Tim Ballard

[Anonymous Mormon]

On 11/3/2023 at 10:35 PM, Diamondhands69 said:

I'd bet the truth is mushier, something like "Elder Ballard knew of some rich members and suggested them to OUR". What very likely didn't happen is "Elder Ballard went to SLC HQ, asked for a list of rich church members from tithing records, then got a copy of those financials, and handed them over to OUR

 

Probably closer to the truth if it did happen. 
 M R Ballard has his own history of securities fraud long ago so it’s not like he is above doing something like this. 

I can tell you LDs philanthropy services has a target list of rich lds. Members they wine/dine to try and get them to leave their estate to the church. They are very proactive.  Maybe if there is a list, that’s where it came from, they know all the rich targets. 

 

Is there any evidence that Elder Ballard committed securities fraud long ago?

I watched multiple videos by Lynn Packer where he made this claim, but never produced any evidence, just inuendo and accusation. He would have quotes about how evil and fraudulent penny stocks are and then he would mention that Elder Ballard owned a brokerage firm that included trading penny stocks and that he tried to take a company public whose shares were considered penny stocks (which is what happens to ALL public companies that don't thrive). Then the innuendo came that because he had a brokerage firm and a company that was involved in penny stocks and penny stocks are fraudulent, that he committed securities fraud.

@Diamondhands69 or anyone else - is there more EVIDENCE that Elder Ballard committed fraud? Is there documentation from the securities and exchange commission, a specific investor who made these claims, or something else of substance? Or is it just because Lynn Packer released some videos with innuendos that this statement is made?

 

[Anonymous Mormon]

On 11/1/2023 at 3:09 PM, Tacenda said:

I get what you're after Teancum, and I agree.

IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like Thom Harrison, Avraham Gileadi, and Christopher Parret. They did go after Julie Rowe and eventually Chad Daybell. But they are low on the totem pole and only became the way they did because of people like Thom, Avraham and Chris. In a podcast I heard Avraham Gileadi has a book on the shelves of Deseret Book even.  These dudes are just as damaging to the church as the John Dehlin's or RFM's out there, but damaging in a far worse way. People that go off the deep end, can end up killing people who they may think are zombies, or dark people, or even killing loved ones for their own good. You don't see exLDS doing this. 

https://deseretbook.com/t/author/avraham-gileadi

 

 

On 11/4/2023 at 2:20 PM, Teancum said:

Based on what I am seeing, yes the church may want to check into things re Brother Gileadi.

 

@Tacenda - Why should the church go after Bro Gileadi? What specific things did he say or do?  (Please be specific with your claims)

@Teancum - What are you seeing that makes you think the church should check into Bro Gileadi? (Please be specific with your claims)

 

I sincerely want to know what the actionable offense is that would make the church want to 'go after' or 'look into' Bro Gileadi. Is it because he spoke at a conference? Is it because he has a blog post where he says good things about the book Visions of Glory? Is it because he gives you a bad vibe? 

What SPECIFIC thing did he say or do that makes you feel he should have church action against him???

And then secondly, do you feel the church should take action against all people who do or say this same level of 'offense'?
(so if your standard is he spoke at a conference or agreed with someone who you feel is distasteful, should the church punish all those who speak at conferences or agree with someone else?)

 

(note: My interest in Gileadi is I have a friend who is into his work. He recommended it to me and I checked out his podcast and perused his website and books. I saw lots of things that I agreed with and gained some insights. I also felt he extrapolated some meanings of symbols that I disagreed with and made it seem like it was the ONLY meaning possible. There are things about his interpretations I think are not accurate. However, I have always felt like he was a valuable and good voice and have never seen anything that would warrant church discipline. So I am sincerely interested what the two of you see that I and my friend are missing)

[webbles]

18 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

 

Is there any evidence that Elder Ballard committed securities fraud long ago?

I watched multiple videos by Lynn Packer where he made this claim, but never produced any evidence, just inuendo and accusation. He would have quotes about how evil and fraudulent penny stocks are and then he would mention that Elder Ballard owned a brokerage firm that included trading penny stocks and that he tried to take a company public whose shares were considered penny stocks (which is what happens to ALL public companies that don't thrive). Then the innuendo came that because he had a brokerage firm and a company that was involved in penny stocks and penny stocks are fraudulent, that he committed securities fraud.

@Diamondhands69 or anyone else - is there more EVIDENCE that Elder Ballard committed fraud? Is there documentation from the securities and exchange commission, a specific investor who made these claims, or something else of substance? Or is it just because Lynn Packer released some videos with innuendos that this statement is made?

 

The SEC revoked the license of his brokerage and said he (President Ballard) was the cause.  You can see their revocation order at https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1963/dig071063.pdf.  You can also see more details of what they investigated at https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1962/dig072462.pdf

Edited November 7, 2023 by webbles

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

 

Is there any evidence that Elder Ballard committed securities fraud long ago?

I watched multiple videos by Lynn Packer where he made this claim, but never produced any evidence, just inuendo and accusation. He would have quotes about how evil and fraudulent penny stocks are and then he would mention that Elder Ballard owned a brokerage firm that included trading penny stocks and that he tried to take a company public whose shares were considered penny stocks (which is what happens to ALL public companies that don't thrive). Then the innuendo came that because he had a brokerage firm and a company that was involved in penny stocks and penny stocks are fraudulent, that he committed securities fraud.

@Diamondhands69 or anyone else - is there more EVIDENCE that Elder Ballard committed fraud? Is there documentation from the securities and exchange commission, a specific investor who made these claims, or something else of substance? Or is it just because Lynn Packer released some videos with innuendos that this statement is made?

 

the “penny stock” shares in question were being offered for $2.50 which is about $25 ish in todays dollars. Not a penny stock at all. 
 

 

First paragraph on this one. Looks like it is a notice of the hearing:

https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1962/dig072462.pdf
 

from his wiki page: 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Russell_Ballard

 

^{and the revocation order..} 

^{https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1963/dig071063.pdf}

“REGISTRATION OF KEYSTONE SECURITIES REVOKED. In a decision announced today (Release 34-7095) the SEC evoked the broker-dealer registration of Keystone Securities Corp., 816 South Main St., Salt Lake City, tab. M. Russell Ballard, Jr., president and a principal stockholder of the firm, was found a cause of the evocation order. In its decision, the Commission found that Keystone and Ballard violated Sections 7 and o of the Securities Act of 1933 in that they aided and abetted Shasta Minerals and Chemical Company in
king false and misleading statements in a registration statement filed by Shasta regarding prior sales of hasta stock in violation of the Securities Act anti-fraud provisions, financial statements and financial ondition and prior activities of Shasta, and the relationships of Shasta and its officers, directors and romoters with Keystone and Ballard. The Commission also found that Keystone filed with the Commission a alse financial statement and violated the Exchange Act bookkeeping requirements. (Commissioner Cohen did not participate in the Commission's decision).”

 

 

 

[Diamondhands69]

3 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

 

Is there any evidence that Elder Ballard committed securities fraud long ago?

I watched multiple videos by Lynn Packer where he made this claim, but never produced any evidence, just inuendo and accusation. He would have quotes about how evil and fraudulent penny stocks are and then he would mention that Elder Ballard owned a brokerage firm that included trading penny stocks and that he tried to take a company public whose shares were considered penny stocks (which is what happens to ALL public companies that don't thrive). Then the innuendo came that because he had a brokerage firm and a company that was involved in penny stocks and penny stocks are fraudulent, that he committed securities fraud.

@Diamondhands69 or anyone else - is there more EVIDENCE that Elder Ballard committed fraud? Is there documentation from the securities and exchange commission, a specific investor who made these claims, or something else of substance? Or is it just because Lynn Packer released some videos with innuendos that this statement is made?

 

Why are you fixated on Lynn packer ? I never brought her name up. Don’t even know who it is. 
 

what do you think about the sec ripping Ballard’s license from him? 

[Teancum]

4 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

 

 

@Tacenda - Why should the church go after Bro Gileadi? What specific things did he say or do?  (Please be specific with your claims)

@Teancum - What are you seeing that makes you think the church should check into Bro Gileadi? (Please be specific with your claims)

 

I sincerely want to know what the actionable offense is that would make the church want to 'go after' or 'look into' Bro Gileadi. Is it because he spoke at a conference? Is it because he has a blog post where he says good things about the book Visions of Glory? Is it because he gives you a bad vibe? 

What SPECIFIC thing did he say or do that makes you feel he should have church action against him???

I am not sure if I am allowed to posts to Mormon Stories Podcasts but here is a good place for you to start:

https://www.Mormon*******.***/portfolio-items/another-prepper-disaster-blaze-thibaudeau/

 

4 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

And then secondly, do you feel the church should take action against all people who do or say this same level of 'offense'?

I do not understand your question.

 

4 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

 

(so if your standard is he spoke at a conference or agreed with someone who you feel is distasteful, should the church punish all those who speak at conferences or agree with someone else?)

That is not my standard.

 

 

4 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

 

(note: My interest in Gileadi is I have a friend who is into his work. He recommended it to me and I checked out his podcast and perused his website and books. I saw lots of things that I agreed with and gained some insights. I also felt he extrapolated some meanings of symbols that I disagreed with and made it seem like it was the ONLY meaning possible. There are things about his interpretations I think are not accurate. However, I have always felt like he was a valuable and good voice and have never seen anything that would warrant church discipline. So I am sincerely interested what the two of you see that I and my friend are missing)

Listen to the podcast I linked them we can chat.

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Why are you fixated on Lynn packer ? I never brought her name up. Don’t even know who it is. 

Lynn Packer is a he:

https://americancrimejournal.com/about/special-contributor-and-many-thanks/

 

[jkwilliams]

23 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Lynn Packer is a he:

https://americancrimejournal.com/about/special-contributor-and-many-thanks/

 

Fwiw, here’s what the SEC had to say about Elder Ballard in 1963.

https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1963/dig071063.pdf

 

 

[bluebell]

41 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Fwiw, here’s what the SEC had to say about Elder Ballard in 1963.

https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1963/dig071063.pdf

 

 

Webbles already posted this link.   

[Calm]

7 hours ago, webbles said:

The SEC revoked the license of his brokerage and said he (President Ballard) was the cause.  You can see their revocation order at https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1963/dig071063.pdf.  You can also see more details of what they investigated at https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1962/dig072462.pdf

Anyone ( @smac97, @helix, @Danzo, others)    want to decipher the case law here?  This was a few years later than the above news releases and is apparently some sort of appeal of the above (prejudicial, inappropriately reputation damaging?)…and the judge appears to be saying these news releases are bunk.

https://casetext.com/case/silver-king-mines-inc-v-cohen

It seems like the SEC is being faulted by the judge for releasing incorrect/premature/unproven information, possibly to manipulate the case, put pressure on the businesses and it was that which led to settlements rather than actual charges at least in some of the case.  Also that actual investigations proving there were actual violations of law were never completed because of settlements, that apparently included “neither deny nor confirm” language.

Quote

The defendants and those acting under them are hereby enjoined until the further order of the court from instigating by means of press releases or similar instigation concerning Silver King Mines, Inc., K.L. Stoker, or companies promoted or controlled by K.L. Stoker, publicity pertaining to the commencement of judicial proceedings for the enforcement of administrative subpoenas, or pertaining to injunction proceedings prior to the issuance of temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions by a court; and said defendants and those acting under them are further enjoined from similarly instigating publicity involving administrative hearings or proceedings concerning the plaintiffs or companies promoted or controlled by K.L. Stoker, unless and until and then only to the extent that the Securities and Exchange Commission has reason to believe that there has been a violation of law within its cognizance by said parties or companies and that the public welfare requires such publicity in connection with a public proceeding before the Commission.

Quote

No decision was ever rendered by the Commission on the charges contained in the original orders for the hearing. The matter was held under advisement by the Commission for approximately two years and four months, until November 24, 1964, when a negotiated settlement was consummated…

Cascade Corporation and plaintiff Stoker further agreed, without admitting the violations charged in the original order for proceedings with respect to Cascade, that such order for proceedings was deemed amended to include a charge of the above violations. Cascade Corporation also consented to revocation of its broker-dealer registration and plaintiff Stoker consented to a finding that he was a cause of such revocation.

Quote

On June 19, 1962, approximately seven months after the commencement of the proceedings in San Diego, an application was filed with the Commission requesting a withdrawal of the registration of Keystone Securities Corporation as a broker-dealer. The Commission, instead of permitting the withdrawal to become effective by the lapse of time, commenced revocation proceedings against Keystone and its principal officer. Part of the charges asserted against Keystone were claims of alleged prior violations charged to Shasta and Mr. Stoker…

ineffective attempts were made to have the Commission change the administrative proceedings to a private hearing instead of public. The proceedings were finally settled on a negotiated basis.

Quote

. Under the terms of the settlement which were set forth in Exhibits 8 and 9 attached to the defendants' answer herein, Keystone Securities Corporation and M. Russell Ballard, Jr., without admitting or denying the allegations made against them in the order for proceedings, consented to a finding that Ballard and Keystone Securities Corporation willfully violated Sections 7 and 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, that Keystone Securities Corporation, aided and abetted by Ballard, willfully violated Sections 15(b) and 17(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 15b-8 and 17a-3 thereunder, that it was in the public interest to revoke Keystone's registration as a broker-dealer, and that Ballard was a cause of the revocation. Under the offer of settlement the Commission dismissed the charges of violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 15(c)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and 15cl-2 thereunder.

Quote

Once it has been determined that the administrative hearing will be public, the news release is issued automatically, without further consideration of public necessity vs. private harm. However, releases of the type complained of as to the public administrative proceedings against Shasta and Cascade in 1961 and against Keystone in 1962 are no longer permitted….

The plaintiffs have been irreparably damaged by the unwarranted publicity as aforesaid. Future publicity of the same character may likewise cause the plaintiffs irreparable injury and damage.

Conclusions by the judge:

Quote

The defendants have issued, or have authorized the issuance of, publicity not justified by any pending judicial or administrative proceeding and constituting under the circumstances unwarranted, arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable publicity for the purpose of bringing pressure to bear upon those involved in administrative or judicial proceedings and without reference to any actual violation of the Securities and Exchange Act or other justification, to the irreparable injury of the plaintiffs as more fully appears from the foregoing Findings of Fact; and unless restrained by order of the court may continue such conduct to the irreparable injury of plaintiffs.

Quote

The plaintiffs are entitled to a decree enjoining the defendants and those acting under them until the further order of the court from instigating by means of press releases or similar instigation concerning Silver King Mines, Inc., K.L. Stoker, or companies in which said Stoker is an officer or director, publicity pertaining to the commencement of judicial proceedings for the enforcement of administrative subpoenas, or pertaining to injunction proceedings prior to the issuance of temporary retraining orders or preliminary injunctions by a court and said defendants and those acting under them are further enjoined from similarly instigating publicity involving administrative hearings or proceedings concerning the plaintiffs or other companies in which said Stoker is an officer or director, unless and until and then only to the extent that the Securities and Exchange Commission has reason to believe that there has been a violation of law within its cognizance by said parties or companies and that the public welfare requires such publicity in connection with a public proceeding before the Commission.

 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Calm

[Anonymous Mormon]

11 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

 

Is there any evidence that Elder Ballard committed securities fraud long ago?

...

@Diamondhands69 or anyone else - is there more EVIDENCE that Elder Ballard committed fraud? Is there documentation from the securities and exchange commission, a specific investor who made these claims, or something else of substance? Or is it just because Lynn Packer released some videos with innuendos that this statement is made?

 

@Diamondhands69 & @webbles & @jkwilliams & @Calm- Thanks for answering my question and sending over these links with info about Elder Ballard's SEC case.

 

If anyone can shed further light on what this all means I'd be interested in hearing. It is possible this is a serious charge. It is also possible it was an error (After spending years of time dealing with the IRS, wading through red tape because my accountant filed my taxes erroneously one year due to not knowing some minor tax code detail, I could totally understand how something like this could have been a misunderstanding or lack of knowledge as well).

Any more info is appreciated. Or if Elder Ballard has ever discussed it that would be interesting as well. 

[Diamondhands69]

2 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

@Diamondhands69 & @webbles & @jkwilliams & @Calm- Thanks for answering my question and sending over these links with info about Elder Ballard's SEC case.

 

If anyone can shed further light on what this all means I'd be interested in hearing. It is possible this is a serious charge. It is also possible it was an error (After spending years of time dealing with the IRS, wading through red tape because my accountant filed my taxes erroneously one year due to not knowing some minor tax code detail, I could totally understand how something like this could have been a misunderstanding or lack of knowledge as well).

Any more info is appreciated. Or if Elder Ballard has ever discussed it that would be interesting as well. 

Don’t know what else to say. The docs speak for themselves. I see there was an amended sec order shared by calm: 

 

5 hours ago, Calm said:

Under the terms of the settlement which were set forth in Exhibits 8 and 9 attached to the defendants' answer herein, Keystone Securities Corporation and M. Russell Ballard, Jr., without admitting or denying the allegations made against them in the order for proceedings, consented to a finding that Ballard and Keystone Securities Corporation willfully violated Sections 7 and 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, that Keystone Securities Corporation, aided and abetted by Ballard, willfully violated Sections 15(b) and 17(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 15b-8 and 17a-3 thereunder, that it was in the public interest to revoke Keystone's registration as a broker-dealer, and that Ballard was a cause of the revocation. Under the offer of settlement the Commission dismissed the charges of violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 15(c)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and 15cl-2 thereunder.

There’s that. So just like the church. He got out of a trial, lost his business and licenses for running a fraud. The stuff they did was clearly fraudulent. Just like the church lied with the 13f stuff. Sure they didn’t admit any guilt, but the investigation and fraudulent documents speak for themselves. One would think the church would like to clear its name. They surely could sue the sec for slander or libel if it was lying about their conduct?! No? Ballard could have done the same thing. People agree to this stuff because it’s like a plea bargain. Beats the alternative having your recorded statements blasted everywhere with you ( whomever is being investigated) admitting and describing your actions. Yes they record the interviews. 
 

having worked in the industry for a couple days now, people take these deals with the sec because it is easier to get a license back in a year or two. Get convicted you will never see a securities license again. 

[Anonymous Mormon]

6 hours ago, Teancum said:

I am not sure if I am allowed to posts to Mormon Stories Podcasts but here is a good place for you to start:

https://www.Mormon*******.***/portfolio-items/another-prepper-disaster-blaze-thibaudeau/

 

Listen to the podcast I linked them we can chat.

@Teancum I really don't want to have to listen to a 3 hour podcast in order to 'chat' about this.

I am very familiar with Gileadi, since I've listened to all of his podcasts and read a lot of his work on his Isaiah Institute website. 

I just was following up because this was the thread between you & Tacenda: 

 

  

On 11/1/2023 at 3:09 PM, Tacenda said:

I get what you're after Teancum, and I agree.

IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like Thom Harrison, Avraham Gileadi, and Christopher Parret. They did go after Julie Rowe and eventually Chad Daybell. But they are low on the totem pole and only became the way they did because of people like Thom, Avraham and Chris. In a podcast I heard Avraham Gileadi has a book on the shelves of Deseret Book even.  

 

Then Smac chimed in:

On 11/1/2023 at 5:21 PM, smac97 said:

As for Avraham Gileadi, perhaps his writings do merit some attention from his local leaders.  I haven't read his stuff.

 

And you responded:

On 11/4/2023 at 2:20 PM, Teancum said:

Based on what I am seeing, yes the church may want to check into things re Brother Gileadi.

 

So I am trying to see if there is something from Gileadi that you and @Tacendaare referring to that I am not aware of? I went through the show notes for the Mormon Stories Podcast link you sent over and they have a link to his Wikipedia page and the blog post about Visions of Glory that Calm and others already discussed in a fair manner.

Is there more than this that makes you think that 'the church may want to check into things re Brother Gileadi' and makes Tacenda say, 'IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like ... Gileadi'?

Am I missing something that he did that was awful, besides write a blog post that he believes that Visions of Glory could be real, that is worth 'checking out' and going after'?   Any specific quotes or writings that are of major concern?

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

@Teancum I really don't want to have to listen to a 3 hour podcast in order to 'chat' about this.

I am very familiar with Gileadi, since I've listened to all of his podcasts and read a lot of his work on his Isaiah Institute website. 

I just was following up because this was the thread between you & Tacenda: 

 

  

 

Then Smac chimed in:

 

And you responded:

 

So I am trying to see if there is something from Gileadi that you and @Tacendaare referring to that I am not aware of? I went through the show notes for the Mormon Stories Podcast link you sent over and they have a link to his Wikipedia page and the blog post about Visions of Glory that Calm and others already discussed in a fair manner.

Is there more than this that makes you think that 'the church may want to check into things re Brother Gileadi' and makes Tacenda say, 'IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like ... Gileadi'?

Am I missing something that he did that was awful, besides write a blog post that he believes that Visions of Glory could be real, that is worth 'checking out' and going after'?   Any specific quotes or writings that are of major concern?

The fall out from his teachings, of course this is just my opinion.

Some believe people like Chad Daybell and even possibly Tim Ballard think they are the guy that's going to restore the kingdom before the second coming. And even Brian David Mitchell, see c/p's with links below, along with a youtube of Gileadi's podcast, where he discusses end of times, and preparing. Even saying something about the eclipse in 2024 etc. so igniting or adding fuel to the fire for preppers gone wild out there. https://kutv.com/news/local/missing-teen-doomsday-family-gilbert-arizona-blaze-thibaudeau-16-found-adult-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-mormon-lds-family-spring-abi-brooke-hale-idaho-utah-arrested-after-doomsday-related-disappearance

https://sunstone.org/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/129-34-45.pdf

Mitchell’s understanding of his role in God’s plan is derived from Avraham Gileadi’s teachings about a Davidic servant—a temporal Messiah who will restore the kingdom of Israel before the Second Coming. In The Last Days, Gileadi claims that the Davidic servant will suffer in the similitude of Christ at the hands of the wicked in a kind of temporal redemptive sacrifice on Israel’s behalf.

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/home-page/current-events/the-vallow-daybell-trial/davidic-servant

Some Old Testament scriptures tell about a latter-day “Davidic King,” “Davidic Servant,” or “Marred Servant.” Mainstream scholarship and consensus teaching from LDS Church leaders is that this refers to Jesus Christ, when He rules the earth after His Second Coming. But some apostates and dissident scholars have claimed the “Servant” will be a mortal man whose identity won’t be known ahead of time. Because of the name “David,” some today speculate Apostle David Bednar will be the Servant, but the same was said decades ago about the prophet David O. McKay. Crucially for those who want to have power in the Church, the misinterpretation of the Davidic King scriptures supposes he will be called by God directly instead of by the prophet or other authorized priesthood holders.

Daybell apparently wanted to gain a following as a spiritual leader and revelatory authority. He was stifled in this by the fact that he never held a higher office in the church than being secretary of his local congregation. He therefore allegedly claimed to be the Davidic Servant, so that those unfamiliar with the scriptures or willing to overlook them would treat him as a prophet and leader.

And the youtube in particular, maybe you've listened to it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HtoFogOWbY

ETA:

A blog that is a good conclusion to my post:

https://gentlyhewstone.wordpress.com/2010/12/30/notes-on-isaiah-decoded-by-avraham-gileadi/

Edited November 8, 2023 by Tacenda

[helix]

16 hours ago, Calm said:

Anyone ( @smac97, @helix, @Danzo, others)    want to decipher the case law here?

I am not in the legal profession. But some days I like to lie to myself that I can read documents. Your reading lines up with what I understood.

The beef seems to be around a 1961 news publication and this 1962 news event: https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1962/dig072462.pdf,

In that 1962 document the SEC had detailed charges against Shasta Minerals and Mining Company and its president Kay L. Stoker, and also Shasta's broker-dealer Keystone with its president Russell M Ballard. The document makes several public accusations, and then says a hearing will be created to determine if all those charges are true. 

This set off a round of legal fights from the accused appealing and defending their rights.

It seems the SEC continued this behavior in 1963 when publicly stating they want to revoke a license from Ballard due to charges. (That appears to have been appealed somewhat by 1966.) In 1964, the SEC seemed to recognize these public news statements could be illegal, and they updated their policies to prevent public manipulation and potential injury, but these 1964 changes weren't enough because...

The 1966 ruling stated the employed SEC's process for accusing others was illegal. For example: "The defendants [the SEC] have issued, or have authorized the issuance of, publicity not justified by any pending judicial or administrative proceeding and constituting under the circumstances unwarranted, arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable publicity for the purpose of bringing pressure to bear upon those involved in administrative or judicial proceedings and without reference to any actual violation of the Securities and Exchange Act or other justification, to the irreparable injury of the plaintiffs..."

The process, while largely focused on the mining companies, intersected Ballard a bit as he was the broker-dealer for one of the companies. The 1966 ruling stated that an SEC/Ballard negotiation concluded with Ballard accepting his license revoked without admitting or denying the allegations. The SEC reduced their accusation against Ballard, and Ballard didn't have to say he agreed with it, but he went along with the revoked license. This is basically a negotiated settlement that both sides agreed to so as to make the issue go away without a longer legal fight.

---

As a comparison, with the recent 13F SEC fines, the church admitted mistakes and paid a total of $5 million in fines (proportionally consistent at a dollar level of investment with prior SEC 13F fines), but didn't agree or disagree with the rest of the SEC's somewhat grandiose accusations. (My understanding is that if SEC employees "win" by settling, they seek to puff up feathers as much as possible for future career sake.)

But in 1966 Ballard did *not* admit fault and was not found to be at fault, but he allowed the SEC to revoke his license while letting the SEC announce reduced accusations against him, and then the case went away.

Edit: The revoked license was only for the Keystone company formed only for the mining company. Webbles explains it below.

Edited November 8, 2023 by helix

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

He got out of a trial, lost his business and licenses for running a fraud.

CFR

Quote

The stuff they did was clearly fraudulent. 

Accusations were made, accusations found to be illegal by a judge.  What were the actual investigation’s findings….as in at the conclusion, not the beginning.

If investigations weren’t concluded to confirm charges, how can you be certain of the above?

Edited November 8, 2023 by Calm

[Calm]

Some of the accusations against Keystone were from actions that occurred before Keystone (Brother Ballard) got involved if I am reading this part correctly:

Quote

On June 19, 1962, approximately seven months after the commencement of the proceedings in San Diego, an application was filed with the Commission requesting a withdrawal of the registration of Keystone Securities Corporation as a broker-dealer. The Commission, instead of permitting the withdrawal to become effective by the lapse of time, commenced revocation proceedings against Keystone and its principal officer. Part of the charges asserted against Keystone were claims of alleged prior violations charged to Shasta and Mr. Stoker. 

 

There was no investigation, no hearing, just a negotiated settlement. 
 

It sounds like the only thing attempted by Brother Ballard on behalf of Shasta was the withdrawal of the registration.  Not sure how that could involve fraud.
 

Quote

Thereafter, ineffective attempts were made to have the Commission change the administrative proceedings to a private hearing instead of public. The proceedings were finally settled on a negotiated basis.

For the earlier involving Shasta, while there was a hearing and arguments were presented, nothing was decided by it:

Quote

After the submitting of briefs, the matter was argued before the Commission on July 31, 1962. No decision was ever rendered by the Commission on the charges contained in the original orders for the hearing.

The 1962 news release seems to be one of those found to be illegal and which contains the alleged prior accusations against Shasta which were made before Brother Ballard got involved and were never found to be true by investigation or trial.

The 1963 news release seems to be about the deal made which is detailed by the judge in his decision, a negotiated settlement where some of the unproven charges were included though Brother Ballard neither admitted to them nor denied them (if he had denied them, a settlement would not have been reached and perhaps he could not afford to take it to court) not a trial decision nor if the details of the judge are correct, a result of a concluded investigation.

 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Calm

[Diamondhands69]

deleted

Edited November 8, 2023 by Diamondhands69

[Teancum]

8 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

@Teancum I really don't want to have to listen to a 3 hour podcast in order to 'chat' about this.

I am very familiar with Gileadi, since I've listened to all of his podcasts and read a lot of his work on his Isaiah Institute website. 

Ok don't listen. 

8 hours ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

I just was following up because this was the thread between you & Tacenda: 

 

  

 

Then Smac chimed in:

 

And you responded:

 

So I am trying to see if there is something from Gileadi that you and @Tacendaare referring to that I am not aware of? I went through the show notes for the Mormon Stories Podcast link you sent over and they have a link to his Wikipedia page and the blog post about Visions of Glory that Calm and others already discussed in a fair manner.

Is there more than this that makes you think that 'the church may want to check into things re Brother Gileadi' and makes Tacenda say, 'IMO, the church has been negligent in not going after people like ... Gileadi'?

Am I missing something that he did that was awful, besides write a blog post that he believes that Visions of Glory could be real, that is worth 'checking out' and going after'?   Any specific quotes or writings that are of major concern?

Gileadi pronote the Davidic messenger that plays into the white horse prophecy.  The church leaders have attempted to debunk that prophecy.  And I understand why.  It threatens the top leadership.  Gileadi's ex wife claims he advocates for "spiritual wifery."  If you listen to the podcast there are videos of Gileadi talking about the fact that most member are ignorant and do not have the insight he has.  He also claims the LDS prophet does not have the insight on Isaiah and the Davidic messenger that he has.

The man advocates for extreme views on the last days that the LDS leadership seems to speak out against. He speaks at conferences that advocate extremism.  Advocating for the book Visions of Glory seems problematic to me.

[Diamondhands69]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

CFR

Accusations were made, accusations found to be illegal by a judge.  What were the actual investigation’s findings….as in at the conclusion, not the beginning.

If investigations weren’t concluded to confirm charges, how can you be certain of the above?

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/261/666/1675043/
 

from my non-lawyer interpretation it seems as if yes the sec was in the wrong to publicize in the manner they did. Despite that, the court provided no remedy to the defendants.. defendants won the publicity stuff but the agency actions of the sec reference Ballard didn’t change:

“h. Thereafter, ineffective attempts were made to have the Commission change the administrative proceedings to a private hearing instead of public. The proceedings were finally settled on a negotiated basis. Under the terms of the settlement which were set forth in Exhibits 8 and 9 attached to the defendants' answer herein, Keystone Securities Corporation and M. Russell Ballard, Jr., without admitting or denying the allegations made against them in the order for proceedings, consented to a finding that Ballard and Keystone Securities Corporation willfully violated Sections 7 and 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, that Keystone Securities Corporation, aided and abetted by Ballard, willfully violated Sections 15(b) and 17(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 15b-8 and 17a-3 thereunder, that it was in the public interest to revoke Keystone's registration as a broker-dealer, and that Ballard was a cause of the revocation. Under the offer of settlement the Commission dismissed the charges of violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 15(c) (1) of the Securities *670 Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and 15cl-2 thereunder.”

[webbles]

9 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

There’s that. So just like the church. He got out of a trial, lost his business and licenses for running a fraud. The stuff they did was clearly fraudulent. Just like the church lied with the 13f stuff. Sure they didn’t admit any guilt, but the investigation and fraudulent documents speak for themselves. One would think the church would like to clear its name. They surely could sue the sec for slander or libel if it was lying about their conduct?! No? Ballard could have done the same thing. People agree to this stuff because it’s like a plea bargain. Beats the alternative having your recorded statements blasted everywhere with you ( whomever is being investigated) admitting and describing your actions. Yes they record the interviews. 

It doesn't look like this caused him (President Ballard) to loose his business or his license.  If you read the case that Calm linked to (https://casetext.com/case/silver-king-mines-inc-v-cohen), in the section " KEYSTONE PROCEEDINGS", it says:

Quote

After discussions with staff members of the Commission in connection with the proposed public offering of stock by Shasta, a separate broker-dealer, Keystone Securities Corporation, was formed to be the underwriter of the proposed public offering. On June 19, 1962, approximately seven months after the commencement of the proceedings in San Diego, an application was filed with the Commission requesting a withdrawal of the registration of Keystone Securities Corporation as a broker-dealer. The Commission, instead of permitting the withdrawal to become effective by the lapse of time, commenced revocation proceedings against Keystone and its principal officer. Part of the charges asserted against Keystone were claims of alleged prior violations charged to Shasta and Mr. Stoker.

If I read that correctly, Keystone Securities Corporation was formed solely to help with the public offering of stock.  It didn't exist before hand and was already in the process of shutting down before the SEC revocation.  It was a temporary job, at best.  Nothing in the SEC revocation announcement (https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1963/dig071063.pdf) says that President Ballard lost his license.  Only that the company (Keystone Securities Corporation) had its broker-dealer registration revoked and that Keystone was already trying to do that so it doesn't even sound like a punishment.  It doesn't even sound like a slap on the wrist.  Keystone was already trying to revoke its broker-dealer registration and the SEC revoked it with a public news announcement.

I also found another case between Shasta and the SEC - https://casetext.com/case/shasta-minerals-v-sec.  In there, I found an interesting piece:

Quote

It states that the representatives of appellant were told in a conference with Commission officials that appellant might as well withdraw its registration statement since it would never be permitted to become effective; also that appellant's representatives were then advised that the Commission had a "long file" on appellant's president and they would never permit a registration statement to become effective for a company of which he was the principal officer. The affidavit also states that appellant was encouraged by the Commission to perform certain described acts, and the fact that these were performed was then used against appellant. Also it asserts that the representatives of the Commission told appellant's attorney that they were going to make a test case out of appellant's connections with its underwriter, a local businessman, and because the Commission wanted publicity, it held a public hearing rather than following its usual practice of holding private hearings on such matters. There are a number of incidents described in the affidavit apparently with the intention of showing a systematic persecution and harassment of appellant and of its president. Since none of the material in the affidavit was controverted and the trial judge's request for an explanation was refused, it can only be assumed that the Commission takes the position that even if all of these statements as to its actions were true, it nevertheless could call upon the court to assist it in pursuing the matter further.

My guess is that the "local businessman" mentioned there is President Ballard.  This looks like the SEC didn't like the president of Shasta (K.L. Stoker) and wanted to make an example of him.  President Ballard, unfortunately, got in the middle of it.

[Stormin' Mormon]

While I don't necessarily excuse misdeeds by the young and inexperienced, such context does facilitate the evocation of Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity." Or to ignorance or inexperience, I would hasten to add.  

In 1961, when all this hulabaloo started, then-brother Ballard was 33 years old, and would be celebrating his 10-year anniversary that August. When I was that age, I was still in my first professional job, still struggling to understand the byzantine workings of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the US Department of Transportation.  

If there were other scandalous or psuedo-scandalous events in Brother Ballard's 25-year business career, I would be more concerned.  If we didn't have to go back 60+ years to find such a scandal in his life, I would be more concerned.  He screwed up, paid a price in reputation and costly litigation, learned his lesson, and moved on, leaving nary a whiff of any other scandal thereafter.  

 

[Anonymous Mormon]

10 hours ago, Tacenda said:

The fall out from his teachings, of course this is just my opinion.

Some believe people like Chad Daybell and even possibly Tim Ballard think they are the guy that's going to restore the kingdom before the second coming. And even Brian David Mitchell, see c/p's with links below, along with a youtube of Gileadi's podcast, where he discusses end of times, and preparing. Even saying something about the eclipse in 2024 etc. so igniting or adding fuel to the fire for preppers gone wild out there. https://kutv.com/news/local/missing-teen-doomsday-family-gilbert-arizona-blaze-thibaudeau-16-found-adult-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints-mormon-lds-family-spring-abi-brooke-hale-idaho-utah-arrested-after-doomsday-related-disappearance

 

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Ok don't listen. 

Gileadi pronote the Davidic messenger that plays into the white horse prophecy.  The church leaders have attempted to debunk that prophecy.  And I understand why.  It threatens the top leadership.  Gileadi's ex wife claims he advocates for "spiritual wifery."  If you listen to the podcast there are videos of Gileadi talking about the fact that most member are ignorant and do not have the insight he has.  He also claims the LDS prophet does not have the insight on Isaiah and the Davidic messenger that he has.

The man advocates for extreme views on the last days that the LDS leadership seems to speak out against. He speaks at conferences that advocate extremism.  Advocating for the book Visions of Glory seems problematic to me.

 

@Tacenda& @Teancum - Thanks for taking time to answer my questions. I was wondering if the Davidic Messenger aspect was part of what you feel he is doing wrong. My friend is very into this idea of a future David King / Prophet. As I mentioned, there is lots about Gileadi's work I like, but his 'certainty' about vague Isaiah prophecies and how they will play out is a bit much for me.

 

I don't know that there is much the church can or should do about those who obsess about end times, beyond trying to subdue it via conference talks. The discussion of end times ushering in a Second Coming of Christ is a key aspect of our faith. There are lots of doctrines of our faith that can be taken to an unhealthy extreme (just like all faiths and political thought).

 

Note: And for what it's worth, after studying the limited number of references and prophecies regarding a future David King or Prophet who proceeds Christ's coming, it does appear that there is validity in this idea (at least if you believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet). I just think that people need to heed the warning in Matthew 24:23-27. I don't think that Gileadi or others have special insight beyond the limited scriptures we have into Christ's second coming and the events that will proceed it and those who do get insight, it is given for them individually to help them and their immediate family be prepared.

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

He screwed up, paid a price in reputation and costly litigation, learned his lesson, and moved on, leaving nary a whiff of any other scandal thereafter.  

If you mean with Keystone and not his other business ventures, where do you believe he screwed up?

From the judge’s opinion, it sounds more like the SEC screwed up to me.

[Calm]

15 minutes ago, Anonymous Mormon said:

ote: And for what it's worth, after studying the limited number of references and prophecies regarding a future David King or Prophet who proceeds Christ's coming, it does appear that there is validity in this idea (at least if you believe in Joseph Smith as a prophet). 

You don’t believe Joseph was actually referring to Christ given the full quote?

Quote

A quote from The Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (p. 339) is sometimes used to support the claim of a mortal “Davidic servant” to be called outside of regular Church leadership channels: “Although David was a king, he never did obtain the spirit and power of Elijah and the fullness of the Priesthood; and the Priesthood that he received, and the throne and kingdom of David is to be taken from him and given to another by the name of David in the last days, raised up out of his lineage.” Considered by itself, that quote seems to support the conclusion that Joseph Smith was prophesying about some future mortal leader. However, thanks to the Joseph Smith Papers Project, it is possible to read the full statement. After saying the above, Joseph immediately continued: “Peter referred to the same subject on the day of Pentecost.”

CHRIST IS THE DAVIDIC SERVANT

Joseph Smith was referring to the Pentecost account in Acts chapters 2 and 3, and more specifically Acts 2:29–31, where Peter declares that David “being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne” (emphasis added). Considered in context, it is clear Joseph Smith was identifying Jesus Christ as the Servant, not a yet-to-be-revealed mortal figure. 

 

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/home-page/current-events/the-vallow-daybell-trial/davidic-servant

Edited November 8, 2023 by Calm