CZ asigură că Binance încă sprijină acordul Voyager pe fondul unor titluri discutabile

Some reports have started running rampant following a tweet that CryptoPotato created earlier today.

More specifically, the tweet in question is this:

RE: @binance – Voyager deal

This is what a US Judge responded to an SEC attorney who failed to provide specific arguments:

“Deliberative is one thing, but what have you done? If there are reasons to be concerned here, I need to hear specifics.” @cz_binance pic.twitter.com/fzMRzmtyu2

- CryptoPotato Oficial (@Crypto_Potato) Martie 3, 2023

• It is related to recent developments with the SEC motion that opposes the attempt of BinanceUS to acquire Voyager Digital.
• BinanceUS entered into a deal with Voyager back in December 2022, but the SEC a obiectat în februarie anul acesta.
• Recent Rapoarte revealed some of the arguments that the US Bankruptcy Judge overseeing the case made in relation to the lack of explanation on behalf of the SEC.
• Judge Michael Wiles said:

Deliberative is one thing, but what have you done? If there are reasons to be concerned here, I need to hear specifics.

• El a mai spus:

I’m shocked a regulator would come in and say: ‘I’m charged with regulatory authority over these things. These are reasons that I have concerns because they’re within my regulatory jurisdiction, but I’ve done nothing, I have nothing to offer to you …

• CZ, the CEO of Binance, quote-tweeted CryptoPotato’s post, saying, “Maybe we should pull out?”
• Very quickly after, he was quick to clarify that Binance is in full support of the deal:

We are still in support of the deal and helping returning funds to users as quickly as possible, if allowed to do so.

• This comes amid somewhat questionable titluri, saying that CZ is “pondering” exiting the deal “after US scrutiny.”
• Nowhere has CZ mentioned anything about “US scrutiny.”
• Interestingly enough, the report itself says that a Binance spokesperson disbands the headline, saying that the company “remains committed to the Voyager transaction.” The article was also updated to include CZ’s additional comment.