As many of you have been following, The SEC has been after cryptocurrencies for awhile now. I have written about this in many previous articles. I believe the SEC is overreaching, and is struggling to make a coherent argument in it's case against cryptocurrency.

Today I came across this article: https://www.ccn.com/news/cardano-solana-securities-sec-kraken/. In it, it talks about the new case the SEC is taking up against Kraken. You can go the the article and read it, so I won't give a lot of detail. However, the point I am making, and the reason for the title of the article is this. If the SEC was being serious and really was not picking and choosing various cryptocurrencies all willy nilly like, would they not have included XRP Ripple in the suit against Kraken?

Think about it, they have publicly stated they disagree with the ruling in favor of XRP that it was not, and is not a security when sold to the general public.  Honestly, if these people believed it, they would have included it in their lawsuit against Kraken. Seriously, what are they doing?  You can't say you do not agree with the ruling, then leave it out in this lawsuit. It proves they are making it up. Either they believe XRP is a security or they don't.  To leave it off weakens their case, both publicly and legally (my opinion).  I mean, how can the SEC go back to court in the XRP case and say with a straight face XRP is a security? All the XRP lawyers have to do is present the evidence that the SEC did not label it as such in the Kraken case.  I mean, seriously who is running that S show, they appear to have S'd the bed.