“The only problem is he’s no longer a regulator. In fact, he’s on the payroll of Ripple, the largest single owner of XRP, whose co-founders actually created the cryptocurrency.” https://twitter.com/forbescrypto/status/1273221436639977474

For avoidance of doubt, Ripple created XRP. https://prestonbyrne.com/2018/09/20/for-the-last-time-ripple-created-xrp/amp/

Here’s the IFLR article written by Giancarlo and some dude at Willkie Farr. It advances the common (but wrong) theory that Ripple was somehow designed before Ripple came into existence, a misconception I deal with extensively in my post.

https://www.iflr.com/article/b1m2pm9g4n65mk/cryptocurrencies-and-us-securities-laws-beyond-bitcoin-and-ether

The rest of the article seems to be garden variety elevation of form over substance. “People didn’t have any rights vs Ripple in the thing they’re buying ergo != security but rather a fiat substitute.”

Which makes Ripple... a money transmitter? Is that where you want to go here?

Tl;dr the courts have yet to sort out XRP’s status, but it is OK for reasonable people to believe that pre-mined coin schemes like XRP pose significant challenges from several points of view including securities law compliance.