their Filing) FINRA’s numbers focus mainly on vendor + review costs, but exclude major legal spend 👀: 📊 A. E-Discovery Vendor + Review (their estimate) •Collection / processing / review: 👉 ~$500K •Hosting (12 months): 👉 ~$150K ✅ Subtotal: ~$650K ⸻ ⚖️ B. Outside Counsel (Squire Patton Boggs-level firm) Typical rates: •Partners: $800–$1,200/hr •Associates: $400–$700/hr Estimated effort (1 year of litigation + briefing + hearings): •Motions to quash + replies + supplemental briefs •Hearing prep + appearances •Coordination with multiple parties 👉 Estimated: $500K – $1.2M 💰💰💰💰💰 ⸻ 🏢 C. Internal FINRA Legal + Staff Time Includes: •Office of General Counsel •Investigators •IT / data teams •Compliance personnel 👉 Conservative estimate: $250K – $500K equivalent cost 💰💰 ⸻ 🧮 3. Total Estimated Spend (Bankruptcy Only) CategoryEstimated Cost E-discovery (vendor + hosting)$650K Outside counsel$500K – $1.2M Internal staff / legal$250K – $500K TOTAL$1.4M – $2.35M+ 💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰 ⸻ ⚠️ 4. Key Insight (This is the Real Story) FINRA is arguing: “Production is too burdensome and expensive” But the reality is: 👉 They have likely already spent $1.4M – $2.3M+ 👉 just to resist producing the data 💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥 ⸻ 🧠 5. What This Means Strategically 🔥 Important distinction: This is NOT about: •whether costs exist (they do) This IS about: •whether the burden is undue ⸻ 💥 Key contradiction: FINRA has already: •Conducted keyword searches across millions of records •Quantified the data precisely •Built cost models •Litigated extensively across multiple filings 👉 Which shows: The data is identifiable, accessible, and manageable ⸻ ⚖️ 6. How a Court Typically Views This A court will not punish a party for spending money, but it may note: 👉 If a party can: •litigate extensively •analyze the data •quantify the burden Then: 👉 targeted production may not be “undue” ⸻ 🎯 Bottom Line •Estimated spend (bankruptcy only): 👉 ~$1.4M to $2.35M+ •Core takeaway: 👉 The dispute is not really about cost 👉 It’s about control of sensitive internal records 🤐🤫🤐🤫🤐


This is happening in SC-05, NOT the Middle East. How did South Carolina leaders let it get this far? THIS is why we launched the Sharia Free America Caucus. I won’t ignore it. I won’t excuse it. And I won’t let it become the new normal.