Is this defense more nuanced than "before they committed fraud they didn't commit fraud"? Yeah, i guess you could see that as a silver lining, but it puts it squarely in the past.
Its not a defense and the point is that people were wrong about tether most of its lifespan and most of the time even after they actually went fractional reserve.
If you said Tether was printing non-backed Tethers in 2017 and pumping the market, you were wrong.
If you said it in early 2018 you were wrong.
Afterwards you would have been mostly wrong.
The product does not offer transparency that competing products do. And thats it. You have no way of knowing if you are wrong or not until a filing shows up in court later and even then it is just part of an allegation.
Tether has a $17bn marketcap because about $17bn dollars were deposited into the Tether printer and are still there and that was true most of the time despite many people not wanting to believe it during the times that it was 100% true until ironically ceasing to be 100% true.
If you said Tether was printing non-backed Tethers in 2017 and pumping the market, you were wrong.
If you said it in early 2018 you were wrong.
Afterwards you would have been mostly wrong.
The product does not offer transparency that competing products do. And thats it. You have no way of knowing if you are wrong or not until a filing shows up in court later and even then it is just part of an allegation.
Tether has a $17bn marketcap because about $17bn dollars were deposited into the Tether printer and are still there and that was true most of the time despite many people not wanting to believe it during the times that it was 100% true until ironically ceasing to be 100% true.