@CS in AZ Fine print didn't protect Robinhood before

against a $65 million fine and its incredibly unlikely it will protect them from this event. If fine print really worked that well every user agreement would include a we own your first child clause.

Since America does not currently have a functioning government I can understand thinking that Robinhood might get away with this - because they might. But by the same token no functioning government can be a double edged sword that turns against them.

#1.2.1.1.1.1.2

if that is all you can spare.

He shows a copy of the Robinhood user agreement with bright color highlights showing exactly where a user of the app gives them permission to liquidate your shares, restrict your access, and even close your account, at their sole discretion.

Sigh... I really wish people here would stop reacting as if what I share in terms of information I find is my own personal opinion of things. That is not the case. Please stop attacking the messenger. I don't think this is right. At all. Many people -- including me -- where wondering whether or not what they did is legal. That is not a matter of opinion, it is something that has an answer, which one can find out. I thought it was a contribution to the discussion to share a relatively concise and thorough explanation of the answer.

It is really disappointing and distressing, to be honest, that there is such a resistance to looking at the truth of a matter rather than going off of purely emotional reactionary thinking.

@snoopydawg @snoopydawg who love guns and interview with Jimmy Dore that "hey, these hedge fund managers have destroyed the free market system and are the money behind the bought out Dems and Repugs. If there's going to be a civil war, wouldn't they be your primary target?"

Just sayin'

#8.1.1.1.1.1.1

.near the end.

This means that virtually every hedge fund that had short positions on was getting hammered. So when dozens of these giant asset managers sat down and decided to polite call one broker after another what do you think happened.

That's right: Joe Sixpack was quickly sold down the river.

Why? Because the so-called "retail clients" are nothing but a cost center to the "retail brokers" thanks to the recently introduced $0 commission pay scheme. In fact, brokers would be delighted to dump all but their biggest whales clients. So who pays the fees? Well, just take a look at Robinhood's form 606: Citadel, Virtu, G1X, Wolverine, and countless hedge funds which, like Citadel, are tightly interwoven in the fabric of the market. It's they that made a few phone call and just put dozens of stocks on a market-wide restricted list.

There's more. While unconfirmed, there is speculation that that "Citadel reloaded their shorts before they told Robinhood to stop trading GME." As the source notes, if true the people behind this should be in jail.

Perhaps this is true, perhaps not. We'll find out soon.

But what we really want to find out is when the brokers will again allow trading in GME, AMC, and so on. What will be the catalyst? Will it be when hedge funds have finally covered their shorts, at which point there will be no further need for a squeeze.

If that's indeed the case, it'll tell us all we need to know about who truly runs the erroneously called "free markets."

So that was highly illegal right? That those people called the brokers to tell them what to do. That is rigging the market. Right? And very, very naughty.

And I didn’t see the answer to this question:

So who pays the fees?