👉🏾 LOOK 👁️ 👁️ CLOSER part 3 (1 of 2) (2 years after the $MMTLP FOIA thread 🧵) Parts 1 & 2 will be in the comments after the 2nd half of this post👇🏾 Finally we come to the December 5, 2022, 9:07 am email. Draddy returns to the same email message from Nov 29, 2001. (Image 1) He keeps the same "Re: Inquiry" subject, he removes Patricia Casimates, adds Richard Boyle and Jay Gibbon, and there are still 3 redacted SEC contacts in total. There's a strong likelihood that these are the same 3 SEC contacts that were in the email message from Nov 2021, this is easy to understand when you read the message. What might this mean? In late 2021 the SEC was already investigating the reverse-merger between Torchlight and Metamaterials. Christopher Rogers and Ty Martinez of the SEC's Fort Worth Regional Office were conducting the investigation under the supervision of Samantha Martin, B. David Fraser, and Eric Werner. If Patricia Casimates contacted the SEC concerning MMTLP sometime before Draddy's Nov 29, 2021 email, then naturally it would've caught the attention or been brought to the attention of Rogers and Martinez. If you noticed, Draddy wasn't included in the Dec 2, 2022 email from FINRA's Richard Boyle. So when you observe that Draddy added Boyle and Gibbon to the December 5th email, it should be clear that Boyle and/or Gibbon communicated with Draddy concerning their findings. So when Draddy begins the message with; "looks like this MMAT/MMTLP matter has now hit my Fraud team's radar screen and seemingly a lot of other radar screens as well." It does two things... 1. It shows that Draddy most likely didn't share the MMAT/MMTLP matter with his fraud team, or at least, not with Boyle and Gibbon. 2. It shows that the Nov 29, 2021 message was most likely about the MMAT/MMTLP matter, even though it wasn't mentioned in that message. Draddy points out to the recipient that he knows they've been in contact with Patricia Casimates, this again appears to reference the Nov 29th message, which makes it seem like Draddy is communicating with the same person/people. Draddy also indicated that they've been in contact with FINRA's General Counsel. So when Draddy says that the MMAT/MMTLP matter has seemingly hit a lot of other radar screens... Patricia Casimates represents the Market Operations Radar, the General Counsel Radar most likely refers to FINRA's Chief Counsel Robert Colby, whom would eventually communicate with Next Bridge Hydrocarbons in multiple correspondences. Also, on this same day, (12/5/22) the counsel of Metamaterials and Next Bridge Hydrocarbons contacted FINRA's Executive team including Robert W. Cook, regarding the delay in processing the MMTLP Corporate Action. It's unknown if Draddy knew about the Executive team being contacted at the time of this Dec 5th message, but if he did, it represents yet another radar. The rest of the message appears to make it clear that Draddy and his fraud team were most likely not focused on MMAT/MMTLP since the Nov 29, 2021 message, until perhaps when FINRA received the fraud tips referenced in the Dec 2nd message. When Draddy says; "...was wondering if it made sense for my Fraud team to have a conversation directly with you and your folks working on the matter so we are not duplicating efforts." This shows that the SEC was clearly investigating the matter, and unless the SEC had multiple teams investigating MMAT/MMTLP beyond just the reverse-merger investigation, then Draddy had to be communicating with at least Christopher Rogers, Ty Martinez, or one of their supervisors... IMO. Draddy then goes on to inform them that his team has formally begun to investigate the issuers, which means that both FINRA and the SEC were aware of each other's investigations. Both of these investigations were reasons in themselves to NOT process the MMTLP Corporate Action, but somehow FINRA published the initial MMTLP Corporate Action the very next day... @DOGE_SEC @FBI

One can argue that the March 16, 2023 FAQ wasn't the first time FINRA publicly addressed $MMTLP... It was actually the January 24, 2023 announcement of Jessica Hopper's (FINRA's then Head of Enforcement) departure! Why? -Hopper was at FINRA much longer than Cook. She might've genuinely cared about her job. -She tried to integrate Supervision, Regulation and Enforcement, but there's no indication that Enforcement was involved in any of meetings or FOIAs regarding MMTLP. -Because when you watch the Madoff hearings, Enforcement gets grilled pretty badly! -Cook spoke so highly of her in the departure PR. It's like he was grateful that she didn't blow everything up. -She appears once in a FOIA, but it's a conversation between the SEC's Head of Examinations, Kevin W. Goodman, and Robert W. Cook, asking about the Departure PR. Why would Kevin W Goodman be interested in Jessica Hopper? -Because Goodman is in charge of the SEC's FSIO (the department that allegedly checks to see if FINRA is following their own rules). -Hopper being in charge of Enforcement (making sure that FINRA rules and securities laws are followed) means that Goodman's ability to ignore FINRA's alleged foul play, is contingent upon Hopper keeping quiet concerning anything she might've learned that might've led to her deciding to leave. Now look at what Cook says in the FOIA... "Kevin-as discussed." What did they discuss? Clearly they didn't want a paper trail but it was obviously about Hopper since it appears he attached the PR that was published that day. Here's what I think! Maybe Goodman and Cook floated the idea that leaving FINRA and likely forgoing her soon to be fully vested pension, might lead to her landing a cushy remote job with a signing bonus and a higher salary somewhere else. Just a theory! And another reason this could be plausible is Marshall Gandy is in the same SEC division of Examinations as Goodman... Gandy comes from the same SEC Fort Worth office that investigated the reverse merger and eventually brought the charges against Brda, Palikaras and Metamaterials. Gandy also used to work for FINRA. But maybe this is all a reach, forget I said anything! @DOJCrimDiv @FBIDirectorKash @FBIDDBongino

These two employees took the blame for GTS' $10M fine in 2023 but they're still employed.

Based on the couple of responses I've received this reinforces my point. Sure 124,000 investors robbed by FINRA, SEC and DTCC collusion is a serious thing but if it was already resolved maybe our efforts could've been used for $NWBO, or maybe our absence could've helped bring it more attention by default. Given that many of the same parties are involved and the NWBO case appears to be further along, it really seems like the wrongdoers benefit from the fact that so much Market based attention ISN'T on that case. Either way I'm glad they were able to get an audience with @POTUS, I hope and pray his Administration does the right thing!

And if my firm was up to no good, surely the regulators would catch wind! youtu.be/NdcTlTXCJG4?is=idEe…