The following transcript has not been checked for accuracy.

well, i tell you what, mr. chilton, my first question to you would be, first of all, and you said it, but i want you to resay it. after we lost literally trillions of dollars on the toxic over the counter market, how many taxpayer dollars have been lost in the futures industry since you've been following it? yeah. it's -- no, no. just what's the amount. that's all i want to know. i think the amount is like zero. ok. that's my first question. zero. my second question is, i love the way you sounded. my hat's off to you. but where were you on halloween? why did the cftc just disappear from the room and let the sec dictate policy, the type of bankruptcy, when you're supposed to be the expert regulator? well, i'm not sure, rick, that we disappeared from the room. that's not my understanding of what was going on. then where are these transactions that everybody seems to know except for the people that are owed $1.2 billion? well, if we knew all of the transactions, then we would probably be trying to prosecute people. i heard through great sources they have all the transactions. well, maybe your great sources should become regulate oars then, because we are the people charged with trying to get these people to finding the money trails and building the case. and if other people have ideas, good for them. we're the ones that are the investigators, rick. we're the ones that have to make the case in court. and ensure that when we go to court that we make the best case and get prosecutions. so four days, four days from basically the 26th until the 30th and 31st of october, those four days' transactions we still can't get a glimmer of transparency and it's now february 9. but here's my next question. hey, rick, what am i supposed to do, give you all the evidence so you can run it on tv and then bring it into court? is that how you think the justice system should work? that's the way every other branch of government seems to be working. they make a lot of noise with few facts unless it doesn't belo behoove them. i noticed this morning that the wells notices went out, and that's because the sec said they didn't give enough information on some bond deals. my next question is if the sec knew in august which many documents seem to show that the $6.3 billion position existed in mf, a primary dealer, no less, why did the august issuance of $300 million in new paper from that company not disclose that? and why doesn't the sec send themselves to wells notice? two things. first of all, and this little bit is going to sound like a bureaucrat. the sec is the sec. i'm not the se krervec. i can't speak to them. second, these are all issues that need to be looked into. i don't disagree with you at all. but the way that these things are done, you have an investigation. you develop a case. and then you go forward as you see appropriate. you don't try them in the media. that's not how you ensure that things are fixed in the right manner. i want transparency as much as you do, but i want it to be fair transparency.