FREEdom Coin presyoFREE

In a stunning revelation that adds political intrigue to an already high-profile legal battle, Reuters has uncovered that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) interim chief, Mark Uyeda, cast the sole dissenting vote against suing Elon Musk earlier this year. The closed-door vote, held just days before Republicans took control of the agency in January, approved a lawsuit over Musk’s delayed disclosure of Twitter stock purchases. The 4-1 decision not only highlights deep internal divisions within the SEC but also raises serious questions about political pressure, regulatory integrity, and the future of enforcement under a Musk-friendly administration. In a quiet but consequential January vote, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) decided 4-1 to sue Elon Musk over his delayed disclosure of Twitter shares. The vote, revealed exclusively by Reuters , exposed a deep rift within the agency. The lone dissenter? Republican Commissioner Mark Uyeda, now the SEC’s interim chief. His "no" vote came just days before a political shift in Washington saw Republicans take control of the agency. The core issue stems from Musk’s 2022 acquisition of Twitter (now X), when he disclosed his stake 21 days late—far beyond the required 10-day window for holdings exceeding 5%. That delay, the SEC argues, allowed him to scoop up more shares at lower prices, saving him $150 million and triggering market movements. The agency sued Musk on January 14, just a week after the commissioners' internal vote. Uyeda, a Republican appointee and close observer of political implications, reportedly questioned the motives behind the lawsuit. Before the vote, he asked SEC enforcement staff to sign pledges that the case was free from political influence—an unusual move rejected by the staff. His opposition was not necessarily about Musk’s actions, but about the optics and timing of the enforcement, which came just before a change in administration. The timing has raised eyebrows. Musk is a known ally of President Donald Trump, and the vote occurred just before Republican leadership took over the SEC. Trump has since issued an executive order accusing the SEC of partisan targeting under Biden and demanded a review of politically driven investigations. Though the SEC declined to comment, the lawsuit’s proximity to the power shift casts doubt on the agency’s neutrality in the eyes of critics. The commission reportedly demanded Musk give up the $150 million in alleged gains and pay an additional penalty. While Uyeda voted no, fellow Republican Hester Peirce sided with the three Democratic commissioners, allowing the lawsuit to proceed. The decision shows an unusual split within Republican ranks and underscores the internal friction over how to deal with the billionaire entrepreneur. Intent was key. SEC investigators explored whether Musk knowingly delayed the filing—a charge that could carry more severe consequences. Musk, however, claimed he misunderstood the rule and eventually complied. The SEC dropped the intent angle but still pursued civil penalties. Musk had agreed to be deposed twice but resisted further interviews, delaying the case until after the 2024 election. Legal experts question the SEC’s sluggish pace. A late filing case is typically straightforward. "Bringing it at the last minute—it loses credibility," said Howard Fischer, a former SEC lawyer. Others argue that not filing at all would have looked like selective enforcement, undermining the agency’s role in upholding fair markets. Musk has until April 4 to respond to the court summons. With Uyeda now leading the SEC and Trump ordering a review of the agency’s actions, the Musk case could become a lightning rod in the wider war over regulatory power and political influence. Musk’s long-standing feud with the SEC—dating back to his 2018 Tesla tweet saga—adds more fuel to the fire. The internal divide within the SEC, revealed in this exclusive report, paints a picture of an agency caught between law and politics. Whether the case against Musk is about justice or timing remains an open question—one that could reshape the future of securities enforcement in a deeply divided America.

the right trenches drastically increase your chances of making it in crypto it's not "free money" tho; you have to put in the work, be willing to learn from others, show up, take risks, and remain persistent but this is the closest you can get to information asymmetry (alpha)

Bitcoin update 24.03.25 - 30.01.25: HTF: We closed another weekly candle in no man's land, still below the 89K SL. At this level, there’s nothing solid to trade on HTF until we either push for new ATHs or drop to the 72K level. Patience is key here—either focus on other timeframes or shift to different assets entirely. Expanding into other markets also helps ease the constant pressure of always wanting to find a trade in crypto. MTF/LTF: A lot more is happening here—nice levels to trade around. While we’re still in a downtrend, we’re slowly forming HHs. The key swing highs are still quite far away, but we might be spotting early signs of a trend shift. Of course, targeting ATHs wouldn’t be wise until these HTF SHs are broken, but we can still look for long setups and trail them properly. This allows us to gain exposure while ensuring we lock in profits along the way. Sentiment/Orderflow: While crypto-related news remains highly bullish, TradFi seems gripped by deep fear, creating a mixed sentiment overall. The best approach here is to focus on MS and base our next moves accordingly—sentiment and news should only serve as secondary confluence, while MS takes priority. As mentioned earlier, we’re starting to form HHs below HTF, which gives me a reason to look for local longs. However, this doesn’t rule out the possibility of further downside, including a potential move toward the 72K level, which remains the most significant level on BTC. Order flow clearly reflects the current mixed sentiment. Traders are quick to short the lows and long the highs, showing a lack of conviction. Many seem confused and desperate, reacting rather than planning. Outlook: With BVOL still in supply and BVOL24H at support, something big is about to happen. The key is to be prepared for every outcome. As you all know, I’ve already allocated significant funds at HTF key levels while keeping some dry powder in case we reach lower key levels. This ensures I won’t miss a potential rally from here while maintaining the flexibility to react. I’m also actively looking for LTF/MTF long and short setups. Once these trades move into profit, they pay me already and become risk-free. This strategy keeps me exposed in every direction with the potential to trail them way higher or lower—exactly how I want to be positioned as trader. Have a great week ahead you all. ✌️

13. Welcome to the Roaring Twenties! Please retweet if you found value in this thread! For me, it’s important to share all of this information for free because abundance is all about generosity!

The core idea behind 'intent-based' workflows is to harness composability & unlocking hybrid on/off-chain dynamics for optimal decision making. @defidotapp puts this into action by abstracting user-side complexity. This is achieved via: 🔸Streamlining routing decision via auto-choosing most optimal route across all swap aggregators. 🔸Enabling gas efficiency like @1inch fusion (gas-free execution) This results in a seamless UX with improved efficiency, all under the hood.