Is this direct evidence of illegality?

This one is not as spurious or as insignificant as it first seems. I did read it through and saw how it was done. There are clearly implications.

1. If the regulatory body follows it up and prosecutes, then the question still remains – why did they wait till it was pointed out, till now?

2. If they don’t or they whitewash it, then that raises all sorts of questions of collusion and who was colluding, to the point the whole industry is involved at the upper end. As with Deep Throat, follow the money.

3. It’s no great surprise to those of us who might have blogged for some years on corruption in the financial markets since 1857 [Peabody] and there are those who instantly accept corruption charges with or without direct evidence.

This one appears to be direct evidence, at least enough to cite “probable cause”.

4. Therefore, it’s well worth keeping an eye out for developments on the story and how far it appears in the MSM. It’s one thing us knowing something, it’s quite another for the links in the chain not to do as they are bound by oath to do.

5. There are immediate implications for how the markets through the various exchanges are henceforth allowed to operate, let alone who will be the body who sets this in motion?

We’re not talking dodgy deals and clever stings here, are we? We’re talking direct illegality.

6. Lastly, there is an end-time scenario. Should this one be investigated publicly, and given that the PTB have the new financial model in the wings waiting to go, here is the golden opportunity they were looking for.

[H/T Chuckles]