40 Burst results for "Barbara"
A highlight from The Mike and Mark Davis Daily Chat - 11/7/23
"The United States Border Patrol has exciting and rewarding career opportunities with the nation's largest law enforcement organization. Earn great pay with outstanding federal benefits and up to $20 ,000 in recruitment incentives. Learn more online at cbp .gov slash careers slash USBP. No more annoying figure politically, but there's Barbra Streisand news that has nothing to do with her weird politics. Did you catch this yesterday? Barbra Streisand. Go ahead. I know the news. Well, I think I know the news that she's being interviewed by Howard Stern. Oh, Lord. OK, well, that'll be something. No, this is a much tinier thing that nonetheless I got it kind of a kick out of. If you ask here, hang on a sec. Let's see if they fix this. Hang on a sec. If it wasn't it wasn't it was Siri. Who is married to James Brolin? Hang on. My phone's not on anyway. It pronounced her name wrong. It gave it a soft S. It would say James Brolin is married to Barbra Streisand. Get it? Streisand. Streisand. Right. Exactly. It's not. Her point was it's not a Z. It's an S. It needs to be Streisand. So guess what she did? She sued them. Much, much simpler. She called Tim Cook. Oh, well, yeah. And he fixed it. You know, there was a there was a have you ever studied the Streisand effect? You know what the Streisand effect is? It's fascinating. And this is something that has become kind of part of the it's sort of the lexicon. The Streisand effect means she was once livid that somebody took pictures of her Malibu estate. And of course, she lives in a palatial mansion right on the water. You know, she's got more money than Fort Knox. Incidentally, speaking of people with more money than Fort Knox, can I share what it's like to rub elbows to somebody with a lot of money? By all means. Don't worry. It's like me. Focus, focus, focus. I'll go back. If Streisand is going to be interviewed by Stern, she has a memoir coming out called My Name is Barbara, I believe. So I think that's why she'll be interviewed all over the place, probably. And that's an interview I'd listen to because, you know, he's a master interviewer. He is an absolute master into the guy is brilliant at that. I mean, if he could lose all the filthy stuff that he does in the you know, the idiocy and lose the covid idiocy. He's gone hard left. independent The fiercely rule breaker, bold Howard Stern is dead, but he remains a very good interviewer. A hundred million dollars a year might do that to you or whatever he gets. He gets some crazy amount of money. And as I was rubbing shoulders with, I'm just going to say, somebody we all know who's got a very familiar face, I rubbed elbows with them at the Job Creators Network event. And this particular person was, I was told, lived in Palm Beach, which I didn't know. And I've known this person for a while. I'm not going to mention the name because I don't want to embarrass anybody. But I said to this person, I'll have this figured out by 830. I said, well, you probably know now if you think about it, if you do the math, I told you who was there. But anyway, I said to this particular person who I love, I said, hey, I didn't know you lived here in Palm Beach. The answer was, well, I don't actually live here. I do have a home here. And I thought, now that's money. Just one of many. That's money. And Palm Beach. Listen, it ain't a double wide. I mean, there's nothing in Palm Beach under about 10 mil. Anyway, so the Streisand effect is that Barbara Streisand sued somebody because she was upset that the pictures they took of her estate weren't authorized, because she's a notorious control freak, and she didn't want people to know where she lived. She sued based on the pretense of security measures, right? Okay. I understand that wish, but go ahead, all right, go ahead. Here's the Streisand effect. So the Streisand effect is the lawsuit had the opposite effect of what she intended, because after she sued, then it was very public where she lives, then the whole world knew. And so there's something in the legal jargon now that has become known as the Streisand effect that sometimes litigation, you know, emphasizes or puts an unwanted spotlight on something you're trying to quelch, to quelch, to quelch. So anyway, that's that. But I would love it. I am. I'm going to try to listen to the stern Streisand interview. I can't wait. And speaking of South Florida, aren't you packing for South Florida as we speak? Indeed. On the stage, DeSantis, Haley, Scott, Ramaswamy, Christie, oh my gosh, poor Chris Christie. I know. Gosh. I played that clip yesterday. Me too. Do you feel sorry for him a little bit? No, I do not, because he is an absolute virulent idiot. This is a willful thing that he's doing. It is a, as I said on Twitter, if he's just on a speaking tour and trying out some Trump hatred as a thought experiment to see how it works and what is still Trump's GOP, whatever, free country, free speech. But in an attempt to supposedly win votes in a campaign for president, it is an act of stunning malice, stunning idiocy. He is a self -absorbed fool and I have zero, zero empathy for that. I can't see him. I can't even picture him without the image of like a pro wrestling mask on his head. He's like a wrestler now. He's become to me a cartoon caricature. Do you hear what he said? Your aversion to the truth is not deplorable. Your aversion to the truth, as if I'm the sole arbiter of truth, is reprehensible. And then he said, you know, your cat calls, you're booing. That doesn't make anything better. That doesn't solve problems. But in an indirect way, yes, it does, because it is a crowd showing disapproval for him in their approval of Trump, who will make multiple things better if he were president again. Well, he's clearly rattled at this stage of the game. He's not liking any of this. He really is very unhappy with the – and what did you think was going to happen? What did you think was going to happen? What in the world did he think was going to be the end result of his vicious attacks on Trump? Look at what's happening to Trump right now. I was reading an article. I just talked about this, what he stands to lose in this New York civil fraud trial. He's at the risk of losing his entire New York empire that his whole life, his whole career was built on. This vicious Soros attorney general, who's trolling him regularly on social media, who's taunting him, who's strutting around like a peacock, bragging about how they've got him, and incidentally, that's how she campaigned. She said – she campaigned on it. I'm going to take him down. I'm going to get him. We're going to get Trump. That was her campaign promise and she thinks she's got him down. She's got this – they got this whack job judge. The judge literally said in the courtroom yesterday, I don't want to hear what you have to say. Also said, control your client or I will. Or I will. But I don't want to hear what you have to say. Well, then what's he on the stand for? You got him on the witness stand ostensibly to hear what he has to say. But they don't want to hear what he has to say. Of course, that was a revealing moment. This is so reprehensible and – but here's the thing, Letitia James could lose by winning. If Trump does lose his business empire, and he could, I mean they – and what he stands – I mean, for example, permanent disbarment of Trump being able to serve as officers or directors in any business headquartered, registered or licensed in New York, Mark, that's the goal here is to crush him financially. Of course it is. Financially, politically, reputationally, and in the midst of us talking about this courtroom appearance. And of course I've become fairly intrigued and amused by the various courtroom sketch artists. I mean, are they doing him a favor or not a favor? But I take you to a larger issue for just a moment because I don't know what your thought is on this. It was a bit of a debate yesterday. Speaking of things that are an outrage, it is an outrage that we didn't get to see this for ourselves, that we have to rely on reporters and courtroom sketch artists. Every courtroom in America contains the public's business being done. There should be cameras in every courtroom. Are you with me? A hundred percent. If we could see what is actually happening in this particular trial, it would only elevate his standing.
Fresh update on "barbara" discussed on Bloomberg Businessweek
"Why the international center for dispute resolution provides a faster more efficient approach to dispute resolution across borders backed by the american arbitration association the icdr is the world's leading provider of dispute resolution services find out white expertise global matters is that i think the art dot org walking into the building for the first time after the shooting it was crippling but it had to be preserved in response to the pulse nightclub shooting that affected the lgbtq community barbara poma owner of pulse founded the one pulse foundation to honor post victims and survivors if you're an ally of this community speak out there are more of us together than a part it is the power of love in its rawest form join the fight for lgbtq acceptance learn how at love has no labels dot com brought to you by love has no labels and the ad council the business news wall street depends on under surveillance this morning china sliding into deflation and the insight that only bloomberg can provide the real news this morning is the german thirty -year yield bloomberg surveillance with tom i'm keen jennifer barrow and these are the moments that look at the data as it is it shows strength and it shows higher inflation listen to bloomberg surveillance live weekly mornings at seven eastern or on demand on apple spotify and wherever you get your podcasts bloomberg radio
A highlight from SBF Trial, Day 18: Sam Bankman-Fried Found Guilty on All 7 Counts in Swift Verdict
"Thanks for tuning in to the Unchained Recap for Day 18 of the criminal trial of Sam Bankman -Fried. On Thursday night, after less than five hours of deliberation, a Manhattan jury found Sam Bankman -Fried guilty on all seven criminal charges in a unanimous decision. He potentially faces decades in prison, with a max sentence of 115 years, for multiple counts of wire fraud, multiple counts of conspiracy to commit fraud, and money laundering. Bankman -Fried will be sentenced on March 28, 2024. His attorney, Mark Cohen, said in a statement, "…we respect the jury's decision, but we are very disappointed with the result. Mr. Bankman -Fried maintains his innocence and will continue to vigorously fight the charges against him." After the verdict, U .S. prosecutors, including Nicholas Rose and Danielle Sassoon, lined up in front of 500 Pearl Street for a post -trial conference. In front of them, Damian Williams, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, gave a statement, "…Sam Bankman -Fried perpetrated one of the biggest financial frauds in American history, a multibillion -dollar scheme designed to make him the king of crypto. Here's the thing. The cryptocurrency industry might be new. Players like Sam Bankman -Fried might be new. But this kind of fraud, this kind of corruption, is as old as time, and we have no patience for it." At about 7 .35 p .m., the prosecution team swiftly walked back into courtroom 26A, which was already filled with journalists, crypto degenerates, family members of U .S. prosecutors, influencers, among many others. Shortly after, it was announced that the jury had reached a verdict. Many in the crowd audibly gasped. That's because some longtime court -watchers had surmised earlier in the day that it was highly unlikely that the jury would reach the verdict within that day. Barbara Fried, Bankman -Fried's mother, leaned her head on the shoulder of SPF's father, Joe Bankman. Bankman -Fried himself was then led into the courtroom. At 7 .43 p .m., Williams walked in and sat in the pew behind SPF. It was silent as the courtroom waited for the jury members to walk in. At 7 .43 p .m., Williams walked in and sat in the first pew, which was directly behind SPF. It was silent as the courtroom waited for the jury members to walk in. After they had been seated, Judge Kaplan asked Bankman -Fried, who was wearing a dark gray suit with a purple tie, to stand and face the jurors. Jury member number four, the foreperson, who was wearing glasses, also stood as she read the verdict out loud. Bankman -Fried stood motionless. In his pew, the defendant's father, Joe Bankman, bowed forward at the waist, his face in his hands, for a couple of minutes, while Barbara Fried covered her eyes one moment and her ears the next. At one time, both were seen holding hands in an attempt to comfort and support each other after jury members found their son guilty. After the jury filed out, SPF's parents stood in the first pew behind Bankman -Fried, who was conferring with his lawyers. He did not turn to look at them. Then, just as he was about to leave the courtroom, he looked back at his parents and gave a slight nod and smile. Barbara Fried slammed her hand into her chest near her heart. The verdict was delivered on November 2, 2023, one year to the day after CoinDesk leaked Alameda Research's balance sheet, showing that the assets of the supposedly legendary trading shop were heavily reliant on FTX's own token. It was a swift and stunning downfall for a man who his ex -girlfriend and Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison said had ambitions to be President of the United States. But in the end, his ill -advised media tour made the prosecutor's jobs easy, and in ended after falsed on the stand. As prosecutor Danielle Sassoon said Thursday morning in the government's rebuttal to the defense's closing argument, quote, the defendant has no obligation to testify. He has a constitutional right not to. But if he takes the stand, it's your duty to scrutinize what he said, to consider whether it matched up with the evidence and the testimony. It didn't. Thanks for tuning in to all our trial updates. Keep watching Unchained for more analysis and news on the trial. Plus, for those of you who haven't heard, my next book deal is about FTX. While the publication date is not yet set and probably won't happen for a couple years, if you take interest in the story, follow me on all my channels or sign up for the Unchained newsletter for further updates. Thanks again.
Fresh update on "barbara" discussed on Bloomberg Surveillance
"Barbara Poma, owner of Pulse, founded the OnePulse Foundation to honor Pulse victims and survivors. If you're an ally of this community speak out. There are more of us together than apart. It is the power of love in its rawest form. Join the fight for LGBTQ acceptance. Learn how at LoveHasNoLabels dot com. Brought to you by LoveHasNoLabels and the Ad Council. listening to Bloomberg radio in your car just got a lot whole easier the new bloomberg business app is here now featuring apple carplay and android auto all your favorite bloomberg radio stations and podcasts plus the latest news at the click of a button it's free and simple to use just download the bloomberg business app and connect your phone to your car the bloomberg business app now with apple carplay and android auto features download
A highlight from Romancing the necromancer with Alice James
"At Breaking the Glass Slipper we believe it is important to have conversations about women and issues of intersectional feminism within science fiction, fantasy and horror. To continue to do so we need your help. Please consider supporting us on Patreon. Join the conversation by following us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. Hello and welcome to Breaking the Glass Slipper. I'm Charlotte Bond. I'm Lucy Hounsom. And I'm Egan Leigh. Romance has always been big business and these days there are plenty of subgenres. Historical, medical, steamy, sweet and of course paranormal. However despite its popularity there is still some snobbery around this genre, often classed as women's fiction, which can be sneered at by critics and even creative writing teachers. But if it is so terrible, then just why does it sell so well? And are the female characters in such books still the swooning, bodice -ripping heroines of the Barbara Cartman's days? Or have we moved on? This episode we are joined by paranormal romance writer Alice James to talk about her Lavington Windsor series, which charts the adventures of part -time estate agent, part -time necromancer Tony Lavington. Alice, thank you so much for joining us. Please tell our listeners a little bit about yourselves and your books. Thank you, yes. I'm Alice James and my paranormal romance series are Lavington Windsor Mysteries. They are actually my first ever books, so I'm really super excited to come here and talk about them. They are somewhat of a romance, somewhat of a murder mystery series, but they fit around Tony who's a necromancer at night, an estate agent in the day, never has enough money, makes terrible decisions, but solves murders by raising corpses from the dead so that her brother, who is a cop, can find out who murdered them. So there's lots of different sub -genres going on in them and I really think that they sit very squarely in the paranormal romance bracket. But they've also got elements of lots of other things going on there and I'm really blathering on, sorry. We like guests who blather on, it is absolutely fine. And to be honest, there's a lot to unpack in your books because you're on book three now, aren't you? On book three, that one's just come out and my agent and I have just finished edits to book four, so yeah, Tony has so many more mistakes to make, so many more murders to solve, so many more poor decisions to make about her love life and really her happy ending, which, you know, it's a romance book, she's got to have one, but it's certainly looking like it's still fairly far over the horizon right now. Well, she's got like little happy endings, like little shots of vodka for each one. Yeah, she has some little shots. Yeah, and I mean, not to bring the tone down immediately, but she has other kinds of happy endings fairly often, just saying. In every book. So, I mean, there's lots of romance books out there and I listed just some of the sub -genres like those masses, I could have had a whole episode just reading out sub -genres of romance. But paranormal romance in particular has become really incredibly popular. And I wondered if you knew why that might be and what it is about vampires and werewolves and all that kind of stuff that makes us go weak at the knees. It's eternal, isn't it? You look at films, you look at bookshelves, vampires, werewolves, they're always the hot ones. And I think partly it's because it reinforces our sense of uniqueness, because everyone feels they're unique. Everyone feels they're totally different from the people around them in some way. That's probably even more so for your average fantasy reader. We think it's one of the reasons we like conventions so much because you can find other members of your tribe there. But I think the allure of vampires and werewolves is that, yes, they are these outcasts, these dark creatures. And we as readers can look at them and say, I'm not really like other people and neither are you. We're outcasts in our own way. So there's this feeling of they're kind of like us by being very different. And there's also the allure of forbidden in there as well, which is constantly attractive. Don't drink, don't get a tattoo, don't you dare date werewolves. How would you even think about giving your bud to a vampire? You can strap onto that unhealthy and rather misogynistic appeal, the whole true love will reform them trope. He's bad for everyone, but he'll love me. He's a killer, but for me, he'll change. I mean, it's not exactly healthy, but it's very pervasive. It's quite misogynistic, the idea that all he needs is the love of a good woman. But it is very much something that people fit into the romance genre. And I think we've made a little bit of progress. Your bad boy always doesn't have to be male. We have some bad girls these days. And I think maybe there's also the appeal of power. Your vampire, your wolf, they have physical power and physical strength, but they also often have other powers that can be mental or arcane or superhero like in nature. So there are lots of different things that come in one usually extremely handsome package. And I think that's why that says some of the reasons the appeal is so constant. So I have been rewatching the classic 90s sitcom, uh, The Nanny, um, you know, just completely off the wall here. Yes, yes it is. Yeah. I'm sorry, but great show anyway. But it just, when we were talking about, you know, the appeal of some of these paranormal romances, especially vampires, I was just thinking about, you know, there's an obsession that Fran has in the show about, you know, staying young and there's the constant jokes about, oh, well, you know, I'm going to be 30 for 10 years, you know, and this sort of thing. And it just made me think about, well, maybe we like these eternally youthful vampires male as a kind of reflection of this desire that supposedly women more than men, although I'm not sure that's true, but supposedly, societally we have, you know, maybe we're drawn to that idea that maybe we could be young forever too. We could keep our beauty and it's that kind of the lure of the thing that we can't have that we really want.
Fresh "Barbara" from Bloomberg Daybreak
"How context exchange is how you see things, how you change things because context changes everything. Go to Bloomberg .com to get context. To start your day in just 15 minutes. The latest on the Israel Hamas war. President Biden touting steps to ease inflation. And wake up with Bloomberg Daybreak US edition. The US Supreme Court has adopted a new code of conduct. Down to number One one in college basketball available now on your podcast feed each weekday morning at 6am. Eastern traders are betting the feds hiking cycle is over. Subscribe to Bloomberg Daybreak US edition on Apple, Spotify and everywhere get you your podcasts. Bloomberg Radio. Context changes everything for the Jewish Communal Fund. Barbara Novick investment professional and philanthropist. I think JCF has one of the best funds out there. It's very reasonable in its pricing. It's very flexible in its investments, and I give them an A plus for client service. A fund may be opened with a $5 ,000 contribution of cash or appreciated
A highlight from Sam Bankman-Fried asked FTX's lawyer to explain away stolen funds (feat. Danny Nelson)
"Welcome back everyone, I am Cas PNC. I'm joined as usual by my partner in crime, Mr. Bennett Tomlin. How are you today? I'm doing pretty well. How are you, Cas? I'm doing good. We're joined by a very special guest, Mr. Danny Nelson, reporter for Coindesk. First time guest. It's a pleasure to have you on today, man. How are you? I'm doing well. Great to be here. Danny has been at the courtroom for the SPF trial along with his compatriots, Nick Day, who we had on last week, and Sam Kessler, who we're hoping to have on at some point as well. But yeah, Danny, I would love to hear some of your insights. I know you weren't there for the first day with Nishad, but we can still go over it. We all read the summaries and you have other friends in the courtroom. So yeah, what was the takeaway from Nishad Singh? For Nishad, I mean, he was of course one of the three insiders, one of four insiders along with Sam who really knew what was going on inside FTX, which is to say knew that everything wasn't what it seemed to be. He was on the FTX side of things and the testimony that he brought to the courtroom really had this, from what I heard from my colleagues, this cinematic flair. He was really talented in coloring the scene, like talking about the discussion when everything went to shit. It wasn't just a discussion. It was at night on a balcony. People were talking it through and that kind of stuff makes for really compelling testimony. All those elements started to fall away on day two of his testimony during cross -examination when the defense attorneys, they didn't really discredit him, but they started to poke holes in this picture that he was painting of a guy who maybe sort of knew what was going on, but really felt morally torn by it. I mean, on one hand, he's saying, well, I learned in, let's say early fall, late summer 2022, that there was this hole in that we were using customer funds, but oh, by the way, in October 2022, I used a loan that I took from Alameda FTX to buy a house in Washington state. It was $3 .7 million. So it was like, well, which is it, buddy? Do you feel bad that you're stealing customer money or are you looking forward to your house? Which by the way, we looked into it, has a hot tub. Not that hot tub is any more or less nefarious, but it is actually, I looked at it as it is more nefarious usually. So your point here is that they were discrediting him by him pretending he has empathy and sympathy and cares while his actions were perceived differently? It's little pieces, right? And I mean, I have to say, I'm starting to really think Sam did it. I'm just kidding there. Of course he did it allegedly, but I'm there for the entertainment and for the information and I find myself rooting for the defense. Like the case is pretty cut and dry. I think he's going to get convicted. I still want the defense to put up a good fight. I want them to throw some good punches because it's much more interesting that way. And otherwise you're just sitting in a courtroom all day and you see you want there to, you don't want just the prosecution to be doing well because they are doing well. So the defense, the strategy that they're taking during their cross examinations is just, how do we chip away at people's credibility? Which is a cornerstone of being a good defense lawyer. And for Nishad, one of the ways they were doing that and something they've tried with all of the witnesses is taking statements that the witnesses made to prosecutors in their extensive interviews pre -trial and bringing them up and seeing if their memories match. And for most of the witnesses, the major ones anyway, their memories match up pretty good. For Nishad, there were a whole bunch of moments where he wasn't quite remembering the very specific jarring things he had been telling prosecutors months before. Now that doesn't mean that everything he says is bull. It does, I think, serve the purpose of making the jury think, well, maybe this guy who really had a wonderful, very clear of mind story to tell about how everything went down, well, he remembers it was night on the balcony and like, I don't know, there was a big dipper up or something. He didn't say that part, but it would have been a nice little flare. He remembers all those things really well, but he can't remember this other thing he told prosecutors. So little bits like that made me think, and I think made other people in the courtroom too also think, this guy might be a little too polished in some areas. I have open on my computer right now, an article that you co -wrote with Nick and Sam about this period of the trial where we see kind of the cross examination. And I thought some of the things you highlighted that came up in that cross were particularly funny. Like at one point they were discussing the penthouse apartment at the orchid that they were living in. And apparently what the defense attorney tried to ask was, was this penthouse really that extraordinary for you all? I mean, you were all rich, right? So shouldn't you live in a penthouse? Which I thought was an interesting little detail when you consider the nature and source of their wealth. Did you have thoughts on that particular moment? Before I get to Deshad's response, I will go back to Yedidiah out of Yedidiah. He worked at FTX. I don't think he knew of things going the way they went until they went to shit, which is I don't think he knowingly committed crimes, unlike some of the people that are appearing in the courtroom. Yedidiah was asked to compare the co -living $30 million apartment to a dorm room. He was like, it was just like a dorm room, but more luxurious, which was quite a telling line for Neshad. I mean, I think it's kind of a fair point, like the, oh, we actually use our customer funds to buy this thing. Notwithstanding if you think you have a billion dollars, you probably shouldn't be living in a like ranch home. Now Warren Buffett still lives at a ranch home. So maybe that's not true, but most of the billionaires don't. They live in big, big, big places. His response, which was basically, I don't know billionaires. I don't really know what's right and what's wrong. I don't know. I don't know about that. Cause he also lives in, by his words, the nicest room in the house. So he just got a lot of mixed messaging from that guy. Well, and at a fundamental level, in a very real sense, none of them were billionaires. I mean, they were on a certain sense in paper that that all depended on a certain fiction being maintained. Exactly that they, even if the money wasn't stolen, they were at best paper billionaires. They did not have the liquid capital. And of course there weren't even actual billionaires in that respect because it wasn't their money. I guess this was the first time anyone has seen the defense kind of wake up. I've been mentioning Liz a lot. She wrote an article entitled, Sam Bankman -Fried's defense finally woke up in The Verge and seemed like even Joe Bankman and Barbara Fried seemed to kind of agree or like at least their outward emotions were that they were pleased with this cross -examination. But the week didn't end with Nishad Singh, right? I mean, we had more witnesses after this. Can you clue me into some of the other witnesses? Probably the best witness of the week was the expert witness, Peter Easton. He is an accounting professor at Notre Dame. He's served as an editor of many of the top accounting journals. I'm going to have to take his word for it because I don't read the accounting journals. And he came out guns blazing with really, really telling charts that illustrated where the money was coming from. Let's say we have the customer funds and the way that we now understand FTX to have been set up was if you wanted to get your money into FTX, your cash, like your dollars, you wired those dollars to a bank account called North Dimension or some smaller accounts, but mostly North Dimension. And they were controlled, the beneficiary of Alameda. And then once your money's in there, you have access on the FTX side to use that money. But the money never actually always completed the transfer from North Dimension to FTX. Instead, they just did some really bad bookkeeping. And the results of this setup was they could then take the money out of those bank accounts and move them, move that money into all the other different things that they were really spending the money on, like real estate, political donations, the charities, like Gardner Capital, specifically half a billion dollars to Anthropic. I don't even remember what point of the trial this was, but there was this whole argument in court about, well, look, they made this bet on Anthropic and it did well. And so he was using the money responsibly. But then Judge Kaplan said, look, if I robbed the Federal Reserve and I take a million dollars and I buy a lot of Powerball tickets and one of them hits, well, I still robbed the bank. You can't say, well, everyone got their money back because the stolen money was used in a way that made more money. No, that's not valid. So, yes, they did. They did. They got lucky with their ill -gotten gains on Anthropic.
Fresh update on "barbara" discussed on WTOP 24 Hour News
"Degrees will warm to the near 60 on Saturday trending dry during the day I'm 70s meteorologist Steve Bruden in the first alert weather center back up to 34 degrees capital in our where the time now on WTLP is 340 money news at 10 and 40 past each hour on WTLP brought to you this morning by pin fed great rates for everyone we check it out with Jeff Claybaugh Thursday morning the Wall Street Journal reports Cigna and Humana are in talks about merging Pittsburgh based Novavax gets WHO approval for its COVID vaccine opening up the Novavax seemed to nearly 200 more countries reviews of changes to Google Maps are mostly negative roads are now gray not yellow water is teal not deep blue parks are now mint not green the Dow finished Wednesday session up although just 13 points Jeff Claybaugh WTLP News overseas this morning Asian stocks finished higher across the board the Nikkei was up by 166 points the KOSPI was up 15 the Hang Seng was up 49 almost 50 the Shanghai was up 8 good morning glad you're with us here at WTOP welcome in time now is 3 41 you're listening to WTOP new sub politics on WTOP this morning to Republican supervisors in Arizona have been indicted on charges related to their attempts to delay the certification of state's the 2022 election results two Republican officials in a rural Arizona county who delayed canvassing the 2022 general election results have been criminally charged Cochise county supervisors Peggy Judd and Tom Crosby each face one count of conspiracy and interference of an election officer the county certified election results in December of 2022 only after a judge ruled Crosby and Judd were breaking the law by refusing to sign off on the vote count Jim Criscilla CBS News why don't you a watchdog overseeing the Trump Organization tells a New York judge this week about 40 million dollars in undisclosed cash transfers the transactions included 29 million dollars sent to former President Trump which he used to make tax payments CNBC reports this week the monitor Barbara Jones broke the news to the judge in a letter the other transfers were told were for insurance premiums more than five million dollars as well Mr. has Trump posted in that civil judgment in favor of the writer E. Jean Carroll who has accused him of course of sexually assaulting her years ago back in the 90s a lawyer for Mr. Trump did not immediately respond this week to a request for comment on the case House Republicans are considering an official vote now on authorizing impeachment their inquiry into President Biden the probe began two months ago without an authorization vote but GOP leaders are now pondering one with White House lawyers arguing the investigation acts legitimacy constitutional while House Speaker Mike Johnson says Republicans have uncovered proof of Biden corruption these facts are alarming the probe has yielded no direct evidence of presidential wrongdoing I think our question is impeached for what California Democrat Pete Aguilar says the GOP move this solely to please the former twice impeached president yet another attempt to make him happy Donald Trump has been pushing the GOP to impeach his successor as payback Johnson visited with Trump in Florida last week Sagar or Magani Washington you are listening to 103 .5 FM at WTOP .com when traffic takes a turn for the worse you'll hear about it first on WTOP northbound 95 has been shut down in Maryland traffic updates every 10 minutes on
A highlight from SBF Trial, Day 11: How Alameda Got FTX Into a $9 Billion Hole
"Thanks for tuning in to day 11 of the Unchained Recap of the SPF trial. On Wednesday, the criminal trial against Sam Pinkman -Fried featured financial and technical expert testimony, a considerable portion of which was mundane. One standout witness relayed his analysis of how much money FTX owed to its customers against how much it actually had over time. However, there were two witnesses whose purpose was unclear, prompting the judge to rebuke the prosecutors. Although the testimony was less dramatic than earlier this week when the prosecution's final star witness, former FTX head engineer Nishant Singh, detailed its growing balance sheet problems and Bankman -Fried's harsh management style, the clear and easy -to -follow financial flows analysis yet again presented a strong case for the prosecution. In the dry and technical terms of bank accounts and blockchain technology, but accompanied by clear diagrams, flow charts, pie charts, and graphs, Notre Dame accounting professor Peter Easton dissected Alameda's bank statements, FTX's database, cryptocurrency blockchains like Ethereum and Bitcoin, and third -party bank statements. His presentation illustrated how FTX had mismanaged customer funds so severely that according to his analysis, at the time of its collapse, the gap between what it had and what it owed customers was about $9 billion. Easton testified, quote, "'The amount of customer deposits held in Alameda Research and FTX .com accounts was way less than what was owed to customers on FTX.' What happened to that money? Well, Alameda Research used it for their own expenditures." Similarly, the amount of FTX hot and cold crypto wallets was far less. The amount owed in those wallets was far less than the amount that was owed to FTX customers. And again, Alameda Research used customer crypto funds to pay for the expenditures. Easton, who was hired by the U .S. Justice Department to analyze FTX and Alameda balance sheets and who had done similar work on the Enron and WorldCom cases, told prosecutors that SPF's firms have spent customer assets on investments, political and charitable donations, and real estate, including the Bahamian penthouse where Bankman freed and nine others lived. After explaining one page with four categories of money visually represented on it, first, Alameda bank accounts, second, accounts with customer deposits, third, FTX bank accounts, and fourth, an SPF entity called Paperbird, the prosecutor asked Easton, quote, "'Now let's talk about what happened to the customer funds that moved through those accounts. And was any of the customer money spent?'" Easton, who seemed to have an Australian accent, responded, "'Oh, yes,' in a tone that sparked laughter in the overflow room." The diagram entitled Co -mingling of customer fiat deposits with other funds showed how interconnected FTX and Alameda were rather than arm's length entities as SPF and Ellison had publicly maintained. It depicted transactions from a nearly 11 -month period beginning in January, 2022 via a network of more than 50 bank accounts under Bankman freed's control. Easton concluded that FTX had chronically used customer assets for its own purposes. His blockchain analysis in particular showed that on October 31st, 2022, FTX's customer balance was more than $10 billion greater than the amount FTX actually held in his crypto wallets. He demonstrated that numerous investments were made using customer funds. For example, 100 % of the investments into trading firm Modulo Capital came from customer funds, according to Easton's testimony. Other investments that were made with either a part or all of the funds coming from customer assets included Anthropic, Genesis Digital Assets, Robinhood, and K5. There were numerous real estate purchases made with customer money, such as the Orchid Penthouse, SPF's Gemini apartment, and an apartment labeled Old Fort Bay, which cost $16 .4 million, along with $1 .64 million for VAT. Its deed listed the owners as Alan Joseph Bankman and Barbara Helen Freed, who are SPF's parents. Of the political donations in his analysis, all of which were paid wholly or in part with customer money, two seemed notable. One, to Freed's Super PAC, was corroborated by an email Freed sent to her son, saying, quote, Since this is going to our 527 and hence is disclosed, I'm assuming Nashad would be the best person to have his name on it. SPF responded with an email approving the transaction. Additionally, Easton said a charitable donation to Bankman Freed's brother's nonprofit organization, Gardening Against Pandemics, received $20 million of customer funds. Easton also highlighted how loans from third -party lenders were paid off using customer funds. In fact, payments to several third -party lenders, including BlockFi, Voyager, Celsius, and Avra, were 100 % composed of customer money. Bankman Freed attorney David Lissner attempted to cast doubt on Easton's methods, asking whether it was, quote, Lissner highlighted that the fiat at FTX internal account tracked all customer deposits in all relevant bank accounts from Alameda, North Dimension, and FTX. Bankman Freed's inner circle had separated the fiat at FTX account to understand the liability split between FTX and Alameda, but Easton admitted to Lissner that he left the fiat at FTX account as is, lumping customer FTX bank account liabilities with Alameda's. All this meant, however, was that Easton's analysis in this instance was just not entirely accurate. Using different witnesses, prosecutors drew attention to Twitter activity by Bankman Freed that seemed to highlight his indifference to FTX's growing financial predicament, or possibly an attempt to fool some of the political heavyweights and celebrities with whom he corresponded. In one instance, Elliora Katz, a Washington DC lobbyist whom FTX hired to help with its government relations, read a tweet by Bankman Freed in which he thanked Maxine Waters, Patrick McHenry, and the House Financial Services Committee. The prosecution also asked Katz to read the defendant's tweet on February 6th, 2022, where he said he was excited to testify before the Senate Agriculture Committee on Digital Assets.
Fresh update on "barbara" discussed on Dear Dyslexic Podcast
"My own research is around a concept called lexism, and lexism is like racism, sexism, etc., except it's that which is applicable to dyslexics. So it's the othering and discrimination of dyslexics. Now that has some similarities with what's referred to as the social model of dyslexia, which was first put forward by Barbara Riddick, which was an adaptation of the social model of disability, but applied to dyslexics, and it's a very good model. It's very strong, and certainly there would be some argument by some people saying we shouldn't mess with it, and lexism is similar to that in some regards. So there are three key features to the social model of dyslexic. The first is that dyslexics face discrimination, prejudice, and so on and so forth. I don't really need to explain that to this audience because I'm sure they're more than well aware of that. The other factor is the importance of social and cultural norms, so how a language is constructed. So English, for example, is very irregular. It's a difficult language because it is so irregular. It doesn't follow any easy patterns, whereas Spanish is much more regular, much more consistent, and so is easier to learn to read, which is why in Spanish-speaking countries, generally speaking, literacy rates tend to be higher, or if they start at a low base, say in South America, they're easier to push up, whereas English-speaking countries are a bit more resistant because it's such an awkward, messed-up language. So those are two key features, both of which I agree with. So lexism would have those features in it. The third feature is dyslexia as an impairment. So in Riddick's model, dyslexia is an impairment. Now, she's not completely clear whether she means some sort of neurological impairment, some sort of disorder. She's not clear on what she means really by impairment, but impairment is used a lot in disability studies to distinguish between a medical issue and a cultural issue. So the cultural is that which disables somebody, but the impairment is, so for example, if somebody is an amputee, for example, then they have an impairment in terms of walking, right? Well, that's fine and fair enough for things which are physical or sensory, but for something like dyslexia, which is built on the assumption of literacy, and that becomes slightly problematic because if the other bit of the model is social cultural norms, well, social cultural norms and literacy don't stay the same. So my concern, and this is going to sound counterintuitive to a lot of your audience, and I should remind people at this point, I am dyslexic myself. I'm not pushing out a view out of ignorance. is that we need to separate the idea of dyslexic and dyslexia, because dyslexia as a theory exists to explain dyslexics, and it exists in the psychological realm and sometimes the neuroscientific realm. That doesn't necessarily mean it's the only theory or the only option we've got. The other option is to think about the existence of dyslexics as being socially constructed. In other words, we exist because there's this distorted and frankly wrong view that somehow intelligence and literacy are linked. They're not linked. You can have somebody who's not very bright, but very literate and vice versa, so that they really aren't linked at all. And there's plenty of psychologists who recognize that. And sometimes what happens is when psychologists start questioning the existence of dyslexia, journalists take it up and mangle the hell out of it. And you get a very unsophisticated view of what they're saying. And actually, they aren't denying the existence of dyslexics per se. What they're doing is questioning the existence of dyslexia, because as a concept, it doesn't really work very well. So what I'm saying when you say we should shift to looking at this as terms of dyslexics are defined by lexism. They are other than discriminated by lexism. So you have a bunch of social norms and expectations or academics sometimes called normative practices or normative assumptions, whichever discriminate people. So how a word is spelt, the fact that you should know and remember how that word is spelt, and so on and so forth. All of those things are actually much more fluid than people realize. So I'll give you an example. This is what a friend of mine calls a Craig special, because it's suitably obscure, weird, and historic, because I started out life as a historian. St. Ambrose of Milan, so we're going back to the 5th century here. Well, late 4th, actually, early 5th, was deemed unusual. And we've got a couple of historical sources. One of them is Confessions of St. Augustine. The other one is The Life of St. Ambrose, where St. Ambrose is seen to be very strange, weird, and have some mysterious power, because he can read silently in his head. Well, reading silently in your head now is not a biggie. You know, everybody does that. You know, it's not considered odd. But at that time, it was considered highly unusual, because when people read, they read out loud. Well, that's an example of a normative practice and a normative assumption associated with literacy. And you can see what exists now and what existed then is very different. Another example would be the spelling of English in the 17th century. People tended to spell as they spoke. So it was very normal to have a whole range of different spellings for words. But now we have a much more restricted thing. So as a kid, I grew up in the South of England, and I couldn't spell the word castle. And I kept putting an R in it, because the way, if you're brought up in the South of England, you pronounce castle, castle. So I ended up spelling it like that. My wife, who's a good northerner, also castle. And she's quite right to call it castle, because then you don't misspell it. So even dialect pronunciation differences. I, up the road from me, well, from an Australian point of view, it's random. You know, it's just up the street. From an English point of view, it's a fair few miles away, is the Lake District. And in the Lake District, there's a village, or there's three villages, and they're all called Plough, but they're all pronounced differently. So you can go up there, and the road, this is going to confuse the hell out of anybody who's not local. They all point to Plough in different directions, but there are three different villages called Plough, and they're all pronounced very, very differently. And I can't remember what the different pronunciations are. So those are examples of practices and assumptions where nice, neat little norms don't really work out. So when you get to psychological testing, and you've got to bear in mind, psychologists are obsessed with data, obsessed with numbers. They're not very good at interpreting that. I mean, I knew a psychologist. He's a very good psychologist. A guy called Victor van Dahl, who used to work at the same institution as me. Very eminent psychologist. And he always struck me as very intelligent, very sensible, because he would quite often say, I can only tell you what, I can't tell you why. And I really wish other psychologists were as sensible as him, because they do tend to build very fancy interpretations on a bunch of numbers, without thinking about wider issues. One of the ways I try and question a lot of these assumptions is through what's called thought experiments. Thought experiments are kind of hypothetical what-ifs, and they go back a long time. They go back to Plato. But other ones you might be more familiar with, if you've got any physicists in your audience. Einstein's special theory of relativity, if I remember rightly, he had this idea about a train traveling at the speed of light. Well, obviously, no train is going to travel at the speed of light. His point was to push our conceptual understandings forward by really trying to understand, yes, but what's actually going on here, to question a bunch of assumptions. And the problem with having lots of numbers, unless you really do some really solid conceptual work about, yes, but what does that actually mean, you could get to the wrong assumption very, very quickly. So some of my thought experiments test and question the concept of dyslexia. Some of them sort of try and lay out how we might understand lexism, because it's a new concept. It's a concept that I created because there wasn't a working concept that I could use, so I had to create one to try and really get us to question things. Now, with the exception of Victor, who did read one of my articles and did understand them, I'm not sure that any other psychologists have read them or understood them. So, you know, they're not really, you know, if you raise my name as a psychologist, they wouldn't have heard of me. But most of my stuff appears in, well, I've got a few articles in the British Journal of Special Education. I've got a couple in Disability and Society. So these are much more disability scholars, critical disability studies kind of area, which seems to be much more open to this. But this would, I think, underline my personal view is that we should be shifting the discussion to sociology. It shouldn't really exist in the realm of psychology because psychology doesn't help us. If anything, I think it's part of the problem. I don't think it's part of the solution. Are you saying that dyslexia doesn't exist in the form that we know it as? Yeah, basically. Which is why I said we need to separate the two. And why I stress that I'm dyslexic myself. I mean, this is a comparative case. It's not the same. I'm not saying it's the same. It's a comparative case. Think how race and gender were constructed a hundred years ago. That doesn't mean that there weren't women and there weren't black people. It just means they were constructed very, very differently. They were medicalized. Well, I think dyslexia has been medicalized and psychologized, however you should put it. And I don't think dyslexia as a concept helps us much. For a concept to be of any use, it's going to help us. I don't think it helps us. I think it gets in the way. We end up sometimes self oppressing. Dyslexics exist. Our difficulties exist. But put it this way. This is this is an example of a thought experiment. Say you've got three guys, right? One's dyslexic. Sorry, one's severely dyslexic. One's mildly dyslexic and one isn't. Right? And they get in a time machine and bear in mind, it is a thought experiment so you can have whatever you like in a thought experiment. They get in a time machine, they go back to the 17th century. Well, the guy who's mildly dyslexic isn't really hasn't got any issues anymore because he's meeting social norms of literacy. There's no difficulty. You know, he ceased to be in effect dyslexic. The guy who's severely dyslexic still got literacy issues, but they're not as bad. The guy who's not dyslexic is not affected either way. They then get in the time machine and go to a far future where the norms of literacy have gone up. Expectations of literacy have gone up. Attitudes to literacy has hardened and become even more awkward than they are now. Right? When they get out of the time machine, the guy who wasn't dyslexic is now dyslexic. Do you see what I mean when I say, well, where's the dyslexia? The answer is it was never there. The dyslexic was there and the dyslexic is defined by the societal context that they're in. But I'm not really sure that dyslexia is helping as much there. And if you go back to Barbara Riddick's idea of the social model of dyslexia, her argument, part of her argument was that dyslexia is a phonological deficit. Well, okay, maybe. But in a given time and culture, somebody's othered and discriminated by that, by how that impacts them. But the obvious question is, okay, you've got somebody with a phonological deficit. If you go to a time and a place where they're not othered and discriminated at because of that deficit, do they cease to be dyslexic? Or if you take them, or if you take somebody who isn't dyslexic and put them in a place where they are, either by the school norms and difficulties with literacy, or where was the dyslexia? This is the really problematic stuff. This is where people really got to think about it. They've really got to problematise it. And it's very uncomfortable because we grow up, certainly in my experience, I was fighting for, my mother especially, was fighting for the acknowledgement of the dyslexia diagnosis.
A highlight from Joe Buck and Troy Aikman
"I'm Mo Rocca and I'm excited to announce season four of my podcast Mobituaries. I've got a whole new bunch of stories to share with you about the most fascinating people and things who are no longer with us. From famous figures who died on the very same day to the things I wish would die, like buffets. Listen to Mobituaries with Mo Rocca on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome everyone to SI Media with Jimmy Trainor. Thank you so much for listening. We have an awesome episode this week. We have Joe Bock and Troy Aikman together followed by our weekly train of thought segment with his alakada, Joe and Troy entering year number, well not entering, they're in year number 22 together and they will top John Madden and Pat Sumrall for the longest broadcast crew in the NFL with 22 years together. So we discussed that and a variety of other topics. Talked to Joe about if he'll ever call baseball again. Got Troy's opinions on the tush push, what's going on with Bill Belichick, some broadcasting stuff, Tom Brady. So excellent, excellent stuff from Joe and Troy from ESPN. Monday Night Football. And then in train of thoughts, we read some mailbag questions. We're going to start doing that every week on the podcast. So check that out. Before we get to it, just a quick reminder, if you missed any recent episodes, go into the archives and check them out. We had Brian Curtis from The Ringer on last week, Andrew Marchand and the New York Post two weeks ago, Kevin Clark from ESPN three weeks ago. So if you missed any of those, check them out. Give them a listen, subscribe to SI Media with Jimmy Trainor and rate and review on Apple. All right, let's get to it. Joe Buck, Troy Aikman, followed by train of thoughts all right here, right now on SI Media with Jimmy Trainor. All right. Very excited. I've had them both separately many times on the podcast, but I have them together. The broadcast crew, the best broadcast crew in the NFL from ESPN, Monday Night Football. Joe Buck, Troy Aikman, Joe, Troy, how are you guys doing? Good. We're good. I have a question already. You said the best broadcast crew in the NFL from ESPN's Monday Night Football. Was that the best broadcast crew in the NFL? And they're also from ESPN's Monday Night Football? Or is it just of all the people that ESPN has doing the NFL, we're the best group? Well, since you brought that up, then I'll just tell everyone that two weeks ago, I believe it was during the giant Seahawk game, I that tweeted Troy is so far and away the best analyst in the sport right now that the gap between him and number two is really wide. And Dan Arlovski actually replied to me on Twitter and was like, hey, you know, like what about me? So I did mean across the entire NFL. Anybody want to respond to that? Troy's just laughing away over there. Yeah. No, thank you for the compliment. It means a lot. It does. It does mean a lot. You know, it's kind of a funny thing. You know, you don't get most of the feedback you get is negative and it's people on Twitter and it's people that are ripping you and saying you're a moron. And, you know, to have somebody who watches this stuff and pays attention saying that is nothing that I take lightly. I think it's great. Thank you very much. Well, I appreciate that. We're going to get into all this stuff and it's your 22nd year together. And I want to talk about that. But I do listen and watch very carefully. So I heard something this past Monday night that I'd like to sort of maybe facilitate here on the pod where Joe you because I am a degenerate gambler. So anytime there's a bet involved my ears perk up. Joe, you offered Troy a hundred bucks if Troy could name four players on the Texas Rangers. I thought this would be the perfect time to see if Troy can do that and then you can pay him when you see him on Monday. Let's see. Pudge Rodriguez, Nolan Ryan, Alex Rodriguez. So no hundred bucks for Troy. No hundred bucks. I was the easiest bet I've ever made in my life. There you go. I love that moment, though. And I think that moment because Steve Ackles, our producer, who's phenomenal, clip that somebody had that on Twitter and sent that to us the next day kind of like, okay, love this for you two guys. And it is I think it does kind of speak to our relationship and it speaks to our friendship and it speaks to the fact that he came back with, you know, there was a time in October I didn't have to work with you. I was so happy that like I was I love that, that he came back at me. So it's that stuff is really fun and I think hopefully separates us. It was definitely a fun moment. You want to offer Troy 50 bucks if he can name one Texas Ranger? Yeah. No, I'm not doing that to him. I like him too much. I'm not going to do that to him. I mean, they advance. You got to now you got to learn one player on the team. Nate Evaldi. There you go. Like I said, you guys now, 22 years together, Madden and Summerall did 21. I know, I know, Troy, you are a huge, huge Madden guy. Yeah. Talk to me about it. Yeah. I know Madden sort of took you under his wing a little bit, right? A little bit, but it didn't, the friendship didn't initially start that way. You know, first of all, I was really fortunate in my career that when we got good, which happened relatively quickly, all things considered, Madden and Summerall, they were, they narrated my, the highlight reels of my career. So, you know, I'm, I'm really happy about that, but, but because of that, because they covered so many of our games, I became very close friends with them on a personal level. Pat lived just outside of Dallas. I spent time, you know, at holiday parties with him. I did a TV show with him while I was playing for two seasons, a weekly show. And then Madden got to know him, spent 4th of July's with him up in Northern California. And played golf with him. And so then when I retired and decided to go into broadcasting, I, yeah, I picked his brain a lot. And that first year we were together at Fox. And then one year later I was actually in Santa Barbara and he called me. That's how I got the news that he was leaving Fox and going to Monday night football that he called me and gave me the news and had little idea what that might mean to me. But that's when Joe and I and Chris Collinsworth got paired and moved up. But yeah, John was, he was a special friend as Pat was as well. And the fact that we're even mentioned in the same sentence with them because of our longevity, it means a lot. It's something that I'm really proud of. The worst thing you or any analyst could do is go into a broadcasting career and try to copy or imitate John Madden or be John Madden. So given that, what did you try to take from him though, when you started to do games? Well, the questions I had was just that there's a lot going on in the booth. And when you get into the booth as a player, straight from the field, it takes some time to figure out exactly what you're supposed to be looking at. Where, you know, I asked him those kinds of questions, like what do you focus on pre -snap? What are you looking at at the snap? And what I found is that, you know, he views it differently. One, because he was a coach, but also because he was a linebacker. So, you know, he views it more along the line of scrimmage. That's what he got into a lot of. Matt Millen, the same way. And then when I came into it, I was a unique analyst compared to what Fox had had at that time. And so I talked more bigger picture. I talked more from a quarterback perspective. And there was a resistance initially to where they said, hey, we need more offensive line play. And I said, well, if you need more offensive line play, then you got the wrong guy, because that's not what I do. And so everybody comes at it a little bit differently. But what John's advice was to me was, you know, hey, where your strength is right now is you're fresh off the field. You know what's happening. You know the players. Whereas his strength was that he knew television, and he had been broadcasting for a long time. So that then is what he leaned on more. And I agree. I don't try to be anybody. I mean, I do listen to all analysts. I know what I think is good and why it might be good. And with that, then you try to say, OK, yeah, maybe I should attack this in this way. But at the end of the day, I'm who I am. My personality is what it is. And I don't try to be John. And quite honestly, I think early on, there were a lot of analysts trying to be John Madden. And I understand it to a point, if he's the best, then everybody's kind of wanting to be that. But think I analysts now have been given a little bit more runway to be who they are. And I think that those analysts who have been able to do that, I think they've been better served. Joe, obviously, Troy was the player, now the broadcaster. You've been a broadcaster your whole life. So I would assume the 22 years together with Troy passing Madden in some role, longest tenured NFL broadcast crew, has special meaning to you, being in this business, with your dad being in this business, et cetera. Yeah. And I have personal ties to both guys. My dad was a broadcast partner to both. My dad did radio football with Pat. They were both at CBS for a long time. My dad was one of Madden's first TV partners. And I know John really liked my dad and obviously vice versa. So I always had that connection to John and to Pat when I would show up at the Fox Seminar. And I was down the list of play -by -play guys. So I do appreciate that fact. I am proud of the body of work that he and I have put together. You have to throw the first three years in there with Chris, too. And I think we're better now than we've ever been, which I think is the best part of it all. I honestly believe that. I think Troy's better than he's ever been. I think I'm more dialed in than I've ever been. Maybe that's without baseball and not kind of running on fumes during this particular month on the calendar. But to think, at least in my opinion, we're still growing and still getting better. And that, to me, is more exciting than milestones. When I was the youngest this and the youngest that, I just had to go do it. I didn't really get caught up in all that stuff. And at the end of the day, nobody really cares other than my family. So, you know, I'm proud of everything I've done with the other guy on this podcast. And I'm really proud of everything I've done with you, Jimmy, over the years. I feel like we've done some good work, too. We have. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to grill you later on some things. No, that's fine. I hope so. We've got some things to discuss. Just on your 22 years before we switched gears, did either of you have, it could be different, a moment, a game, a season where you felt like, we're really good, we're in a groove, this is working, this is kind of special? Like, when did you first feel that? I think right out of the gate, I knew it was pretty interesting. I think it was very different, obviously, with another person in there, being Chris, and Chris and Troy being very different people. And very different broadcasters. By the way, I think that's really the only time it kind of works, when the two analysts in a three -man booth are different. And that was certainly the case with Chris and Troy. But I never felt like we weren't in a good rhythm. I never felt like we were a bad listen. I do feel like once you get through your first Super Bowl and you come back around and you're lined up for the next year, and now Chris had moved on, and it was Troy and me, it didn't take long, that fourth year total, for us to get into an even better rhythm, because it was almost like the weight was off. The weights, the handicap was off. And that has nothing to do with Chris. It could have been anybody. But I think three -man booths are very hard. And when it was just the two of us, it became very easy to get into a rhythm together. And he knew when I stopped talking, it was his turn. I knew when he stopped talking, at some point it was my turn, as opposed to having another person in there. So I think I would say year four is when it felt like, okay, this is really good, I enjoy this, and hopefully it lasts for a while. Troy, you got anything on that? Yeah, no, I would basically agree. I don't think there was this moment when, hey, this is really good, or hey, this works. I know that I had been in a three -man booth my first year with Moose, and then three years following that with Chris. I mean, I knew four games into my career with Moose that three -man booth was tough, and it wasn't something that I really wanted to continue to do. So I was excited when it became a two -man booth. And you just control the broadcast a little bit more, and you're not scatter -shooting after every play and chasing a lot of different things. So that part of it was good. And I would just add this, Jimmy, and Joe and I have talked about it, and we've talked about it on other podcasts and with other writers, that when you get to 22 years, there's a lot of things that have gone well for you. I mean, there's other pairings that could have lasted that long as well, but it was not because of anything they could control. And there was changes made, or this network lost football, or whatever it might be, you know, or this guy wanted to retire. Joe and I came in, you know, we're roughly the same age. I'm a little bit older. But when I left for ESPN, there was no certainty that Joe was going to be able to get out of his contract, so there was a lot going on there. And I think that had Joe not wanted to come to ESPN or if I had not wanted Joe to work with Joe any longer, we both had equal opportunities to kind of take a stand and say, hey, this has been great for, you know, 20 years, but, you know, it's time to kind of move on. We could have very easily have done that. And I think the fact that we're still working together, it's one thing to say, hey, you really respect the guy and you're really close friends, but I think that both of us going to ESPN and continuing to work, you know, you really put an exclamation mark at the end of that. And it meant a lot to me. I mean, I can't even begin to tell you how much it's meant to me that Joe wanted to come and continue to work with me. And I think it's fair to say that it meant as much to him that I wanted to continue to work with him. And so if anything else, going to ESPN has only made our relationship that much stronger. The parallel is interesting because here you are passing Madden and Summerall, and Madden and Summerall, and you guys are the rare teams that stayed together at different networks. They were obviously at CBS for a million years. CBS loses the NFL. They went together to Fox. I'm sure, you know, NBC at the time who had the rights trying to get them or Monday Night Football, but they stayed together. And then here you guys are, Troy goes to ESPN. Joe wasn't there yet. It was Troy leaving first. And then you guys end up together. It's an interesting parallel to Madden and Summerall that you remain together. I mean, John ended up having other partners afterwards, but, you know, we work with Al Michaels, but it's an interesting - I'm pretty sure John ended up at every network. Yeah, he did, I think. You know, when it was all said and done. And yeah, I'm just as proud of that. And I do like that parallel that Pat and John stayed together and he and I stayed together. And it's just, this business is too weird and it's too tough at times who not knowing is standing next to you and what they're all about and what their motives are and if they've got your back. And, you know, to have that and to have the - forget the mechanics of the broadcast and the rhythm and all that stuff. We've got that down. That's baked in. But knowing, like, even that moment that we've already talked about where I know I can throw something at him. If I was working this year with Greg Olsen and I said that, I don't know if that's gonna piss him off. I don't know if he's gonna be like, hey, why are you trying to - But Troy one -upped me by ripping me saying there was a time when I didn't have to work with you in October. That's what I'm talking about. Like, I can give him trouble. He can give it back and be better at it than me. And that is like a great moment for us. It has nothing to do with me. Like, I genuinely root for Troy to be great. And I know he does for me. And that is what it's all about. And I would imagine with Madden and Summerall not having asked him this specifically, but they fit together so well because Jon was so big and such a big presence and a personality and a wham and, you know, kind of snot hanging off the face mask and all the other stuff. And Pat was the straight man. And we're not that, but we fit together on the air in a way that I think is genuinely pleasing to ears people's and sensibilities when they're listening to the game if they bother to listen to it that closely.
Kerry Welcomes Licensed Cosmetologist and Barber Geoff Johnson to the Show!
"I have a very special guest who's actually he's joining our lineup right here on the hair radio morning show his name is Jeff Johnson he's out of kind of like the South Jersey area and we're real happy to have him with us to come on board he's a barber license barber he's making some some waves out there thank you Jeff Johnson Jeff welcome to the show now that's g -e -o -f -f I just want to make that clear okay not the j -e -f -f no that is right it's the first time when I sell when I say someone when I tell someone my name that's the first thing I do is given the correct spelling and also I want to just to go back and that is a big thing but I'm a licensed cosmetologist that specializes oh that's right I got you I got you okay that is correct that so you are a licensed cosmetologist who specializes in barbering is that correct that's how you want to state it that is correct which is awesome because usually we don't necessarily hear it that way but that is awesome and we applaud you for that and I think it's just you know as you were saying and describing a story earlier I was thinking to myself as you were saying that you always wanted to do hair and you actually went through the car the whole cosmetology course and I think you really appreciated that where I had known a whole bunch of barbers who like unwillingly almost so I think it's really amazing because they they wanted to do the barbering I do want to make that clear it's not that they didn't want to do go to school they loved school and loved the course but they didn't necessarily you know feel that the whole course is what they wanted to do but I think at the end of the day I think it's awesome because it opens up a Jeff I want to I want to switch gears a little bit I want to talk about coming to the hair radio morning show what are some of the topics you'd like to see spearheaded on this broadcast that you yourself will be bringing to your piece here oh I definitely I'm definitely glad that you asked that one of the things I want to bring to the show again really focus on the business side of barbering in this field again going back to the pandemic and the shutdown of the of the jobs and people not being able to work one of the things I really want to focus on as far as being a barber with the license is also because you have a license is also learning how to create or have create a business from your name which would allow you to if you operated your business the right way which would be another time that I would speak about you would be ahead you are have been able to collect that additional grant money that was given to a lot of the small businesses and also at the unemployment there are a lot of barbers who did not receive the unemployment because they never filed taxes you don't have a life that's right back so yes go ahead please that's important so with that that is something I really want to bring to the table I need barbers to understand that paperwork is important ownership of your craft and of your name is very important and well it would also open up a lot of doors for you correct and I'll tell you and on the flip side from the filings of all of that and the you know I heard another stylist I think on the radio show this morning actually talk about that as well that's very important and to be registered you know it is cash and we're we're still kind of essentially a cash based business but let's remember to do that paperwork and make sure that you're registered very very important you you know that like when this came out of the clear blue sky no one knew that this was going to happen but you would have been positioned to take advantage of a bunch of those monies that they're pretty much throwing at everybody these days and just be for those who are able to take advantage just read the the small fine print please okay please yeah important especially in our community please read the fine print and so that's all you know just to be aware on both sides of that debate listen I have to say Jeff I'm really really happy to have you on board with us so this is going to be just listen awesome any is there anybody you want to shout out to this morning on the hair radio morning show I definitely want to shout out to what big Barbara van who's the owner it's having the barbershop 1135 definitely Jersey a great guy great owner fair guy so that's one of the definitely a barber that'll not shut out oh what's the name of that shop again we're gonna give them a little bit more of a plug today what's the name of that shop in that owner it is called the new extravagant multicultural barbershop 1135 definitely Jersey all right that is just awesome and we want to shout out everybody in the facility there and all the clients who come in there
A highlight from 1425: Bitcoin ETF Will Send BTC to $1,500,000 - Cathie Wood
"Say goodbye to your credit card rewards. Big -box retailers led by Walmart and Target are pushing for a bill in Congress to take away your hard -earned cash back and travel points to line their pockets. Senate Bill 1838 would enact harmful credit card routing mandates that would end credit card rewards as we know it. If you love your credit card rewards, visit HandsOffMyRewards .com and tell them to oppose credit card routing legislation paid for by the Electronic Payments Coalition. And here's your prescription. I know just the pharmacy to get this filled. Who are you? A pharmacy benefit manager. A middleman your insurer uses to decide which medicines you can get, what you pay, and sometimes even which pharmacy you should go to. Why can't I go to a pharmacy in my neighborhood? Because I make more money when you go to a pharmacy I own. No one should stand between you and your medicine. Visit PHRMA .org slash middleman to learn more. Paid for by pharma. In today's show I'll be breaking down the latest technical analysis as Bitcoin circles around $28 ,000. I'm also going to be sharing with you a $41 ,000 intermediate target for the king crypto and quoting Max Keiser, war mongers can't confiscate your Bitcoin and buy guns and kill people with it preach. He also says that no nation once adopting Bitcoin as a legal tender has ever gone to war. If you want peace, go Bitcoin. Fiat money always leads to war and violence, capiche, unconfiscatable Bitcoin monetizes peace and love. Also in today's show pro XRP lawyer John Deaton slams Sam Bankman -Fried sympathizers. We'll also be discussing Bitcoin about to head north as several indicators are lining up for the king crypto according to top crypto analysts. I'm also going to be sharing with you Max Keiser's $220 ,000 short -term Bitcoin price prediction. I'm also going to be sharing Arthur Hayes. He says that AI, artificial intelligence and historic money printing will create the most epic bull market for crypto. In fact he's predicting a $750 ,000 to $1 million Bitcoin price by the year 2026. I'm also going to be sharing with you Kathy Wood of ARK Invest. She says the odds are she also says she is confident in the Bitcoin price reaching $1 .5 million per BTC. We'll also be taking a look at the overall crypto market. All this plus so much more in today's show. Yo what's good crypto fam. This is first and foremost a video show so if you want the full premium experience with video visit my youtube channel at Cryptonewsalerts .net. Again that's Cryptonewsalerts .net. Welcome everyone happy Sunday today is October 8 2023. I'm your host JV and this is podcast episode number 1425. We have lots to discuss so without further ado let's dive into today's Bitcoin market watch. As you can see here on coin 360 many of the top cryptos are correcting and in the red including Bitcoin hovering just under 28 ,000 along with BNB XRP and Cardano while Ethereum and Solana are breaking out but barely in the green and checking out coinmarketcap .com the current crypto market cap sits at 1 .09 trillion dollars with roughly 17 and a half billion in volume at the past 24 hours Bitcoin dominance still on the climb on the cusp of hitting 50 % we're literally at 49 .9 % according to coin market cap with the ether dominance which has been on the decline at 18 percent even how high do you think this Bitcoin dominance is likely to climb against the altcoin market for this cycle please let me know in the chat and at the end of the show I'll read everyone's comments out loud and checking out the top 100 crypto gainers at the past 24 hours we got basic attention token leading the pack of 5 % trading above 18 cents followed by Lido Dow up 3 % trading at a dollar 61 followed by Clayton up 3 % trading just north of 12 cents and checking out the top 100 crypto gainers for the past week you can see we got to see a green but also a mixture of bloodshed we got Lido Dow and clay look like to be the top gainers for the week and checking out the crypto greed and fear index we're dead in the middle with a 50 which is neutral yesterday was a 49 last week a 48 and last month a 46 in fear so there you have it fam how many of you are bullish for the king crypto now that we're in October let me know in the comments below and now let's dive into our Bitcoin technical analysis as we do each and each and every day here on the channel let's break this baby down Bitcoin kept up renewed pressure on $28 ,000 into the October 8th weekly close as geopolitical uncertainty entered the traders radar here you're looking at the Bitcoin one -hour candle chart data from Cointelegraph and trading view showed Bitcoin price performance avoiding a downside of volatility over the weekend we had Bitcoin slash USD recovering from a snap retest of 27 ,000 a couple of days ago on October 6 thanks to the surprise United States employment data which diverged policy tweaks by the Federal Reserve now the 28 ,000 resistance formed the main point of interest for market participants going into the new week and in the lower timeframes analysis of exchange order books popular trader skew said the major bidding power was still required in order to flip $28 ,000 into support quitting the analysts here so on the long timeframes we can see clearly the market is still trading 28 ,000 as resistance going to require a big spot buyer to crack that area in my opinion perps are shorting every low timeframe bounce into 28 ,000 as well say goodbye to your credit card rewards big -box retailers led by Walmart and your hard -earned cash back and travel points to line their pockets Senate Bill 1838 would enact harmful credit card routing mandates that would end credit card rewards as we know it if you love your credit card rewards visit hands off my rewards calm and tell them to oppose credit card routing legislation paid for by the electronic payments coalition and fellow trader Dan crypto trades caution the ongoing short Bitcoin should a sudden breakout occur as this might form the start of further upside quitting him here I will say that what Bitcoin sitting around this big 28 ,000 level which has the daily weekly 200 moving average sitting there I am personally not very keen on shorting any deviations above in the past we have often seen a weekend breakout at these kind of spots which tends to not retrace as easily as they otherwise would and we also have an accompanying chart showing around the CME price is best practiced during a ranging and choppy environment we are still in such an environment but that would likely change upon a strong break above this region hence me not being too eager to short immediately in case we'd see a weekend pump I also think you got to be crazy to be shorting Bitcoin at a time like this but that's just me now in the wake of new events in Israel others meanwhile flagged geopolitical instability as a potential Bitcoin price catalyst to come quoting crypto analyst me Cal van de pop now market perspective is going to be a volatile week my idea is that Bitcoin continues the upward grind and potentially reaches $30 ,000 as worldwide uncertainty grows and I am sure you have all seen the devastation of what's happening between Israel and Palestine right now van de pop previously forecasted a trip beyond the 30 ,000 mark in October traditionally Bitcoin strongest calendar month hence why we call it up tober yeah I mean and check out this analysis from Titan a crypto he says Bitcoin 41 ,000 intermediate target in play a bull flag is forming on the two -weekly chart if it were to play out it would catapult the Bitcoin price the $41 ,000 imagine the smell in an environment of gloom and doom announcements well we got to consider Bitcoin is on its own vector anything is possible the current high for this cycle I should say for this year thus far is just south of $32 ,000 I feel once we can recapture that we can head on up to 40 ,000 above and beyond now let's break down some information max Kaiser shared over on X which I'll read out loud here he wrote warmongers can't confiscate your Bitcoin and buy guns and kill people with it that's a fact max also says that no nation once adopting Bitcoin as the legal tender referring to El Salvador has ever gone to war if you want peace go Bitcoin Fiat money always leads to war and violence capisce on confiscate a bull Bitcoin monetizes peace and love facts so shut out to the high priest the Bitcoin max Kaiser so there you have it fam let me know how many of you are currently bullish on that King crypto and now let's break down our next story of the day and that's XRP pro attorney John SPF Deaton slamming sympathizers which is quite interesting as you know the ongoing lawsuit continues and trial in court with SPF attorney and crypto advocate John Deaton criticizes supporters of former C FTX CEO Bankman freed during his ongoing trial related to the crypto collapse FTX in a post Eaton says that those characterizing SPF as a well -intentioned individual who made errors are unfit to manage people's finances facts he suggested that such sympathizers should not be considered for interviews with prominent television shows like CBS's 60 minutes a divide has emerged within the crypto community with some deeply concerned about SPF's alleged investor fraud charges while others attempt to portray him positively in the media very interesting the same media that once called Bankman freed the Michael Jordan of crypto even after FTX is bankruptcy filing SPF continued to participate in interviews and was often depicted as a crypto hero sparking backlash from the web3 community here's the actual tweet from Deaton people who believe SPF fraud is a good guy who made mistakes and FTX grew too fast and it got away from him should never be in charge of other people's money and certainly should never be interviewed by 60 minutes or any other news outlets and yes his parents are 100 % complicit let me know if you agree or disagree with that statement by Deaton I agree 100 % I think his parents knows what's good FTX had successfully recovered over seven billion dollars worth of assets however there is a growing call for SPF his sentences to act as a deterrent for other industry innovators Deaton is also resolute and holding Joseph Bankman and Barbara freed SPF's parents accountable despite FTX's present leadership pursuing a legal case against them no regulatory agency has initiated legal action against SPF's parents I wonder why maybe they're all interconnected Deaton believes that Bankman and freed share full responsibility for their son's alleged crimes a view shared by others in the industry that's why I want to know your thoughts fam let me know in that chat and according to Bloomberg Stanford University decided to return the entirety of donations received by FTX amounting to roughly five point five million dollars and here's your you a pharmacy benefit manager a middleman your insurer uses to decide which medicines you can get what you pay and sometimes even which pharmacy you should go to why can't I go to a pharmacy in my neighborhood because I make more money when you go to a pharmacy I own no one should stand between you and your medicine visit ph RMA org slash middleman to learn more paid for by pharma and I read yesterday that Stephen Curry considered the greatest basketball player of our generation definitely the greatest shooter of all time he was paid he disclosed 35 million dollars from FTX to be an ambassador and in return all he had to do was put in 20 hours worth of promotion over the course of so many years so you can see they were handing out money hand over fist because they can print unlimited amounts of their scam token FTT so it's a damn tragedy we'll see how this plays out a big week ahead in the courts as Caroline Ellison is gonna be testifying against Bankman Freed and we know they also dated I think she is going to throw SPF under the bus because SPF already threw her and Gary Wang under the bus and just the other day Gary Wang also testified against Bankman Freed said he knew damn well what he was doing so there you have it fam how do you think it'll play out for SPF let me know in the comments right down below now let's discuss some more bullish technicals for the king crypto and why a bull run is amongst you know I mean the corner we're about the climb and go parabolic while he followed crypto analysts as the number of high time frame indicators are currently suggesting the bitcoins bear market is over in an expansion upward is imminent send it and let's go I also agree that we likely when we hit that bottom of fifteen thousand seven hundred in the fourth quarter of last year I felt like the bull market started and commenced since then and this year already we're up pretty substantially still up like I don't know something like 60 % or something like that so let's see if we continue to climb higher fam anyways anonymous analyst tech dev tells his followers that Bitcoin is in the same situation now which it was before the 2016 and 2020 bull market kicked off and how many of you were around for the 2016 and 2020 bull markets let me know fam tech dev shares a chart with the monthly candles Bollinger bands and an additional indicator showing the logarithmic width between the bands relative to the 200 months moving average the chart which you can see here in your screen appears to suggest the bitcoins Bollinger bands which measures the relative volatility compressed enough to foreshadow a likely breakout to the upside send it let's go quitting the analysts here what Bitcoin has looked like before heading north can you say deja vu you see those three yellow arrows on your screen you already know the closely followed analyst says that both Bitcoin and the altcoin market are simultaneously jockeying for breakouts he compares Bitcoin with others a chart that measures a market cap of all the crypto assets except for Bitcoin and aetherium and according to the trader Bitcoin established support at the beginning of the long -term bullish impulse while others have broken a downward resistance as outlined in these charts Bitcoin and alts are lining up let's go now earlier in the year tech dev said the Bitcoin had checked the three prong signal which proceeded each of bitcoins for all -time high runs so there you have it fam how many of you are anticipating a new all -time high for the king crypto let me know and how hot do you think we're likely to climb for this cycle peak next up we're gonna be discussing a prediction from the one and only high priest of Bitcoin and that's Max Kaiser projecting his short -term target for Bitcoin of 220 thousand dollars per coin let's break this down and again shut out to the one and only high priest max is a Bitcoin enthusiast and crypto advisor to the president of El Salvador Najee Bokele and recently made the bold prediction of where the Bitcoin price could be heading joining other experts and making some eye -popping guesses in the tweet made on X Kaiser confidently stated he thinks bitcoins price will go up a lot reaching an impressive two hundred and twenty thousand dollars per Bitcoin meanwhile his statement came after reading a CNBC article about the current financial market which is facing some challenges due to worries about the economy and rising prices however he didn't say exactly when this target will happen but eventually Kaiser has had been a big supporter of Bitcoin for quite some time in 2011 he called it the currency of the resistance and one of the biggest stories of the decade so he's ultimately been telling you to buy Bitcoin back since when it was like a dollar insane right how many millionaires are responsible for being created due to Max and Stacy in the Kaiser report let me know fam if you're one of them his recent prediction seems to be based on the idea that the central banks worldwide will print lots of money not surprising right leading to a massive increase in the supply of money that's where Bitcoin comes in it's seen as a way to protect your money from losing value when the prices go up that's right Bitcoin is the ultimate hedge against inflation so apparently not everyone agrees with Max's rosy outlook when it comes to the Bitcoin price action and inflation Nicholas Merton who I would consider a Bitcoin permeable and other experts so -called experts on crypto think the rise in prices could actually be a problem for BTC he suggests that people who control the money might need to do something about it like raising the interest rates which could make it harder for the Bitcoin price to go up we also have Bloomberg analyst Mike McGlone who has shared some concerns he says that if interest rates go up the Bitcoin price might go down and one last thing to keep in mind Bitcoin isn't all by itself it's connected to other things happening in the financial world and when big things happen in regular money or stocks it can affect Bitcoin too so even a Bitcoin is digital and fancy it's still a part of the bigger picture but if you actually do the math what's the alternative where can you park cash right now and not lose 20 % of its value due to inflation or hyper inflation the alternative is gold but gold is a terrible alternative because the gold prices are also manipulated hence why JP Morgan Chase got caught spoofing the precious metal markets and had to pay north of a nine hundred million dollar fine they literally got caught with their hands in the cookie jar so you can't make this stuff up when do you feel that Max Kaiser's 220 ,000 Bitcoin price prediction is likely to come a reality let me know in the comments right down below now let's discuss a 750 to 1 million dollar price prediction and the latest from the bit max co -founder Arthur Hayes and then we'll dive into the latest from Kathy wood of ARK Invest and her one and a half million dollar price target and then we'll wrap up the show with our live Q &A as we do each and every day so here's the latest from Arthur Hayes he says that two key catalysts will spark an epic bull market for the digital asset industry how many of you are ready for this bull run fam make some noise in a new interview with crypto banter Hayes says that the commercialization of artificial intelligence better known as AI and historic money printing by the Federal Reserve better known as money printer go will lead to a massive bull run for the crypto assets quoting Arthur here so I had this thesis I presented at token called 2049 double happiness and it was all about the bull market we are about to experience that we're on the cusp of and it's a combination of the most amount of money ever printed in human history in a two to three year period and the commercialization of AI and how that relates to crypto as the most transformative technological development that has ever happened in human history these two things combined are going to produce the most epic bull market in crypto and just about everything else that's sort of a risky asset around the world and according to Arthur Hayes the economic powerhouses such as the US Europe and China are going to be issuing ridiculous amounts of debt which will work in the favor of digital assets quoting him again I did the research and to how much debt is actually going to be issued by the US China Europe and Japan and it surprised me to the upside it's just so ridiculous how much money is going to be printed over the next two to three years while the central banks try to save the government bond markets that I guess I am just so bullish on Bitcoin certain crypto stocks and so bearish on fiat just because there's going to be an umpteenth more trillions of dollars of it so there you have it fam let me know if you agree or disagree with Arthur Hayes and to watch this video he recently did in this interview check the show notes below the video in the description now let's dive a step deeper as he recently made a very bold prediction as well that the Bitcoin price is likely to soar up to as much as a million dollars within the next three years by the year 2026 that's right in a recent interview Arthur Hayes boldly projected the mind -boggling price range of a 750 to 1 million dollar Bitcoin price by the year 2026 known for his unapologetic and often controversial statements Hayes says once again he caught the attention of the crypto community and when asked about his rationale behind such a staggering forecast he confidently stated the following I think it'll be the biggest boom in financial markets we have ever seen in human history very bold words such a statement may sound hyperbolic to some but considering the meteoric rise Bitcoin over the past decade it is not entirely implausible fact from the bottom 14 years ago to the top of 69 ,000 Bitcoin already appreciated 69 million percent so let's not forget that Hayes pointed out the bitcoins limited supply cap to 21 million coins combined with increase in global demand will inevitably drive his price to unprecedented heights he emphasized that as more institutional investors and corporations enter the space the scarcity of Bitcoin will become even more pronounced leading to a surge and its valuation basic stock to flow supply demand and can you say supply shock incoming there's currently less than 2 million Bitcoin sitting on the exchanges and next year we have two major catalysts which we know are incoming Bitcoin having scheduled to take place in April of 2024 and also the approval of a spot Bitcoin ETF so let's freaking go and our next story that day with Kathy wood we're gonna be diving a little deeper into what that looks like and what it equates to for the price action now while some septics argue the bitcoins skeptics argue the bitcoins volatility and regulatory uncertainties could hinder the growth Hayes remains unfazed he believes that the crypto ecosystem matures and regulatory clarity improves Bitcoin will become a staple investment for retail and institutional investors and as the Bitcoin industry continues to evolve and gain mainstream recognition many experts and analysts have offered their projections for the future price of the crypto while authors projection of 750 thousand to 1 million dollars per Bitcoin by the time of 2026 has garnered attention it is essential to consider other general trends and projections in the industry one common trend that experts highlight is the increasing institutional adoption of Bitcoin over the past years major institutions like PayPal square and Tesla have embraced Bitcoin as the legitimate asset class this institutional interest has put as seen a significant driver for the Bitcoin price growth bringing in more liquidity and credibility to the market and of course we now have a dozen applications for major institutions for a spot Bitcoin ETF and another factor that experts consider on the ongoing narrative a Bitcoin is a store value against a hedge for inflation as governments worldwide continue to print fiat currencies at unprecedented rates many individuals and institutions see Bitcoin as a way to protect their wealth from the potential devaluation as Michael Saylor once called it the melting ice cube keeping your hard -earned cash in the bank is no different than watching a melting ice cube melt preach however it's important to note that projecting the Bitcoin price accurately is challenging due to various factors including market volatility regulatory developments technological advancements and macroeconomic conditions which all shape the crypto's future price trajectory therefore it is crucial to cautiously approach any price predictions and projections and consider multiple perspectives when making an investment decision so there you have it now let's break down our featured story of the day and the latest from Kathy wood of arc invest projecting the Bitcoin price is likely to hit one and break this baby down shall we welcome those just joining us and tuning in make sure to say hello in the live chat and at the end of the show I'll read everyone's comments out loud so as you can see here on your screen this is the one and only Kathy wood early Bitcoin adopter and very savvy investor and now u .s. base arc invest last month announced its entry into Europe and said the odds are going up that the Securities and Exchange Commission better known as the SEC will approve her firm's application for the spot Bitcoin ETF let's go now arc invest which last month announced it had acquired the UK base rise ETF to assist with its push into Europe filed an application with the US regulators in April to launch a spot Bitcoin ETF with Switzerland base 21 shares the SEC has yet to approve a string of spot Bitcoin ETF apps that it had received from asset managers including the likes of BlackRock the world's largest invest go fidelity and Vanek we're talking about behemoths last month the SEC delayed its decision on our spot Bitcoin ETF and now has until January 10th of next year to make up its mind quoting her here we're partnering with 21 shares in the United States hoping to launch a Bitcoin ETF and if it's ever approved by the SEC we think the odds are going to go up and that it will be approved wood said during a media a media call three days ago on October 5th the acquisition of rise which manages 450 million dollars across 11 European ETFs gives arc invest directly entry into the European market and a platform from which to launch and distribute products globally the deal which was brokered in just a few months also raised the prospect of arc launching crypto focused products over in Europe UK let's go in the US meanwhile Woods flagship 8 billion dollar arc innovation ETF includes coinbase and block amongst its top 10 holdings what is also one of the biggest Bitcoin champions let's go champs she has previously predicted the Bitcoin price can top 1 million dollars by 2030 and it's currently trading as we know just shy of 28 ,000 there are already several crypto exchange traded products on offering the European investors with firms such as wisdom tree fidelity invest going global X among some of the providers that offer them would say that any crypto focused products would probably see arc invest relying on their expertise a 21 shares rather than trying to create products from scratch however would said she did not anticipate any problems including indirect crypto plays within any product arc invest Europe might roll out in Europe quitting her here my senses there won't be any issue but we are still working through this with our partners who are speaking with the regulators now Stuart Forbes the co -founder of rise ETF said the firm was looking at arcs existing fun lineup into the u .s.
A highlight from Encore of Episode 23: John Bianchette: Why Kids Hate Math and How to Fix It
"Hey, it's Batsheva. I've pulled this episode out of the archive vault for you, in case you hadn't heard it before. But if you have already heard it, well, you might want to listen again because this time you'll know all the answers to the 5 -Minute Game Show. And also because there's always something to learn from my wonderful guests. With the exception of adding this intro, I'm bringing you the original episode in its original form, which is also kind of a time capsule. So enjoy. Gee, Professor, why do we have to learn this math anyway? It's boring, I don't understand it, and I'll never even use it. Well, Jimmy, that's just not true. Let me explain it. Are you a frustrated teacher trying valiantly to get your students to love math as much as you do? Do you struggle to explain why math is relevant to students when it seems obvious to you? Maybe you just want to liven up your math lesson to engage more students. Well, now you can with Math -O -Matic, a convenient solution to a host of problems. And I don't mean math problems. Although, technically, they are caused by math, so they could be considered math problems, I suppose. Ahem, you were saying? Ah, yes. Use Math -O -Matic to liven up your math lessons, make them more engaging and relevant to your students, and have more fun yourself. The makers of Math -O -Matic have culled together the wisdom and creativity of hundreds of great math teachers and developed the ultimate product. Use Math -O -Matic and level up your lessons, and it makes great Julian fries. Sounds interesting. I'll try it. Get your Math -O -Matic today. Thank you so much for joining us on Overthrowing Education, the podcast for educators, students, and parents. We celebrate what great education could and should be, and hopefully inspire others to advocate for and create it when they don't see it happening. You got that love that rises like the sun. Raise it up, raise it up, raise it up. Hey, everyone. It's mid -June now, and once again, the world is shifting dramatically. Could this be the time that this country finally really deals with systemic racism? I am working with some incredible educators on a series to address how to eradicate racism in education, so look for those episodes soon. But for today, I'm addressing something different. This episode on why kids hate math and what we can do about it was originally going to air in April, but when the schools closed, like many others, I felt that there were other issues that needed to be immediately addressed. But I do want to think about this, especially now that schools, remote learning and all, are mostly done for the year. So I asked my original guest, John Bianchetti from Mathnasium, to come back and add to the first interview, which was done in January of 2020. In the second, newer part, he updates us on remote learning opportunities and more. And I'm going to be doing the In the Trenches segment, tracing my journey from hating math as a student and defining myself as I'm not a math person for most of my adult life and finally realizing that I actually enjoy math now that I've experienced learning it and using it in a whole new way. I'll also give some tips and tools that I learned from the Arte Preparatory Academy math teachers to help your students make the transition from math haters to math, well, at least appreciators. And as you might know, after every interview, I subject my guest to the Five Minute Game Show. You won't want to miss this musical parody game show, which features great musical star impersonations from the incredibly talented Barbara Heller, who is also the awesome voice artist that has been in many of my phone commercials. You seriously don't want to miss this. And now on with the show.
A highlight from What a Weird Week Canadian Thanksgiving Special: Ten Ten Again! Fri. Oct. 6, 2023
"What a weird week Canadian Thanksgiving special 1010 again Hi friends, I'm Scott and this is what a weird week a show about the weird news that happened this week for show notes and More visit show notes dot page. That's show notes dot page It's Canadian Thanksgiving this weekend, but instead of taking the week off or even posting a rerun Please enjoy this 10 10 episode where we revisit 10 Former number 10 entries from this podcast and see how they hold up now So here comes season 4 episode 54 10 10s for Thanksgiving first published on Friday, October 6 2023 10 kicking off the top 10 this week number 10 from March 24th 2023 the headline was bonkers carrot caper This happened at the Clearview Mall in Pennsylvania where police caught the suspects charges at the time were Expected pending two people stole a giant foam carrot and a pinata from a mall Easter display in March of this year and when they took off a Security guard was dragged by the getaway truck for around a quarter mile. No one was hurt Thankfully police located the large carrot and the Easter pinata at a home And at the time we hoped there would be some sort of Hollywood treatment because no one got hurt We were like, maybe this should be a movie. All right, how does that one stack up long story short it holds up We haven't had any other giant foam carrot Theft stories on this weird news podcast since that happened in March This is our only weird Easter caper story So that one holds up the follow -up on this is they named the two fellows an 18 year old and a 20 year old And they said they would be charged at a future date They also said because of the nature of the crime they wouldn't be taken into custody. Oh, they were both visiting from, Texas So the anonymous tip came in they found them at a house. The two fellows were visiting from, Texas When they said the nature of the crime, I think what they mean right is it was more of a prank No one got hurt. Although that security guard did get dragged for around a quarter mile behind the getaway vehicle But they weren't taken into custody and then that story goes cold I don't know the follow -up is kind of open -ended what happened next The story just went cold after that 10. The next number 10 was from March 31st of this year It was about the fella the 91 year old fella who crossed the Grand Canyon It's around 24 miles to hike from one edge of the Grand Canyon down through to the other edge This took five days 91 year old fellow named John did it and he got in the Guinness Book of World Records He is the oldest person to ever cross the Grand Canyon. This one holds up no, 92 year old was waiting in the wings to break this record, I guess or hasn't done it yet. So John is still the World record holder is the oldest person to cross the Grand Canyon at the time I remember treating this like an inspirational news story something You know if you've always dreamed of getting in the Guinness Book of World Records But you can never seem to get it right you could never get that Rubik's Cube solved or you know cross the Grand Canyon There are still opportunities as you get older this one You can train until you're 92 years old and then attempt to beat the world record So this one holds up and still inspirational You Are listening to what a weird week It's a show that leans into the weirdness 10 our next entry in our 10 10s Thanksgiving special is from April 7th of this year. How young is the world's youngest published author? That's weird And we went from the oldest person to cross the Grand Canyon one week and the next week We kicked off the show with the young author this was a story about that boy from the United Arab Emirates four years old four years and 218 days old and has a published book called the elephant sayeed and the bear The book is about kindness and an elephant and a polar bear and it is officially a Guinness World Record This person the youngest published author You have to have at least a thousand copies sold to have an official Guinness World Record as a published author this book sold more than a thousand copies and Guinness World Record This story holds up. No one younger than four years old has published a book. Come on slackers. What's going on? In writing three -year -olds to sorry to this one. I did I remember at the time I was maybe in a bad place that week I remember thinking wow once you start kindergarten once you're five years old Strolling into the kindergarten class if you don't have a published book You've failed already because a four -year -old did it That one was not a great take on my behalf. I would say for the aspiring writers When you crunch the numbers the demographics of this the people who listen to this program it cuts off at a certain age So you don't know how many five -year -olds are listening to this podcast But I want to apologize to any five -year -olds listening who want to be a writer and I was like you might as well quit You didn't get the world record. That was a terrible thing to say Continue to pursue your dreams five -year -olds, please continue to write stay with it Let's end on that message 10 next up was our story from April 14th of this year How short is pearl the Chihuahua the shortest dog in the world? And so just to recap from the ground up pearl the pooch is 3 .59 inches tall a little bit taller than 3 .25 or half of a dollar bill or a little bit taller than a credit card Also a can of soup is taller than pearl the pooch Pearl is about as long as a dollar bill five inches long weighs a little bit more than a pound Does this story hold up turns out pearl the Chihuahua was? Actually a person in a suit. It was all fake you guys. No no, the story does hold up and pearl the Chihuahua is still the shortest dog in the world and the photos are still Wonderful if you want to see pearl the pooch and smile click show notes that page is You This the what a weird week show a weekly rundown of weird news 10 if you're just jumping in here We're doing 10 number 10s from past episodes as a Canadian Thanksgiving special and then Going back to see do the story still hold up. Are they still weird? Is it all still a real thing? Did it really happen? Will we be disgraced by reporting something that was completely fake at the time so far so good The next one is how fast can you this one doesn't hold up you guys spoiler alert? How fast can you drink are you ready to set a world record a German man shattered the this is from April? 21st of this year when the German fellow shattered the Capri Sun speed drinking world record 10 .41 seconds finished an entire Capri Sun drink. These are the ones where if you don't have Capri Sun where you're at it's a Bag of drink and you stab it with that pointy straw and you drink the thing Well, that was a nice record while it lasted but just last week We talked about the fellow who now has a Capri Sun speed drinking record of under 10 seconds Eight point something seconds to finish an entire Capri Sun So this story does not hold up from April to last week It was a record but now there's a new champ in town 10 next up from April 28th of 2023 Nudists will feel naked and exposed if cable car over nude beach goes ahead This was a story we had in April from Vienna Where there was a plan for a cable car route to pass over a beach frequented by nudists and it was not a popular thing amongst the nudists a Nudist named Barbara was quoted in the story I don't want to end up on the internet 72 year old Barbara said The developer said the cable car will pass over the beach for hardly any time at all The cable car windows could be the kind that switch to non see -through when the cable car gets close to the beach Anyway, that was the story in April. How does this one hold up at the time? I remember I was like everyone calm down. Keep your pants on nudists. I was very proud of that joke I remember so does it hold up? The last thing I can find about this is from a blogger who says in their blog post not sure if it's a sure thing yet or still in the Possibly could happen stage. So there's not a lot yet. I mean these projects sometimes they take a while You got to get approval. You got to get money all of that and then you got to calm down the nudists There's a lot happening behind the scenes no doubt, but there's not a lot of follow -up yet on this one I've found some video of non nude variety and I will post that in the updated show notes a Weekly countdown of Weirdy McWeird stuff This is the what a weird week show 10 next is from May 5th of 2023 Our number 10 that episode was freaky foot world record. Do not attempt This was about the lady named Kelsey who said a Guinness World Record for her freaky footwork Basically, she can point one foot forwards and the other foot backwards Kelsey is a librarian from New Mexico. Her official world record is most foot rotation for a female She discovered this world record ability at her library when the new Guinness Book of World Records came out She's flipping through she saw the foot record in there and she was like, I wonder if I could do that She did and she could get more Flexibility or more whatever She could be going in both directions more. So however you word it. I'm not sure anyway, this story holds up this one is still a Guinness World Record and Please if you're going to attempt it stretch consult a physician I just feel like you could try this one Maybe you're having a couple of wobbly pops or something at a Canadian Thanksgiving party this weekend And you're like, I'm gonna try that world record and you haven't warmed up enough or whatever Maybe your feet would stick that way. How are you gonna get around now? Please do not attempt 10 next number 10 was from May 12 2023. How excited are you about printed fish? That was our headline from May the company in Israel has 3d printed fish It's not meal ready fish you print it out and then you have to cook it fish fillet they start with lab -grown grouper fish and They turn that into some sort of edible filament for a 3d food printer That was kind of how I described it at the time I you know, it's oversimplification But you get the picture lab -grown printable fish could save the environment could save real fish could save all of us Like the other lab -grown meats they're trying to get enough food for everyone Wouldn't it be wonderful if everyone all of the humans had enough to eat that would be good, right? They said they wanted this to be available for purchase next year at the time. I described it as white goo It looks like white goo. I stand by that. It does look like white goo and how does it taste? Well, unfortunately our website when you click our show notes, we do not have that capability I know I should be upgrading to Squarespace. I get it. But right now our show notes blog Does not have lick the screen capabilities so that you can taste what the printable fish would taste like So is this story fishy or does it hold up? I say it holds up I mean, we're still at the place where they're trying to get regulatory approval get through all the hoops You got to jump through and then by the end of 2024, they hope to have it available You know, you could have it on your plate by next year. That's where we're at with this one So I say it holds up. I've been voting all of these hold up haven't I mostly Maybe I'm biased Recapping the weird ones from this week's news. This is what a weird week 10 if you're just jumping in at this point, this is the what a weird week show Thanksgiving special for Canadian Thanksgiving We're doing 10 10s 10 former number 10 stories and then we're doing follow -ups do the stories hold up This is from May 19th 2023 the Gator that fooled us all This happened on Treasure Island on the Gulf Coast Police on Night Beach Patrol were surprised by a tricky Gator a biggie from their Facebook post Look at the size of that Gator one of our officers tried rounding up on Treasure Island Beach last night It was an incredibly realistic sand sculpture That's it. That's what we had for a number 10. Well, this story doesn't hold up I mean we've had weirder stories than this weirder things have happened to you on your way to work this morning probably, right? last recap week This is where we recap last week It's right there in the title and this episode from last week is still up if you want to check it out if you didn't have a chance show notes dot page to Find previous episodes and all the show notes and all the links number 10 last week Tinder's very expensive option makes news. I kept saying $4 .99 and made it sound like it was five bucks a month It's five hundred bucks a month I think we made it clear by the end of that story But there's a lot of money for tinder or is it? I don't know I'm married number nine last week Wiener mobile rides again number eight was dogs go to human movie world reacts number seven flock of sheep steals 600 pounds of marijuana plants Number six was Guinness World Record for ten -year -old makes many of us feel inadequate Number five was message in a bottle sweepstakes makes news number four last week guy drinks Capri Sun brand beverage very fast sets new world record 8 .02 seconds number three drug that can grow new teeth was in the news Number two last week dog from Canada sets sock removal record I had a hard time getting through that one last week We had an honorable mention last week spongebob mac and cheese is a triumph of the human spirit and number one last week the lady Who got stuck in the toilet lady stuck in toilet makes news retrieves? Watch a few of you sent notes saying I should have had that outhouse story at number two in the number two spot The lady in the watch in the outhouse. It should have been number two. You're absolutely right. Well played You Welcome back to the what a weird week show our final number 10 of this all 10 special is 10 from May 26 2023 people reminded to wear clothes for driver's license photo in Georgia now in the state of Georgia in the USA You can get a digital driver's license as part of the apply process when the story came out You have to send them a photo and at the time the Georgia Department of Driver Services Posted on their Facebook attention lovely people of the digital era Please take pictures with your clothes on when submitting them for your digital driver's license and IDs Let's raise our virtual glasses and toast to the future Cheers to technology until I would say that story holds up until they allow naked driver's license. How about that? And that's a wrap on our special episode of 10 number 10s from the past year the lasting tenacity of weird Cannot be understated. I don't know am I wrong. It seems to me like most of those stories hold up And so we'll wrap there the special episode of 10 number 10s from the past year if you are celebrating Thanksgiving this weekend Canadian Thanksgiving have a weird and wonderful.
A highlight from The Sam Bankman-Fried Trial Begins - Everything You Need to Know
"Welcome back to The Breakdown with me and LW. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on guys? It is Tuesday, October 3rd. The SBF trial has begun. This is all the background that you need to know. Of course, before we get into all of that. If you are enjoying The Breakdown, please go subscribe to it, give it a rating, give it a review. Or if you want to dive deeper into the conversation, come join us on The Breakers Discord. You can find a link in the show notes or go to bit .ly slash breakdown pod. Hello Breakers. As you can imagine, this is a fairly weird time for me. A year ago at this time, I was deep in the midst of planning FTX's second Super Bowl ad. And yet a month later, I had resigned, the company had declared bankruptcy, and the world had discovered a rotten core of fraud around Sam and his closest consigliaries. Now, I did a very long episode about the experience of the week of the collapse from the inside last November 14th. It was called Sam Bankman Fraud to give you a sense of how I felt about it. Since then, I've been covering the FTX bankruptcy and Sam's legal battles as I would any other crypto story. In other words, just part of the necessary cleanup of the last cycle, but ultimately something that is hopefully for the past and not for the future. When it comes to the trial, I've spent a long time deciding about how to approach it. The reality is, for the next five or six weeks or however long this takes, this is going to drown out a lot of other things that are happening in the space. I have to imagine that most products will choose not to launch during this time for fear of being outshined because everyone is just laser focused on this. The question then of course is how much time to give it. Is there a risk of over focusing on it? You bet. It's going to have lots of drama. But does it need to be covered? I think that the answer is also ultimately yes. This is something that has to get concluded for the industry to fully move on. It is in many ways an exorcism that just has to be done. And on top of that, I think that this trial and everything that surrounds it will have some impact in shaping how much the external world sees the crypto space as itself inherently fraudulent versus Sam as specifically fraudulent. So how is the breakdown going to cover this? Well, I talked to a lot of you listeners and the general request mirrored my own thoughts, which is to every few days do an update, sometimes with a guest discussion. This won't be then an everyday thing. At least there won't be some big feature every day. But you will get all the salient details as they come up. And with that in mind, I thought it would be valuable to try to create a bit of a definitive primer, something that if you haven't been paying attention at all, if you were barely watching last year, you could pick up and listen to and feel pretty well prepared to get into what you're going to see over the coming weeks. What that means is that today we're going to go over the charges, the rough timeline of events, the key witnesses, what we expect from the defense, the latest procedural news and info from the bankruptcy and the trial schedule. I don't think we'll have time to get into people's very strong feelings about Michael Lewis's book that just came out, but I imagine that that will be on the docket for later this week as well. However, where we begin is with the charges of which Sam faces seven. Those include two charges of wire fraud, two charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, as well as charges of securities fraud, commodities fraud and money laundering. More generally, Sam is accused of fraudulently dealing with customer funds in a multitude of ways. The most damning allegation, and the one prosecutors will likely focus on establishing, is that Sam knowingly diverted customer funds to FTX -affiliated hedge fund Alameda Research. Alameda, of course, served as the primary market maker on FTX. Now, FTX is widely understood not to have been able to obtain bank accounts, and so in many cases used accounts held by Alameda Research to receive funds from customers. The thing that prosecutors will seek to demonstrate is that Alameda not only held customer funds, but that it racked up billions of dollars in debt to FTX, which it could not repay. Evidence has been put forward that Alameda did not have the same risk controls as other entities when it traded on FTX, and that the lack of limits allowed Alameda to continue to operate while carrying a large negative cash balance. To put a fine point on it, the prosecution will allege that this large negative cash balance represented improperly using customer funds to trade and lose on the exchange. Now of course, Alameda had a significant balance sheet of assets held against this negative cash balance, but these assets were crypto tokens largely created by Sam and FTX. They were far too illiquid to realize it anywhere close to their full book value. The SEC summarized the allegations in their separate lawsuit by stating that Sam, Put more simply by Bloomberg's Matt Levine in an article published yesterday, It was pretty much entirely because Alameda had lost it. Now the key to proving these allegations will be establishing that Sam was aware of this financial artifice being run using Alameda. Fraud isn't fraud if it was caused by a mistake or an oversight. Prosecutors will need to show that Sam was either aware of the fraud or willfully blind to it. As the judge put it during a hearing last week, Now let's move on to the timeline of events. Much of the DOJ's case will center around the fateful final weeks as the FTX empire came crashing down. The beginning of the end came on November 2nd when Coindesk's Ian Allison published an expose on the Alameda balance sheet. There had been some rumors of trouble at Alameda prior to that, but with a partial copy of the balance sheet, this piece of reporting blew the lid off the situation. TLDR, what the balance sheet showed was that a huge portion of Alameda's holdings, the were pretty illiquid tokens and in particular, the native exchange token of FTX, FTT. Now in terms of a huge portion of their assets being in FTT, there were also a bunch of other Sam coins from DeFi projects that barely got off the ground, which in some cases had Alameda representing up to 95 % of the overall token supply. According to the Financial Times, just $900 million in assets on this balance sheet could be easily sold. The next major event was the very public sparring between Binance CEO CZ and Sam. Binance had been an early investor in FTX, but at that time had been bought out of their stake for $2 .1 billion. That repurchase, a theoretically pretty good return on an $80 million investment, had been paid out in a mix of stablecoins and FTT tokens. On the Sunday following the Coindesk article, CZ tweeted that quote, Due to recent revelations that have come to light, we have decided to liquidate any remaining FTT on our books. He said the firm would attempt to do so in a way that quote, minimizes market impact over the next few months. But of course, when you have CZ, the single biggest player in the industry, saying dump FTT and run for the hills, guess what happened next? Within the hour, Carolyn Ellison absolutely pissed gasoline all over the situation. She had taken over as sole Alameda CEO just a couple months prior and tweeted to CZ quote, If you're looking to minimize the market impact of your FTT sales, Alameda will happily buy it all from you today at $22. The market immediately plunged, with FTT's price being very visibly defended against Throughout the week before, FTT had traded around $25 and a market cap of $3 billion. By Tuesday night, with Alameda's traders and balance sheet exhausted, the token settled at $5 and FTX closed withdrawals. Now like I said, I gave my account of being on the inside. And while Tuesday when FTX closed withdrawals was clearly a final moment in the coffin for many of us inside, for me when it was clear that something very nefarious had gone on was on Monday, when I started getting hit up by other friends outside of FTX in the industry who were asking if I had heard anything about an FTX emergency fundraising round. Now of course, as an exchange that was supposed to be fully backed and given Sam's recent statements to the team that we had around $2 billion in cash and liquid assets thanks to trading revenue as well as recent fundraising, the only way in the world that we would need an emergency fundraising round was if Sam had been using FTX customer funds for purposes other than sitting on FTX's books waiting for those customers to reclaim those funds. Anyway, in the middle of that week after withdrawals were closed, there was also a weird sham sale announced to Binance, which they very quickly backed out of. And by Friday, with most FTX staffers having already fled the Bahamas, Sam finally capitulated to bankruptcy. Now to this day, Sam claims that he was forced by external lawyers to place the FTX empire into bankruptcy and appears to continue to be holding onto the idea that the exchange could have raised an emergency fundraising round to make customers whole. For most people, that might be where the event ended, but not so much for Sam. What followed was a bizarre string of press interviews, an incredibly disjointed Twitter thread, and basically an odd media tour that attempted to paint Sam as a wayward and naive CEO in over his head rather than a perpetrator of criminal fraud. This tour was capped off by a live broadcast interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times on November 30th. During that sprawling interview, Sam claimed that he, quote, didn't ever try to commit fraud on anyone. Authorities disagreed, and on December 12th, Sam was arrested in the Bahamas at the request of the US government. Although initially defiant, Sam ultimately agreed to be extradited to face charges and was released on bail. Once again, for any normal person, that might be the end of the story until we get to trial, but not for Sam. Although he was confined to his parents' house in California, Sam managed to continuously test the boundaries of his bail conditions. February, Sam was hauled before the judge on allegations that he had used encrypted messaging apps to contact the General Counsel of FTX US as well as using a VPN, which Sam claimed was just to watch NFL games. To the former General Counsel of FTX US, Sam had reached out to see if it was possible to, quote, have a constructive relationship, use each other as resources when possible, or at least vet things with each other. The DOJ characterized this communication as an attempt to taint a potential witness. At that point, the judge decided not to revoke Sam's bail, but instead expressly forbid Sam from using encrypted messaging apps and VPNs. And yet, in July, Sam stepped over the line once again by leaking the private journal of Carolyn Ellison to the New York Times. The judge agreed that providing this material to journalists was, at best, an attempt to embarrass Ellison, if not a brazen attempt to intimidate her and discredit her in the public eye. During the course of that hearing, it was uncovered that Sam had held more than 1 ,000 phone calls with journalists, including over 100 with the New York Times reporter who published the story. And thus, by early August, Sam had his bail revoked and was locked up at the Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention Center to await his trial. Since then, it's basically just been a never -ending set of appeals to try to get Sam out of jail, but alas, jail is where he remains. Next up, let's talk witnesses. What became clear quite fast was that there was a cohort of around four people, including Sam, that seemed to know about the extra special privileges that Alameda enjoyed and the fact that for all intents and purposes, customer funds on FTX were just used as a slush fund for their hedge fund traders. And it turns out that while Sam was still in the air being extradited from the Bahamas, multiple FTX executives were revealed to be collaborating witnesses. Of those, Carolyn Ellison is the one likely to get the most attention. As well as being the CEO of Alameda, Ellison was also Sam's former girlfriend. The couple split prior to the collapse of FTX and there will no doubt be extensive cross -examination which questions Ellison's motives in giving evidence against Sam. Although Ellison was only at the helm of Alameda for a little over two months, recent reporting describes her as essentially in charge of the trading firm for much longer, at least as much as anyone could be in charge of the firm relative to Sam himself. Nominally, Ellison and Sam Trabuco, another Sam in this story, had been appointed co -CEOs of the firm in October of 2021 when SPF stepped away from the role. However, Trabuco had recently been described as almost entirely checked out at that point, leaving Ellison in charge of day -to -day operations. Ellison is expected to give evidence regarding the inner workings of FTX and has acknowledged that she knew about the hole in Alameda's balance sheet prior to the collapse of the exchange. Nishad Singh and Gary Wang are the other two executives known to be cooperating with prosecutors. Singh acted as engineering director while Wang was the exchange's CTO and co -founder. These two basically built all of FTX from the ground up, so anything going on with the codebase is basically going to be mostly just their work. Nishad is expected to give a first -hand account of how the Alameda backdoor was enabled in the code. Nishad was reportedly extremely distressed and wracked with guilt during the final weeks at FTX and was confrontational with Sam during that time. Gary was one of the last employees left in the Bahamas as the exchange collapsed and famously coded almost the entire platform by himself. Some have speculated about how he will be as a witness given that he is notoriously quiet. Now, each of these three key witnesses have already pleaded guilty to criminal fraud charges and have agreed to testify in exchange for a lighter sentence. Prosecutors will need to demonstrate that each one is presenting an honest account of events rather than merely throwing Sam under the bus to save themselves. There are also complicated personal relationships between each of these executives and Sam, which could be used by the defense. All three cohabitated with Sam in a Bahamas penthouse and were some of Sam's closest friends as well as employees. To give an indication of how hostile cross -examination could become, last week a DOJ motion to prevent the defense from asking questions about recreational drug use was denied. The defense will need to provide notice to the court before asking witnesses about their drug use, but the subject was not ruled to be out of bounds. Another FTX executive who has pleaded guilty to criminal charges is Ryan Salem, who served as CEO of FTX Digital Markets. FTX Digital Markets was the operating company for the Bahamas. Now, Salem was particularly involved in the political campaign side of things for Sam and was charged with violations of campaign financing law in relation to making straw donations to politicians on Sam's direction as well as operating an unlicensed money -transmitting business. Unlike the other three, Salem is not cooperating with prosecutors as part of his plea deal, but could be called to testify as a non -cooperating witness. Alameda co -CEO Sam Trabuco has not been heard from since he stepped away from the company last August. He has not been disclosed as a witness and has not been charged at this stage. The DOJ has also flagged that they have at least two additional witnesses set to testify under a grant of immunity but have not publicly identified them at this stage. By and large, speculation about who those witnesses might be include not only Trabuco who we just mentioned, but Daniel Friedberg who served as FTX's chief compliance officer and who had formerly been implicated in a major online poker scandal, and Constance Wang who was FTX's COO and was described as Sam's right hand during fundraising efforts. Now in addition to FTX executives, the DOJ will also call multiple customers and investors to give brief testimony. Prosecutors have flagged that they will call upon retail customers who traded tens of thousands of dollars on the platform, as well as institutional clients who traded millions of dollars. The high range could imply notable industry figures will make an appearance on the witness stand. Several high profile market makers are listed as top creditors of FTX and are no doubt none too happy about their funds being locked up in the bankruptcy process. Both customers and investors are intended to present their understanding of the FTX terms of service and representations made about the use of customer funds, which could be crucial in refuting possible defenses. Which indeed brings us to that section of this primer, what are the defense strategies that Sam might try to employ? SPF's legal team have flagged a few potential arguments. In a filing on Monday, they sought clarification on a few issues they may wish to present. The filing asked whether the defense could argue that FTX International was not regulated in the US and therefore did not have to follow applicable rules. They also asked whether Sam could discuss the likelihood that creditors could see massive returns from the bankruptcy process. Still, the primary defense expected from SPF relates to instructions from legal counsel. In August, SPF's team flagged a plan to argue that he relied on advice from both in -house attorneys as well as lawyers from Fenwick and West in basically all elements of FTX's operation. Sam sought to introduce advice from lawyers on topics ranging from his use of self -deleting messages, unconventional banking relationships, and intercompany financial arrangements. The DOJ objected to this defense, claiming that not enough detail had been provided, but the judge reserved their decision on this point until later in the trial. The judge said that they would make rulings on individual advice of counsel arguments on a case -by -case basis as they come up. Outside of what indications we've gotten from Sam's team, the industry and the wider world at large have had no problem speculating about how he might defend himself as well. Bloomberg's Matt Levine paraphrased his view of a likely defense as The crypto market crashed, there was a run on the bank, and the run on the bank is what evaporated the customer's money. It was an accident, perhaps a careless accident but not theft. Certainly, in media commentary, SPF has been focused on the bank run, rather than the hole in Alameda's balance sheet as the cause of FTX's collapse. Now, of course, there are some obvious issues with that defense, particularly if witnesses establish that Alameda had effectively commandeered customer funds in contravention of the exchange's terms of service. Another plank of Sam's defense will likely be to rely on prosecutors being unable to In a New Yorker article published last month, the journalist wrote, Going back to his article, Matt Levine again sketched out a plausible way that Sam could brush off an $8 billion balance sheet hole as a careless oversight rather than willful fraud. He suggested Sam could claim he thought FTX had so much money that $8 billion was a rounding error. From Levine's back of the napkin math, at its height, FTX had somewhere approaching $100 billion in crypto assets on its books. Finally, it's also expected that Sam will seek to blame Caroline for mismanaging Alameda. The publication of excerpts from Caroline's journal was an attempt to paint her as a naive child way out of her depths, and some of Sam's leaked writings also showed a belief that Alameda had failed to hedge correctly, as if that was the main issue here. Now, one thing that's important to note is that when considering defenses, SPF does not need to prove his innocence. He only needs to introduce a shred of doubt in the minds of the jury. To convict, the 12 jurors must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Sam is guilty and reach a unanimous decision. Prosecutors often fail to get their cases over the line due to being unable to entirely convince each juror of the defendant's guilt. This can be even more of a difficulty when the case involves complicated financial crime which can be difficult to fully understand. And yet, many commentators are convinced that the case is damning. Daniel C. Silva, a former prosecutor who participated in the BitConnect case, said, Now, in terms of the latest from the bankruptcy, as the trial gets underway, the FTX bankruptcy process is entering its 10th month and has had no shortage of intrigue. The current focus has been on pursuing clawbacks from people and organizations that had been, in the estimation of the bankruptcy estate, unjustly enriched by FTX. On the very top of that list are Sam's parents, Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried. Two weeks ago, the estate sued Bankman and Fried, claiming that they had received over $26 million in gifts from FTX, including a luxury property in the Bahamas. The lawsuit alleges that Bankman was intimately involved in the operations at FTX and used his position to enrich himself. You may have seen the now -famous email where he tried to raise his salary to a million dollars by threatening to involve Sam's mother. Now, speaking of Sam's mother, Barbara Fried is alleged to have directed political donation efforts at FTX. This instructing included Sam on how to structure donations to avoid donation limits. She is also alleged to have knowledge of loans made to FTX executives, which were then used to fund election campaigns. All in all, the lawsuit alleged that the pair, quote, Now, for their part, Sam's parents immediately hit back at the lawsuit through lawyers saying, A last note on the bankruptcy, while current FTX CEO John J. Wray has no doubt been cooperating with prosecutors in providing internal documents, he is not currently expected to testify as a witness. Now, in terms of the latest trial procedural stuff and timeline, today was technically the first day of the trial with jury selection the goal. Both sides have alleged the other is attempting to bias the jury pool. The DOJ claimed that Sam's questions for the jury about effective altruism, political donations and ADHD are intended to paint him in a sympathetic light. In particular, prosecutors are concerned that asking about charitable and political donations could improperly introduce the idea that Sam's actions were justified outside of evidence. The defense, meanwhile, have complained that the DOJ are treating Sam's fraud as an established fact in their jury questioning by omitting the word allegedly. They also claim a question about being stopped or questioned by the police is intended to racially filter the jury in a manner irrelevant to the case. Last week, as I intimated before, SPF placed a last minute appeal to be released from jail for the duration of the trial. Sam's team claimed that his incarceration would be an unreasonable barrier to adequately preparing for each day's hearing. Unfortunately for him, the judge found this argument insufficiently convincing and stated that they consider Sam to be a flight risk. They said, Sam was granted some concessions to be allowed to meet with his lawyers early at the courthouse each day, as well as during jail visiting on off days. Now, while a decision is yet to be made on exactly how Sam can introduce the concept that he relied on the advice of lawyers, limits were placed on what can be said during the defense's opening arguments. Specifically, Sam's lawyers have been prohibited from mentioning any advice of counsel arguments while presenting their case. The judge ruled that this argument may confuse or prejudice a jury when presented without specifics and evidence. The trial is currently scheduled to take six weeks. Jury selection is expected to be completed by the end of today's hearing, although before I was recording this, there were some indications that it might go into tomorrow morning as well. In either case, tomorrow we will likely see the beginnings of opening arguments. After that, the prosecution will present its case and call its witnesses. The DOJ has estimated their case will take four to five weeks. The defense will then have an opportunity to present their case, which they have estimated will be much shorter, taking around a week and a half. Now, the defense is not compelled to present a case and can simply choose not to if they are confident the charges have not been proven. We don't yet have any indication of whether SPF will speak in his own defense. Traditional legal strategy suggests that defendants should never take to the witness stand to avoid giving prosecutors an opportunity to cross -examine them. However, this is no ordinary trial and SPF is no ordinary defendant. Judging from how extensively Sam has defended himself in the media, I would not be surprised if his lawyers have a tough time keeping him out of the witness box. Hearings will be held four days a week with a short break after three weeks. If the trial takes longer than six weeks, it will be extended, but the consensus seems to be that it will be all over by Thanksgiving. And won't that be something to be thankful for? Now, even if Sam escapes a guilty verdict, his legal troubles will continue well into next year. The DOJ will present additional charges related to bribery of Chinese officials, as well as political donation violations during a second criminal trial, which is scheduled for March. Sam will also face civil lawsuits from the SEC and the CFTC after the first criminal trial is concluded. Beyond that, there's still the possibilities of lawsuits from the FTX bankruptcy estate, as well as from former customers and investors. So my friends, that is the lay of the land. That is what we are going into. Like I said at the top, for me, the most interesting thing, the thing that I will be watching most closely, is actually the meta -narrative analysis around this. I want to know how much, especially mainstream media looks at this and treats this like what it is, which is Sam Bankman -Fried going on trial, versus what I fear it might become, which is the entire crypto industry being put on trial. But in any event, this truly is a scenario where the only way out is through. So get on your boots, friends, because we are getting into the muck. Until next time, be safe and take care of each other. Peace.
A highlight from News Block: Shocking Lawsuit Against SBF Parents, UAW Strike, Anti-Bitcoin Senator Indicted, Housing Crisis Ahead?
"Welcome to the CoinStories news block. I'm Natalie Brunell, and in the span of just 10 minutes, roughly the same time it takes to mine a new Bitcoin block, I'll provide you with concise, insightful updates on Bitcoin and the global financial landscape so you're well informed on the week's top stories. Everything you need to know, in one place, in one block. Let's go. Let's begin this block with shocking new information coming from the FTX bankruptcy. In a court filing last week, managers of the bankrupt FTX estate sued SPF's parents, Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, who happen to both be renowned legal and ethics scholars and professors at Stanford Law School. The lawsuit alleges that millions of dollars were fraudulently transferred to SPF's parents from FTX Group, and lawyers want to claw those funds back. The filing describes in detail how SPF's parents were more deeply involved with FTX than many people suspected, with SPF's dad routinely calling it a, quote, family business. The filing says Bankman and Fried exploited their access and influence within the FTX enterprise to enrich themselves. It alleges SPF's dad acted as a de facto manager, hand -selecting recipients of charitable contributions, directing hundreds of millions of dollars in loans, hiring and firing employees, and overseeing key investments for FTX. In one exchange, he was upset about his $200 ,000 a year salary and told his son he needed it to be a million a year, even saying, quote, gee, son, I don't know what to say here. This is the first I heard of the 200k a year salary, putting Barbara on this. SPF's father appears to have been richly rewarded for helping to perpetuate the FTX fraud. He flew in private jets, received millions of dollars in cash and real estate, and even appeared in a Super Bowl commercial. He also used his insider status and wealth to influence his circles, including his employer, Stanford University, and various political groups. Stanford has said it will be returning millions of dollars worth of, quote, gifts it received from FTX. Among the most shocking revelations was that it appears Joseph Bankman understood that FTX was nearing insolvency and transferred funds into assets like primary residences so they would be protected in the event of bankruptcy. This included transferring a $16 .4 million luxury property in the Bahamas to himself and his wife. Now, SPF's mother, Barbara Fried, was also deeply intertwined with the FTX scheme. She was the beneficiary of cash and properties and appears to have been the mastermind behind the illegal political donations. Barbara Fried was described as SPF's primary political advisor and allegedly pressured FTX insiders to, quote, unlawfully avoid federal campaign finance law. She pushed FTX employees to use straw donors, which are people who illegally use another person's money to make a political donation in their own name. And lawyers say more than $100 million was stolen from FTX customers to make political donations, making FTX the second largest donor organization behind George Soros Fund management. Although SPF's parents have not been formally charged with anything yet, this lawsuit provides shocking evidence of their involvement in the crypto criminal enterprise. Let's turn now to Robert Menendez, the senior Democratic senator from New Jersey who has been indicted on bribery charges. According to the indictment, Bob and his wife accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bribes in cash, gold bars, mortgage payments and a Mercedes Benz convertible. What makes this particular bribery case notable in the crypto community is that Senator Menendez has been a long time outspoken critic of Bitcoin. Specifically, he has voiced concerns about corruption in Bitcoin and its use in illicit activities. In 2017, the senator wrote a letter stating that the, quote, anonymous nature of Bitcoin transactions makes it an ideal choice for criminals. Menendez was also one of the three co -sponsors of the Accountability for Cryptocurrency in El Salvador Act, which sought to, quote, mitigate risks of El Salvador's adoption of Bitcoin. When it comes to Bitcoin critics in Congress, it's really best to focus on what they do, not what they say. Senator Menendez's charges are just the latest development that supports a 2021 report from former acting director of the CIA, Michael Morrell, who found that criminal activity that takes place using Bitcoin is negligible compared to what transpires within the traditional financial system. This news only further speaks to the corruption present in our political system today and how criminals still prefer good old cash over Bitcoin for illicit activities. Now, speaking of Congress, the clock is ticking to pass yet another new funding bill to prevent a government shutdown. Congress has until October 1st to pass new funding legislation, but Republicans and Democrats are not even close to making a deal. So how could all of this impact the economy? Well, under a government shutdown, hundreds of thousands of federal employees would be sent home without pay. Also, government services like the court system, national parks and economic data reporting institutions would be suspended. According to The Wall Street Journal, government spending makes up about a quarter of U .S. GDP, so a sudden slowdown in spending can impact the economy significantly. But get this, in the event of a government shutdown, those workers won't be paid. But the Pentagon has announced that Ukraine operations would be exempt from any potential shutdown and will go forth fully funded. And that is making a lot of people very upset out there.
A highlight from UNCHAINED: Why FTX Might Try to Claw Back Funds From Retail Customers
"Thanks for listening to Unchained, your no -hype resource for all things crypto, on the CoinDesk podcast network. You can also listen to the episodes on the Unchained feed earlier if you subscribe there. Plus check out all our content on our website, unchainedcrypto .com. These are all fraudulent transfers, potentially while the debtor was insolvent, potentially while it was coming to lift funds, so clearly all that money has to come back. I think that's pretty easy. The question is, like, what's it worth now and who can actually pay it back? With Toku, you get unmatched legal and tax tech support to grant and administer your global team's tokens. Make it simple today with Toku. Today's episode is brought to you by Overtime Markets, your premier Web3 sportsbook. The innovative protocol is changing the game one match at a time. Powered by Thales, explore more at OvertimeMarkets .xyz. Arbitrum's leading Layer 2 scaling solution offers you ultra -cheap and lightning -fast transactions, all with security rooted on Ethereum. Visit arbitrum .io today. With the Crypto .com app, you can buy, trade and spend crypto in one place. Download and get $25 with the code LORA. Link in the description. Today's guest is Thomas Brazile, founder of 117 Partners. Welcome, Thomas. Hey, Laura. Good to see you again. This week, FTX sued Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, the parents of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman Fried. Alleging that Bankman was intimately involved in a number of the allegedly fraudulent schemes, such as silencing someone who threatened to expose the alleged FTX fraud, the purchase of property in the Bahamas, Barbara Fried encouraged the use of strong donors as campaign finance laws, or allegedly, and both were accused generally of either knowing or ignoring the red flags that FTX was insolvent. Was this development surprising or expected? Thanks for having me on, Laura. Good to see you, as always. Was it surprising? No, I don't think it was that surprising. I think what was in the lawsuits in bankruptcy referred to as adversary proceeding, but what was seen in the adversary proceeding was probably a bit shocking, the actual details, but I think people knew that they were pretty involved. I think that was some of the heat they were getting post him getting a criminal complaint against him was that, why is he hanging out with his parents? Weren't they involved in a lot of parts of the business and people were saying things like that. I don't think it's that unexpected. People, I think, long knew that there were some real estate transactions where they were gifted or given some certain real estate in the Bahamas, but to see it all laid out in the complaint or I should say in the adversary proceeding was interesting. Which items in particular really struck you? I guess just the involvement in the actual day -to -day stuff. I mean, if you come from a corporate background or were a tax lawyer, which his dad, I guess, was and is, that there wasn't more, I don't know, structure to the organization. I mean, the dichotomy between what people thought pre -petition, what John Ray sort of said post -petition and now some of the revelations coming out about the pre -petition activity. I mean, it's just kind of amazing to think about people that might have been a more corporate background and saying like, if the business was so profitable, why were you cutting corners? To be fair to these guys, like in the light of day, sunlight of bankruptcy court, which as people in bankruptcy say, like my parents would say, the last place you want to be as a criminal is in bankruptcy court because there's so much sunlight and everything. Everything gets scrutinized. To be fair to people, sometimes the stuff gets overly scrutinized and they cherry pick stuff that went on. But it seems pretty damning, some of the stuff and there's, let's see what the responses will be. I mean, it's good for the estate and it's good for creditors because I'm sure they want to see sort of retribution. But in terms of recoveries, I don't think it's going to be incredibly meaningful, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 million dollars. I mean, that's, I don't know, maybe two months of bankruptcy fees. And so, earlier when we were talking about like how some of the things are particularly damning, like if you were to kind of say, FTX will win in court for these reasons, like which were the particular acts that you think probably will put things over the edge? Oh yeah. I think almost all the stuff though, the win on the merits of the fraudulent conveyance. I mean, these are all fraudulent transfers potentially while the debtor was insolvent, potentially while it was coming with funds, so clearly all that money has to come back. I think that's pretty easy. The question is like, what's it worth now and who can actually pay it back? Like if money was given to a charity, can you actually go and get it back? Like meaning, is it there? Has it been spent kind of stuff? And you can only squeeze whatever rocked so hard. So the question will be, what is the real estate in the Bahamas worth? The 10 million bucks or whatever that was gifted to them, where did that money end up going? Can they trace it? So, these things cost money to do and then the question is like, how much of an effort do you want to make? And of course, all that can be stopped by a criminal investigation, which there isn't a complaint, but clearly some of the activity could be considered criminal. And I think, I won't pretend to be a criminal lawyer or a lawyer at all, but when you're bringing lawsuits, I mean, basically these are kind of like preponderance of evidence standards versus like higher standards that you might have for criminal complaints. So, it's easier for John Ray to like stitch together some stuff they know and slap an AP and sue these guys, but it's a little harder from a criminal side. But all of it, just facially, I mean, of course, as my lawyer likes to tell me, like, facts matter Thomas. So, if more discovery happens than they take discovery, we'll see. But on the face of it, I mean, it looks pretty obvious that it's sort of slam dunk. Just the question is what they'll actually be able to recover. Yeah, I think one of the ones that stuck out at me, simply because I could very easily imagine myself in a similar position with my own parents and I could just picture what my mother would say. And it was when they purchased the Bahamas property and everything was just getting billed or allegedly in the complaint to FTX. And the parents didn't even make an attempt to pay to furnish their home themselves. And I could just imagine if something similar was happening with my mother, she would be like, wait, is this okay that we're doing this? Like, you know, she would have so many questions about the money and like what was okay, what was kosher, what was not. Like, I could just practically hear her in my head. But at least, you know, from what the complaint described, it didn't feel at all like the parents had any of those qualms. So that was... Yeah, it wasn't 100 % owner of FTX. So it is bizarre that those red flags wouldn't have been, or people wouldn't have been like, hey, I know that you think this is okay, but I don't. Like someone would have said something, maybe they thought it was a drop in the ocean, but if FTX was so wildly profitable and Alameda was so wildly profitable, they didn't need to cut in corners and have them picking up the checks. I mean, it would have been easy for Sam to just be like, no, I'm picking this up personally or something. Well, one thing that I also noticed is that the document hedges its language saying things like, quote, Banquin and Freed either knew or ignored bright red flags revealing that SPF and other insiders were orchestrating the scheme. And again, you know, I saw later again, it was like, they either knew or blatantly ignored. So, yes. Right. That's because the standard for these civil cases is much lower. You know, like if you were trying to criminally try them, you'd have to like really show that they knew because they're going to say they didn't know, they didn't know, right. But the standard for like breach of fiduciary duty or, you know, kind of unjust enrichment, it's a much lower standard. All you have to basically show is a reasonable person should have known, you know. Oh, oh, I see. Yeah. So, that's why they keep saying that. So, you're saying – So, basically, they don't know whether or not they knew, but it doesn't matter for what they're trying to do. Is that what you're saying? I will respectfully say that I'm not a lawyer, but a stress investor and what people usually say – is the standard is usually what a reasonable person should have known, steps a reasonable person should have taken, best practices that a board should have taken. So, like a board of directors, if somebody runs off with money in a company, they don't have to necessarily show that they knew the person stole the money, but did they take any steps a reasonable person would have taken to like verify that the money was there or that the person wasn't absconding with money or whatever. So, it's this reasonable person standard that I think you trigger under Delaware and there are a lot of jurisdictions for breach of fiduciary duty or breach of loyalty, duty of care that you have, mainly in the boardroom, but also I think as a C -suite executive and it sounds like he was sort of melding between the two. So, basically, yeah, they're just trying to meet that standard for their purposes. They don't need to go beyond. And Barbara Fried, you know, also – so, as far as I understand from reading this, you know, Sam Pinkman was definitely involved more in the day -to -day, you know, he was often listed with FTX management. He could make executive decisions on his own at one point saying, oh, I'm just going to make this decision without Sam, like we don't need to involve him, that kind of thing. So, Barbara Fried was not involved at that level. However, it did say that she was a key influence on the campaign donations and I wondered what your takeaway was in that regard in terms of, you know, her involvement there. campaign finance fraud. Yeah, I don't have too much to say other than it's just bizarre that, you know, so many corners were cut in regards to stuff. I don't have a real view on – again, it's like it helps them build a story that they can, you know, just slam dunk, take back any money that was taken out of the estate at any point in the last couple of years by Barbara and the husband. But I don't think that – I don't have a real view on that. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And as far as I understand, I don't think they're married, they're domestic partners. Just to clarify, yeah. All right. So, in a moment, we're going to talk about what the consequences could be after, you know, from this document. But first, a quick word from the sponsors who make this show possible. Toku makes managing global token compensation and incentive awards simple. Are you designing your token compensation plan and grant templates with multiple law firms? Are you managing cliffs, vesting and taxable events in a spreadsheet? Are you distributing tokens to your team manually? With Toku, you get unmatched legal and tax tech support to grant and administer your global team's tokens. Easy -to -use token grant award templates, vesting tracking via online dashboard, tax withholding integration with payroll, automated distributions, great employee experience. Make it simple with Toku. Learn more at toku .com slash unchained.
A highlight from Were SBF's parents in on it? Follow the Money
"Welcome back, everyone. I am Cass Pianci, and I'm joined as usual by my partner in crime, not of the criminal sort, Bennett Tomlin. How are you today? I'm doing well. How are you, Cass? I'm doing good. It's been busy. It's been a very busy week for both of us. But today's episode is going to be about SPF's parents, the Bankmans and the Freeds, and their what appears to be increasingly important role that they each played in the criminal elements of FTX and Alameda Research. They called it a family business. They accepted incredibly large salaries. His father was getting a million dollars after requesting it because he was only getting 250 ,000 before. Mom pushed and tried to ensure that any money getting sent to the charity arm of the company had two steps of separation, two degrees of separation. And just really shady, weird stuff going on over there with the Bankmans and the Freeds. But those are kind of vague descriptions of what's going on. Bennett, why don't you walk us through some of the seriously criminal elements and what is happening? There is a decent amount of allegations contained in this lawsuit from the FTX debtors in possession against Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried that at a high level alleges that they were involved in specific aspects of the business and were closely connected to various alleged criminal acts and criminal acts people have pled guilty to. Starting with Joseph Bankman, he was involved with Alameda Research as early as 2018, which is when it was founded, and stayed involved throughout the entire time. The first several years, this appears to have been relatively informal. He directed FTX towards their first law firm, suggested their first accounting firm, was involved in consultations for hiring of certain executives and things like that. But none of this was documented in any kind of formal way. Eventually, in January 2021, he decides that there should be some kind of piece of paper that describes his relationship with these entities. And so he creates a document that describes his work for Alameda Research and FTX and FTX US, saying he's doing a variety of pro bono legal work and consulting work for these entities. What's interesting, of course, is that he was the signatory for the FTX entities and for himself on this entity. Really has kind of vibes of that loan agreement between Bitfinex and Tether years ago, where JLVDV and Juan Carlo was signing for both entities. And so that was one moment that really struck me as I was going through that is that he felt the need to, after providing advice for several years, finally in 2021 documents it and says he's providing this pro bono legal advice. This did not stay pro bono for very long. Later in 2021, he would take a leave of absence from Stanford University. And after he took this leave of absence, he allegedly told an FTX US employee, I'm no longer getting paid by Stanford because I'm on leave, so you should have me on salary starting December 1st. In December 2021, this is when he finally entered into a formal employment agreement with FTX US, where his nominal title was Senior Advisor to the FTX Foundation. You said it was $250 ,000. It was actually $200 ,000 a year, plus bonuses he was supposed to be getting paid. And this is where we get to the fun part that you made an allusion to before. He went to FTX's head of administration after signing this employment agreement that clearly said $200 ,000, told this person that he was supposed to be getting $1 million a year starting in December, and then he sends an email over to Sam Bankmanfried, his son, that says, and I quote, Gee, Sam, I don't know what to say here. This is the first I've heard of the $200 ,000 a year salary putting Barbara on this, meaning he cc'd in Sam Bankmanfried's mother and his domestic partner to help him deal with this contract negotiations that happened after he signed that contract. And it worked. It worked. Within two weeks, Bankman and Fried were gifted $10 million in funds originating from Alameda. Within three months, they ended up getting their $16 million mansion in the Bahamas funded entirely by FTX. And over the period after they got that mansion, they were able to expense something like $90 ,000 in various other expenses. And before he signed that contract agreement in December 2021, I do want to make clear he was also provided with an option to purchase shares of FTX US and FTX trading in November 2021. Before he was even employed with FTX, he was getting large options of shares. So yeah, I think that kind of is a good initial overview and we can get into some of the details he was also involved in, but they were receiving a lot of this type of monetary compensation. Yeah, well, I want to specifically bring up here some things that really made a red flag go off for me were, for instance, how they were keen to keep the residencies, the properties that they were acquiring with these gifted funds and all this money that they were essentially taking from customers, to be clear on that, that they wanted to ensure that that money in those properties would be shielded from a bankruptcy. And I'm just wondering, like, why, if they're so confident in this business, if they're so confident in their son, if they're so sure this is the future of finance, and I get it, you want to shield your personal property from a bankruptcy, but you just got gifted $10 million. You have to know this isn't exactly personal property, right? Like, you have to know your son is giving this to you. Your son is making money from the company. How is he making all of this money? You haven't really nailed that down yet. And you still are just letting this all transpire. Nobody was asking any questions is kind of what I'm getting to. But the questions they were asking were about, like, ensuring that they were shielded from any problems in the future. Yeah. And we should clarify the timeline a little bit here. There's a 2021 email exchange where FTX's general counsel wants to set up a meeting with their law firm to discuss how assets, including primary residence, can be structured to be bankruptcy remote. And Bankman quickly kind of responds in this email chain the next day and says it would be great, all else equal, if we could have the founders put money into property in the Bahamas and sent them a link to a description of an offshore trust structure in the Bahamas. He then discusses this with a lawyer in the Bahamas, another Stanford law professor, and his brother -in -law, and then ends up saying something we might use when we buy property in the Bahamas. And the reason I'm belaboring this point is because it happens, I think, about a year before they actually end up getting the house. And then, five months before they get the house, there's another thing that happens, and that's that they apply for residency in the Bahamas, permanent residency in the Bahamas. In order for them to get that, there's a $15 ,000 fee. That's also paid by FTX. And so I think what that kind of shows is this kind of series of planning that went into them eventually getting this mansion. They started discussing how to structure this about a year before, and I don't think they ended up using those trusts, at least not at the time of bankruptcy. They had already gotten their residency months before they got the property, and then they got the property. They wanted to benefit from this. There's no doubt about that. I mean, there is no doubt. I just want to be clear, and we're going to link to the very thorough protest article that goes over all of this, but it is very obvious. I think before we get to the crux of this, I first want to delve into this a little bit more. So Stanford yesterday decided that they were going to return all of the donated funds from this family, which amounted to $5 .5 million, which is a lot. I mean, I know that they get a shit, a metric shit ton of cash every year, but the idea that they're getting $5 .5 million in a single year from one family, one company, you know, essentially one family. That's how you get your name on a building and stuff like that. So they were donating a ton of money to this educational institution. All I want to say is that I think Stanford is disgusting. I think we see this in a bunch of these higher education, these private institutions, probably equally common in great public universities as well, but the ones that we hear about are like MIT or Harvard or Stanford accepting money from Jeffrey Epstein or accepting money from these guys, and then, oh, okay, you're returning it. Great. Well, you know why you're returning it? Because you got caught. That's why you're returning it. You're not returning it because you thought it was the right thing to do. Now that it's all coming out in these court documents, Stanford's giving the money back. They didn't do it one minute before that happened, though. Isn't that interesting? And I, you know, I think you should get into kind of the details of those donations, which there were many over this period, but like, oh, what a nasty, nasty way for a university to operate. I think the elite private colleges are at a special risk for kind of this because so much of their, like, existing structure is based around taking in cash and converting it to some vague elite authority. Speaking specifically about the donations from FTX to Stanford that appear to have been directed by Joseph Bankman, there was one that came from Paperbird directly to Stanford University. And this one was interesting because there was a lot of discussion about which entity to use. And what Bankman ends up saying is that he thought it should come from Paperbird, which was one of the entities that Sam Bankman -Fried owned that held most of the stock for FTX that investors were buying into. The corporate structure of FTX is a mind fuck. But this shows Bankman was aware of parts of the mind fuck. He says Paperbird can use the deduction. And when he discusses alternatives, he says we can have another entity loan Paperbird money, but that requires some paperwork. Eventually they get it all sorted out. FTX transfers money to Paperbird into a newly set up bank account, which immediately sends that money on to Stanford. There was another four million dollar donation to a Stanford fund for pandemic preparedness that he described as pretty much a no brainer. Bitcoin were transferred from Alameda Research's FTX account eventually. There was another series of donations where it was proposed that they give 1 .5 million from the FTX Foundation to Stanford College. However, the initial 500 ,000 for this came from an Alameda Research bank account, and the second 500 ,000 came from an FTX US bank account. There was another donation they did for a Stanford blockchain conference so they could sponsor it. That one was only 10k. But again, it kind of points towards how Bankman saw these entities as interchangeable. He said 10k is so little it doesn't really matter. So if we think that having FTX US is easier or safer for some reason, we should just do that. And what's most interesting is you talked about your name on a building. And there was a Stanford University employee who provided comment as part of this lawsuit. And this Stanford University employee apparently says that internally in Stanford, these donations were categorized as directed by the Bankman -Frieds. And like when they specifically got the big $4 million pandemic preparedness donation from Alameda, this person even reached out, should this one be categorized like the rest as from you all? Or is this one somehow different? And so yeah, I think that those donations kind of point towards how they were specifically using these commingled customer and client funds from across all these different entities in this self -promotional activity of giving these donations. Yep, there's more to where this money went, how much was spent, why they were in control of this. But I think the question that everybody wants to ask and is wondering about is how are they not being criminally charged with anything yet? And will they? I think we should hold off on that question for just a moment, because I want to talk about how Joseph Bankman also made sure other people he was related to and friends with got paid while he was in this position, because I think that's kind of fun. They talk about one example where he got a Stanford law student a free trip to the French Grand Prix tickets to the race so they could go and visit that. But I think the more interesting one was a hackathon that they had planned that was run by his sister. Bankman freed Sam's aunt. They hired her at a rate of $14 ,000 a month to prepare the FTX million -dollar hackathon and crypto summit held at the Miami Heat Arena, which was the one they put their name on briefly. They spent a total of $2 .3 million on this event, which was attended by 1 ,200 people. They were spending crazy amounts. They said she was authorized to spend like without a budget, whatever it was needed to get this event done. There was so much of this kind of like self -enrichment here that we'll get to your question as to how are they not being criminally charged. That's just grift. Yeah, obviously. The other person we need to talk about, of course, is Barbara. Barbara Freed, Sam Bankman Freed's mother. In her specific role, she, as you alluded to at the very beginning of this episode, described herself as her son's partner in crime of the non -criminal sort. And Sam made sure to sing her praises to his team, making known to her that he intended to rely on her direction regarding who to give to, how much to give to, and how it should be disclosed and told them that it would be good for them to follow her advice as well. And what seems really interesting is she seemed to have a great deal of control. The lawsuit even alleges she was able to unilaterally commit funds of Sam Bankman Freed's to her political action committee, Mind the Gap, meaning without Sam's authorization, she was able to take Sam's money donated in Sam's name to her political action committee, which is a great deal of trust. And even inside her own committee, when she had to talk about some of these donations, she would say things like, I don't know exactly what interconnected entity he sent the money from, but the business is real and revenue -generating, which again, I think, points towards kind of the interchangeability of these entities for these folks. What I think really gets interesting is Nishad Singh, who has already pled guilty for conspiracy to defraud the federal election committee, as well as a variety of other conspiracy charges. He was one of the people who appears to have served as effectively a straw -man donor for Sam Bankman Freed, and was advised in this process by Barbara Freed, Sam's mother. At one point when they were discussing donations to her organization Mind the Gap, and she suggested that, now that my connection to Sam is publicly known, because we don't want to create the impression that funding MTG is a family affair, as opposed to a collective effort by many people, including some mystery guy Nishad Singh, which is when she was suggesting that on their end, they would prefer if his name was the one that was donating to Mind the Gap instead of Sam Bankman Freed's. And similarly, she was worried about a lot of their political donations. There's a really telling one, where she's warning him in an email, And again, later, just the last one to really put kind of a cherry on top of her seeming knowledge of some of the criminal acts that Nishad Singh has pled guilty to. She said, And I think this, as well as some of the more specific tax advice that Bankman Freed was giving on FTX their specific finances and stuff like that, point towards potential knowledge of criminal acts. I tweeted out shortly after I read through this lawsuit, or as I was about halfway through reading this lawsuit, if I'm being honest, And as you alluded to previously, that is kind of what this feels like. It feels like these two law professors, who should have known better, had high -level knowledge of things that people have already pled guilty to, and were deeply involved in the business. Bankman specifically was even mentioned on an internal document as a member of the management of FTXUS, along with only a few other names. They had knowledge, they were inside the organization, and they had some amount of presence. One last thing that I think really hammers that home. When we went to consensus, and we talked about this in our episode that we did after that, Anthony Scaramucci was talking about his experiences in the lead -up to and aftermath of the FTX collapse. And one thing he said that seemed to be corroborated in the lawsuit is that Bankman was involved in them attempting to get the emergency funding. And as we said, and we shared the audio clip of Scaramucci saying it, Bankman apparently told Scaramucci, Anthony or intimated to him, that there was an asset liability mismatch at FTX. What happened to me is I was actually speaking in Sarasota, Florida. There was rumblings that day, I think it was November the 6th or something like that, or 7th. The Monday was the 7th. And then I got back to New York and I spoke to Sam's dad about the problem, and it was intimated to me that it was an asset liability mismatch, that they were leading redemptions and there were assets available, but they weren't necessarily liquid, and they needed time to get the liquidity, and they were looking for some rescue plans. And so at that time, I was a good citizen and a partner in the business. In fact, they owned a piece of my business. I was certainly trying to help them on their fundraising round.
A highlight from Why FTX Might Try to Claw Back Funds From Retail Customers- Ep. 547
"I mean, these are all fraudulent transfers, potentially while the debtor was insolvent, potentially while it was coming to lift funds, so clearly all that money has to come back. I think that's pretty easy. The question is like, what's it worth now and who can actually pay it back? Hi, everyone. Welcome to Unchained, your no -hype resource for all things crypto. I'm your host, Laura Shin, author of The Cryptopians. I started covering crypto eight years ago and as a senior editor at Forbes was the first mainstream media reporter to cover cryptocurrency full time. This is the September 22nd, 2023 episode of Unchained. Toku makes implementing global token compensation and incentive awards simple. With Toku, you get unmatched legal and tax tech support to grant and administer your global team's tokens. Make it simple today with Toku. Today's episode is brought to you by Overtime Markets, your premier Web3 sportsbook. The innovative protocol is changing the game one match at a time. Powered by Thales, explore more at OvertimeMarkets .xyz. Arbitrum's leading Layer 2 scaling solution offers you ultra -cheap and lightning -fast transactions, all with security rooted on Ethereum. Visit arbitrum .io today. With the Crypto .com app, you can buy, trade and spend crypto in one place. Download and get $25 with the code LAURA. Link in the description. Today's guest is Thomas Brazile, founder of 117 Partners. Welcome, Thomas. Hey, Laura. Good to see you again. This week, FTX sued Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, the parents of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman Fried, alleging that Bankman was intimately involved in a number of the allegedly fraudulent schemes such as silencing someone who threatened to expose the alleged FTX fraud, the purchase of property in the Bahamas. Barbara Fried encouraged the use of strong donors as campaign finance laws, or allegedly, and both were accused generally of either knowing or ignoring the red flags that FTX was in solvent. Was this development surprising or expected? Thanks for having me on, Laura. Good to see you, as always. Was it surprising? No, I don't think it was that surprising. I think what was in the lawsuits in bankruptcy referred to as adversary proceeding, but what was seen in the adversary proceeding was probably a bit shocking, the actual details. But I think people knew that they were pretty involved. And I think that was some of the heat they were getting post him getting a criminal complaint against him was that, you know, why is he hanging out with his parents, weren't they involved in a lot of parts of the business, and people were saying things like that. I don't think it's that unexpected. People I think long knew that there were some real estate transactions where they were gifted or given some certain real estate in the Bahamas. But to see it all laid out in the complaint or I should say in the adversary proceeding was interesting, you know. And yeah. Which items in particular really struck you? I guess it's the involvement like in the actual day -to -day stuff. I mean, if you come from a corporate background or were a tax lawyer, which is that I guess was is, and that there wasn't more, I don't know, structure to the organization. I mean, you know, the dichotomy between what people thought pre -petition, what John Ray sort of said post -petition, and now some of the revelations coming out about the pre -petition activity. I mean, it's just kind of amazing to think about people that might have been a more corporate background and saying like, if the business was so profitable, why were you cutting corners? And, you know, to be fair to these guys, like in the, you know, in the light of day, sunlight of bankruptcy court, which as, you know, people in bankruptcy say, like my parents would say, like, the last place you want to be as a criminal is in bankruptcy court because there's so much sunlight and everything, you know, everything is good scrutinized. And to be fair to people, sometimes the stuff gets overly scrutinized and they cherry pick stuff that went on. But it seems pretty damning, some of the stuff and, you know, let's see what the responses will be. I mean, it's good for the estate and it's good for creditors because I'm sure they want to see, you know, sort of retribution. But in terms of recoveries, I don't think it's going to be incredibly meaningful, you know, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 million dollars. I mean, that's, I don't know, maybe two months of bankruptcy fees. And so, you know, earlier when we were talking about like how some of the things are particularly damning, like if you were to kind of say, FTX will win in court, you know, for these reasons, like which were the particular acts that you think probably will put things over the edge? Oh, yeah. I think almost all the stuff though, they'll win on the merits of the fraudulent conveyance. I mean, these are all fraudulent transfers, potentially while the debtor was insolvent, potentially while it was coming with funds, so clearly all that money has to come back. I think that's pretty easy. The question is like, what's it worth now and who can actually pay it back? Like if money was given to a charity, can you actually go and get it back? Like meaning, is it there? Has it been spent kind of stuff? And you know, you can only squeeze a, you know, whatever, rock so hard. So the question will be, you know, what is the real estate in the Bahamas worth? The 10 million bucks or whatever that was gifted to them, where did that money end up going? Can they trace it? So these things cost money to do and then the question is like, how much of an effort do you want to make? And of course, you know, all that can be stopped by a criminal investigation, which there isn't a complaint, but clearly some of the activity could be considered criminal. And I think, you know, I won't pretend to be a criminal lawyer or a lawyer at all, but when you're bringing lawsuits, I mean, basically these are kind of like preponderance of evidence standards versus like, you know, higher standards that you might have for criminal complaints. So it's easier for John Ray to like stitch together some stuff they know and slap an AP and sue these guys. But it's a little harder from the criminal side. But all of it, just on facially, I mean, of course, as my lawyer likes to tell me, like, you know, facts matter, Thomas. So it is more discovery happens than they take discovery. We'll see. But on the face of it, I mean, it looks pretty, pretty obvious that it's sort of slam dunk. Just the question is what they'll actually be able to recover. Yeah. I think one of the ones that stuck out at me simply because I could very easily imagine myself in a similar position with my own parents and I could just picture what my mother would say. And it was when they purchased the Bahamas property and everything was just getting billed or allegedly in the complaint to FTX. And the parents didn't even make an attempt to pay to furnish their home themselves. And I could just imagine something similar was happening with my mother. She would be like, wait, is this OK that we're doing this? Like, you know, she would have so many questions about the money and like what was OK, what was kosher, what was not. Like, I could just practically hear her in my head. But at least, you know, from what the complaint described, it didn't feel at all like the parents had any of those qualms. So that was. Yeah. It wasn't 100 percent owner of FTX. So it is bizarre that those red flags wouldn't have been or people wouldn't have been like, hey, I know that you think this is OK, but I don't like someone would have said something. Maybe they thought it was a drop in the ocean. But if FTX is so wildly profitable, I mean, it was so wildly profitable, they didn't need to cut in corners and have them picking up the checks. I mean, it would have been easy for Sam to just be like, no, I'm picking this up personally or something. Well, one thing that I also notice is that the document hedges its language, saying things like, quote, Banquin and Freed either knew or ignored bright red flags, revealing that SPF and other insiders were orchestrating the scheme. And again, you know, I saw later again, it was like they either knew or blatantly ignored. So right. Yes. That's because the standard for these civil cases is much lower. You know, like if you were trying to criminally try them, you'd have to like really show that they knew because they're going to say they didn't know, they didn't know, right? But the standard for breach of fiduciary duty or unjust enrichment, it's a much lower standard. All you have to basically show is a reasonable person should have known, you know? Oh, oh, I see. Yeah. So that's why I keep saying that. So you're saying, so basically they don't know whether or not they knew, but it doesn't matter for what they're trying to do. Is that what you're saying? I will respectfully say that I'm not a lawyer, but a stress investor. And what people usually say is the standard is usually what a reasonable person should have known, steps a reasonable person should have taken, best practices that a board should have taken. So like a board of director, if somebody runs off with money in a company, they don't have to necessarily show that they knew the person stole the money, but did they take any steps a reasonable person would have taken to like verify that the money was there, that the person wasn't absconding with money or whatever. So it's just this reasonable person standard that I think you trigger under Delaware and under a lot of jurisdictions for breach of fiduciary duty or breach of loyalty, duty of care that you have, mainly in the boardroom, but also I think as a C -suite executive and it sounds like he was sort of melding between the two. So basically, yeah, they're just trying to meet that standard for their purposes. They don't need to go beyond. And Barbara Fried, you know, also, so as far as I understand from reading this, you know, Sam Pinkman was definitely involved more in the day to day. You know, he was often listed with FTX management. He you know, could make executive decisions on his own at one point saying, oh, I'm just going to make this decision without Sam, like we don't need to involve him, that kind of thing. So Barbara Fried was not involved at that level. However, it did say that she was a key influence on the campaign donations. And I wondered what your takeaway was in that regard in terms of, you know, her involvement there. Campaign finance fraud? Yeah. Again, I don't have too much to say other than it's just bizarre that, you know, so many corners were cut in regards to stuff. I don't have a real view on. Again, it's like it helps them build a story that they can, you know, just slam dunk, take back any money that was taken out of the estate at any point in the last couple of years by Barbara and the husband. But I don't think that I don't have a real view on that. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And as far as I understand, I don't think they're married. They're domestic partners. Just to clarify. Yeah. All right. So in a moment, we're going to talk about what the consequences could be after, you know, from this document. But first a quick word from the sponsors who make this show possible. Toku makes managing global token compensation and incentive awards simple. Are you designing your token compensation plan and grant templates with multiple law firms? Are you managing cliffs, vesting and taxable events in a spreadsheet? Are you distributing tokens to your team manually? With Toku, you get unmatched legal and tax tech support to grant and administer your global team's tokens. Easy to use token grant award templates, vesting tracking via online dashboard, tax withholding integration with payroll, automated distributions, great employee experience. Make it simple with Toku. Learn more at toku .com slash Unchained.
A highlight from "They've Taken All My Money From Me!" | Ben Armstrong
"So is BitBoy broke. At least that's what he says. He says he's lost everything and he's asking people to help him. So listen to this. Let's listen to this together. Don't watch the video. Guys, I've been under threat of blackmail. I've been extorted for my Lamborghini. That's gone. I've been under literal death threat. That literally told my wife they were going to put me under the ground, put me under concrete over money. Literally said that I've got a recording of it as well as we have the police report. That's what said to my wife. Remember who's on it. We're all supposed to be protected here. So anyway, so BitBoy says he's broke and that he is getting death threats. We're going to talk about that. We're going to also show I'm also going to show you is asking people to help him and they are actually helping him. He's raised over $100 ,000. We're going to talk about that today. Also on the eve or on the day of the big FOMC, this is where we're at. We've got Bitcoin trading at $27 ,000. And if you look where that is, it is just, I would say, touching that resistance level that Gary spoke about. But I think that this is not the chart that everybody should be watching in crypto. In fact, let me show you another chart. And I don't think enough people are actually watching this chart over here because as long as this chart over here is going down, we can't get into a bull market. So if my predictions are going to come right for September, we talk about that chart that I just showed you. Also, what else have we got? We've got the SEC warning that they're coming after exchanges. Again, look at this. So SEC now warning that they're going to be coming after exchanges. And this time it's not the exchanges that you think they're coming from. They're not going for Binance and they're not going for Coinbase. They're going for the decentralized exchanges. And you may be in trouble if you haven't been using a VPN. So we need to talk about that. Then, I mean, if the SEC are attacking the DeFi and attacking exchanges, they are just blocking adoption in the United States. And I'm going to show you who's capitalizing in the adoption in Asia. You can see that Asia is really, really, really flying when it comes to adoption. We're going to talk about that. And then lastly, I want you to get this story. So there is a story or there is something that's come out of the FTX case. You're going to laugh when you hear this. But Sam Bankman -Fried's dad, Joseph, asked Sam for a million dollars salary and they were negotiating his salary. And what Sam said is, he said, I can't give you a million, I'll give you $200 ,000. And so you know what Joseph said? He said, I'm going to tell mommy. Now, look, if you're not Jewish, if you're not Jewish, now I can say this because I'm Jewish, but if you're not Jewish, you would never understand what it means when they say they're going to tell your mother. Because a Jewish mom can invoke so much guilt in her son that it's probably the worst thing in the whole world. So we're going to talk about Joseph, Sam, Barbara and the whole FTX debacle. And of course, we're going to talk about FOMC. So listen, we've got a huge show today and we've got Annie on the show as well because we've got to decide based on what you guys said. So look, yesterday I asked you guys whether we should join Annie's team, go alone or partner with Kyle. Those are the results. I've got Annie coming on and I think that I think Dylan's also coming on and Sheldon's coming on. OK, so there's a lot going on today, a lot going on today. So listen, let's let's get into the show. There's a hell of a lot to do here today.
A highlight from 674:JPEX Meltdown, FTXs Family Feud, and Global Regulatory Squeeze
"Dispatch, this is Mindy at ME Flow. You know, you don't have to put off fixing plumbing problems in your home anymore. I mean, you could just ignore that clogged drain. Or visit MEFlow .com to take care of your plumbing problems. ME Flow, License 271 -001 -2450. Dispatch, this is Mindy at ME Flow. Coming to terms with a dying AC unit is tough. I know, because I've been there. I tried to get my old unit to last just one more summer, and boy did I pay the price. Longest summer of my life. So trust me, if you need to replace your AC, just call ME Flow. My team is on time, total pros, and can take care of any type of AC replacement. Visit MEFlow .com to schedule your free estimate. ME Flow. One call, one company. Well, I gotta get back to it. Dispatch, this is Mindy. Go ahead. Good evening, and welcome to the Crypto Overnighter. I'm Nickademus, and I will be your host as we take a look at the latest cryptocurrency news and analysis. So sit back, relax, and let's get started. And remember, none of this is financial advice. And it's 10pm Pacific on Tuesday, September 19th, 2023. Welcome back to the Crypto Overnighter, where we have no sponsors, no hidden agendas, and no BS. But we do have the news, so let's talk about that. Tonight, we're diving into Hong Kong's JPEG scandal, which has rocked the crypto world and prompted regulatory crackdowns. Across the pond, the UK is sharpening its legal tools to seize crypto assets. But at what cost to financial freedom? In a surprising twist, FTX is suing the parents of its founder, Sam Bankman -Fried, for alleged misappropriation of funds. Meanwhile, the New York Department of Financial Services is tightening its grip on crypto firms with new guidelines. Down in Thailand, a new tax policy could discourage crypto trading by residents, and over in Malta, the blockchain island is aligning itself with new European crypto regulations. Since around the beginning of the year, we started bringing stories about Hong Kong's re -emergence into the world of crypto. We watched China turn a blind eye as Hong Kong politicians and officials appeared to soften their stance against crypto. We've watched as policies have been announced and licenses granted. Sadly, it seems Hong Kong's brand new crypto landscape is in turmoil thanks to the JPEG scandal. The Hong Kong police have arrested eight individuals in connection with the alleged fraud. The police received 1 ,641 complaints involving assets around HK $1 .19 billion. The authorities also seized cash, jewelry, computers, and phones worth about HK $8 million. Additionally, HK $15 million in relevant bank accounts were frozen, along with properties worth about HK $44 million. Hong Kong lawmaker Duncan Chu stated that the city is running its second round of consultation for stablecoin issuance guidelines. He hopes that regulatory guidelines for stablecoin issuers will be released by the middle of next year. This comes as Hong Kong aims to develop itself into a Web3 hub. In June, Hong Kong officially started its crypto licensing regime, allowing licensed exchanges to offer crypto trading services. The JPEG scandal is a glaring example of why regulation is both a necessity and a double -edged sword in the world of crypto. Hong Kong, unlike its hulking big brother China, has been more welcoming to crypto firms. Yet, the JPEG case shows that this openness can be exploited, and the government's response? Tighten the news. Hong Kong's chief executive announced increased efforts to inform investors to only use platforms with Securities and Futures Commission licenses. The JPEG case exposed the vulnerabilities in Hong Kong's crypto market, and it's clear that the government is now in damage control mode. The question is, will this lead to overregulation, thereby stifling innovation, or will it strike a balance, ensuring both growth and security? Either way, it's a critical moment for crypto in Hong Kong, and by extension for the global crypto community. Now before we move on, remember if you find this content valuable, hit that follow button and turn on notifications. Now from Hong Kong's regulatory puzzle, we hop over to the UK. The British are writing new laws that could redefine your notion of financial freedom. Is this an evolution or a step back? Let's find out. The UK is ramping up its efforts to combat crypto -related crimes. A new bill, known as the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill, is set to be enacted later this year. This legislation aims to empower local authorities with the ability to freeze and seize crypto assets tied to criminal activities more efficiently. The bill removes the need for an arrest or conviction before assets can be frozen. This is a significant change from the current laws. The bill also introduces new civil forfeiture powers. These allow assets to be seized even if a person is not convicted of a criminal offense. This is particularly useful in cases where the subject of the investigation is unlikely to face justice in the UK. The UK plans to spend $124 million to fight economic crimes, a 50 % increase compared to 2020. The bill has moved to its final stages in parliament and is awaiting final approval. Okay, where do I begin? The UK's new bill is a double -edged sword. On the one hand, it's a powerful tool for law enforcement. It can prevent criminals from moving their assets offshore before they're seized. But on the flip side, this could be a slippery slope towards more centralized control over crypto assets. The bill's broad powers could potentially be misused, leading to unjust seizures. Moreover, the UK's aggressive stance might push crypto activities to jurisdictions with lax regulations. This could make it even more challenging for global authorities to track illicit activities. The bill also raises questions about financial privacy. How much power should a government have to freeze and seize assets without a conviction? The UK's move is a clear signal that governments are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies. While the bill aims to fight economic crimes, it also sets a precedent that could be followed by other countries. This could lead to a global tightening of regulations around cryptocurrencies, which are something we should all be wary of. How you think seizing crypto assets without a conviction is shocking? Hold your horses. FTX is suing the parents of its founder. You heard that right. It's a family feud worth millions, and it raises some dark questions about ethics in the crypto world. Don't go anywhere. So that's gotta be a rough day. The day the company you founded sues the very people who gave you life. But that's what's happening as FTX is suing the parents of its founder, Sam Bankman Fried. The lawsuit aims to recover millions in quote, fraudulently transferred and misappropriated funds. Both parents, Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, are accused of exploiting their influence within FTX to enrich themselves. The lawsuit alleges that the parents received millions from FTX for personal benefit and their chosen causes. For instance, they received over $18 .9 million for a property in the Bahamas known as Blue Water. The parents are also accused of siphoning off money for lavish expenses like $1200 per night hotel stays. The filing further claims that Joseph Bankman had a unique understanding of FTX's complex corporate structure, which he used to facilitate a $10 million cash gift to himself and Fried. Barbara Fried was the point person for SPF's political contribution strategy and co -founded a political action committee that received tens of millions of dollars from FTX. The lawsuit also says that the parents were involved in FTX's business cradle to grave. Joseph Bankman is described as a de facto officer of FTX group with broad authority to make decisions. Barbara Fried was actively involved in FTX's political donations. The lawsuit against SPF's parents shines a glaring spotlight on the darker aspects of the crypto world. The case raises questions about the ethical boundaries within businesses in the crypto space. The parents, both law professors, should have known better. Their academic credentials add a veneer of legitimacy, making the allegations even more shocking. The involvement of Stanford law professors in such a scandal reminds us that even those in towers can be lured by the siren call of easy crypto riches. The lawsuit paints the picture of a family that used their intellectual prowess, not for the betterment of society, but for personal gain. It's easy to get caught up in the promise of decentralization and financial freedom, but this lawsuit shows that the same old vices, greed, corruption, and exploitation, can infiltrate even the most modern of financial systems. It's as I said at the time, the crime had nothing to do with crypto and everything to do with greed. Intrigued by the drama at FTX? Make sure to like this episode and share it. But now, let's switch gears. If you thought family drama was complex, try navigating New York's new crypto guidelines. The NYDFS is tightening the leash on crypto firms. Is it protection or overreach? We're diving in.
A highlight from 1406: Bitcoin Will Hit $4 Million, Rising 100x - Peter Thiel
"In today's show, we'll be discussing Bitcoin Bollinger Bands hitting a key zone as Bitcoin price fights for $27 ,000. In breaking news just in, Bitcoin hash rate hits a new all -time high. Let's go. And quoting Stacey Herbert, Bitcoin is pumping on the news of President Bukele's speech to the UN tonight. Can't wait. We'll also be discussing Bitcoin Adoption Fund launched by Japan's $500 billion Nomura Bank. That's right. The Bitcoin Adoption Fund will have long -only exposure to Bitcoin and be available to institutional investors. We'll also be sharing Sam Bankman, Fried's father, dragged his mother into an FTX US salary dispute. You can't make this stuff up, folks. Also in today's show, Bitcoin gearing up for a post -having parabola, according to crypto analysts. I'll be sharing his very bullish all -time high target. We'll also be discussing crypto asset market cap should explode 5 to 10x during the next bull cycle, according to investor Raoul Pal. I'll also be sharing Peter Thiel's $4 million Bitcoin price prediction, and we'll also be taking a look at the overall crypto market. All this plus so much more in today's show. Yo, what's good crypto fam? This is first and foremost, a video show. So if you want the full premium experience with video, visit my YouTube channel at cryptonewsalerts .net. Again, that's cryptonewsalerts .net. Welcome everyone just joining us. This is pod episode number 1406. I'm your host JV. And today is September 19th, 2023. We have lots to cover as usual. Massive shout out to everyone today in the live chat. Please let me know where you're tuning in from. And at the end of the show, I'm going to be reading everyone's comments out loud. Let's kick off today's show with our market watch as we do each and every day, the entire crypto market back in the green with Bitcoin back above $27 ,100 and checking out coinmarketcap .com, the current crypto market cap on the climb at $1 .08 trillion with roughly $27 billion in volume for the past 24 hours, Bitcoin dominance at 49 .2 % and the Ether dominance at 18 .4%. And checking out the top 100 crypto gainers of the past 24 hours, we have TonCoin leading the pack up 5%, trading at $2 .57, followed by GMX up about 5%, trading just under 36 bucks, followed by Conflux up 4%, trading at $0 .12. And checking out the top 100 crypto gainers of the past week, virtually 95 out of the top 100 cryptos are in the green. Some of the top gainers include GMX, GRT, as well as CRV and NEO. And checking out the crypto greed and fear index, we're currently rated at 46 in fear, same as 37 in fear. So there you have it. How many of you are pretty stoked for this most recent pump? And how many of you agree with Stacey Herbert that this pump is due to Bukele's speech scheduled for this evening? Let me know, fam. And now let's dive into today's Bitcoin technical analysis. Check out the charts and what's popping with the king crypto. Bitcoin could see fresh upside volatility as the price action and the strength revisits a key level according to a classic metric. In a new post, John Bollinger, creator of the Bollinger Bands volatility indicator, says Bitcoin was positioned for a breakout decision. That's right. After hitting new September highs the day prior, Bitcoin has been challenging resistance levels out of reach since mid -August, according to data from Cointelegraph and TradingView. Now for Bollinger, the signs for Bitcoin are encouraging. Bollinger Bands use a standard deviation around the simple moving average to determine both the likely price ranges and volatility. And as Michael Saylor once said, volatility equals life force. Now, currently Bitcoin is putting in daily candles that touch the upper band. And when this happens, it can signal an imminent reversal back to the center band, or conversely, an inbound fit of upside volatility. Now narrow Bollinger Bands seen on Bitcoin recently lend weight to hopes that the latter scenario will now play out, quitting him here. And then there is the first tag of the upper Bollinger Band. After the new set of controlling bars were established at the lower band, he commented alongside this chart, the question is now, can we walk up to the upper band or is it too early to answer? What are your thoughts, chat? Let me know in the comments below. Now Bollinger characterizes the current mood among seasoned Bitcoin traders and analysts on the short -term timeframes. Despite the strength seen this week, caution abounds as various trend lines previously acting as support remain above the spot price. Now discussing the situation, we had on -chain monitoring resource, material indicators share the following. We have heavy technical resistance overhead at the key moving averages and support at the lower low. It is quite possible that we round trip the range. And with any luck, we'll see a legit test of the RS levels that will give us some clarity on where Bitcoin goes from here before the end of the week. And they also shared here in update number two, as noted earlier, it appears the Bitcoin bulls are gaining some momentum, but things are not always as they seem and goes on to share that sometime after last night's candle and close open, we've seen a new trend precognition signal develop on the daily chart and it seems to be bullish. I mean, we are breaking out. We are above 27 ,000. So let's freaking go. And also more strong foundation on the technicals. You can see Bitcoin hits yet another all -time high, which virtually means the network has never been this strong and this secure. Now I'm pretty stoked to tune into President Bukele's speech to the UN this evening. What do you think he has to share besides? I told you so. Let me know, fam. And again, welcome to everyone just joining us for the live show. Lots to continue to cover. So let's continue breaking it down. Next, let's discuss this adoption fund, which is a pretty big deal coming out of Japan. Let's go check this out. Japan's largest investment bank, Numura's digital asset subsidiary, Laser Digital Asset Management, launched the Bitcoin adoption fund specifically for the institutional investors. Bring it. The official announcement noted the Bitcoin -based fund will be the first in a range of digital adoption investment solutions that the firm plans to introduce. Now Numura is a Japanese financial giant with over $500 billion worth of assets, which basically that's half a trillion, baby, offers brokerage services to leading institutional investors. The Bitcoin fund launched by its digital asset arm will now offer investors direct exposure to BTC. The Laser Digital Bitcoin Adoption Fund offers long key exposure to Bitcoin. The financial giant has chosen Kamanu as its regulated custody partner. The Bitcoin fund is a portion of Laser Digital Fund's segregated portfolio company that has been registered as a mutual fund in accordance with the Cayman Islands regulatory authority. Now, Laser Digital Asset Management head Sebastian said the Bitcoin is one of the enablers of this long -lasting transformational change and long -term exposure to Bitcoin offers a solution for the investors to capture this macro trend. Now, the Bitcoin adoption fund might be the first of its kind launched by Numura and the digital asset arm, but the Japanese investment banking giant has been investing in the digital asset ecosystem for quite some time already. In fact, September of last year, the firm launched its digital asset venture capital arm to stay at the forefront of digital innovation. And also won Dubai's virtual asset regulatory authority license to operate in the country. The long -only Bitcoin adoption fund for investors in Japan comes amid a growing discussion around Bitcoin -based investment products from regulated and mainstream financial giants. The United States SEC approved two Bitcoin ETFs, even though there is a delayed decision specifically on the spot. Bitcoin ETFs. What's up with that, Mr. Gensler? Just saying. And apart from the US, Canada and focused investment products over the past couple of years. So there you have it, mass adoption, let's freaking go, especially on the institutional level. How many of you are in Japan? I know we have some in our audience out there. Let me know. And have you ever heard of this company before? Any plans in investing through them? Let me know how you guys feel. And now let's break down the latest. It gets more surprising and shocking every day with what all is going on with Bankman -Fried and FTX. Now his parents are involved. His parents are being sued by FTX. And it's just a nightmare of a mess, to say the least. So let's break down this latest story regarding SBF. Now, Joseph Bankman, the father of the former FTX CEO, Sam Bankman -Fried, complained to his son about the salary he was receiving during his employment at FTX US, turning the issue into a family matter. In a September 18 filing with the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, FTX debtors filed a complaint against Bankman and Barbara Fried, alleging that SBF's parents misappropriated millions of dollars through their involvement in the exchange's business. And according to the court documents, Bankman's contract with FTX US should have provided a $200 ,000 annual salary following a leave of absence from the Stanford Law School in December 2021. However, Bankman seemed to express ignorance about the terms of the contract, claiming to both FTX US and his son that he was expecting a $1 million annual salary. What about all that property in the Bahamas, fam? What about all that? Hundreds of millions worth of properties? Just wanted to throw that out there. The complaint states that Bankman was putting Barbara on this, suggesting that SBF's mother may have been able to persuade her son to follow through with the salary change. Things get even more interesting. So according to the complaint, Bankman's influence paid off, with SBF later providing his parents $10 million from Alameda Research. Can you talk about commingling? A 16 .4 million property in the Bahamas, funded by FTX Trading, the ability to expense roughly $90 ,000 to FTX Trading on the island nation in the Bahamas, and options to purchase company stock. Now, when reached out to the legal team representing Bankman and Fried, but did not receive a response at the time, unfortunately, the legal action brought by the debtors was the latest in the bankruptcy case involving FTX and many of its subsidiaries filed in November of last year. Bankman Fried also faces 12 criminal charges to be spread across two trials, starting in October of 2023, which is right around the corner, fam, and March of 2024, right before the halving, scheduled for April of next year. And since the federal judge revoked his bail in August, Bankman Fried has been largely confined to the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. Where's Brooklyn at? Before the start of his October trial, then on September 19th, a three -judge panel heard an appeal from SPF's legal team requesting the former FTX CEO to be released from jail in order to prepare for the trial, citing the lack of internet access and first amendment issues. All I got to say is this, I mean, how many people realistically have access to the internet in jail? Why should he? Million dollar question right there. But what are your thoughts, fam? How do you think this is likely to play out? And do you think that Bankman Fried's parents are just as guilty as SPF himself with the commingling and the fraud of going up north of $30 billion, making it the biggest scam in history that we're aware of? Hence why we call him Mini Madoff, because he made off with billions of dollars worth of investors' money, and Gary Gensler and the SEC was protecting him behind closed doors. So it's going to be very interesting to see how all this is likely to play out. Now let's discuss post halving. We all know there is a halving scheduled roughly six months out. We all know post halving, the price action is most likely going to reach a new all -time high and enter price discovery mode. Well, this analyst shares a very intriguing target. So let's break this down, shall we? And welcome to y 'all just joining us. Say hello in that live chat. Let me know where you're tuning in from. I stream live here seven days a week from Puerto Rico. Synonymous analyst Rhett Capital tells his followers on X that Bitcoin can rally above $80 per ,000 coin in the months following next month's event. For the halving, send it. Let's go. The Bitcoin halving cuts the Bitcoin miners' rewards in half, as we all know, expected to take place in April of next year. And while Rhett Capital is a long -term bull on Bitcoin, he notes that it is possible for Bitcoin to continue its downtrend before the halving, putting him here. Hang in there and make the most of any deeper downside in this pre halving period. You won't see the post halving parabola in the outlines here in this chart. It shows you in the yellow, the pre halving period, then in the pink, the post halving resistance, and then in the green, you can see the post halving parabola when we hit those new all -time highs. Now, Rhett notes that Bitcoin may repeat its 2019 bear market cycle when it traded within a triangle pattern before breaking out and starting off the bull market, as he shares here, if Bitcoin continues to form lower highs, could Bitcoin fill the CME, which is the Chicago Mercantile Exchange gap, at $20 ,000 later this year or in early 2024? So it makes a good point. There is currently a gap sitting at that $20 ,000 psychological level. And he continues, if so, the possible path could be consolidation to the apex of the black triangle before finally breaking out to close the halving. And you can see that triangle right here in this chart. Now, looking at the chart, he seemed to suggest that Bitcoin will confirm the triangle breakout in April of 2024, followed by a rally towards his long -term target. Now, let me know your thoughts, chat. How many of you agree that Bitcoin is likely to break out to a new all -time high, entering price discovery mode in 2024, the year of the halving? Let me know. And what are some of your targets? I'd also like to point out that the Stock the Flow model and Plan B, creator of that model, he suggests a $100 to $1 million range price for the King Crypto post halving. We also have some very other bullish predictions, which I cover on a daily basis here on the channel. But I'd love to know your personal prediction. I think we reached the cycle peak personally sometime in 2025, but I think 2024, we enter that price discovery mode. But I'd love to know your thoughts and your opinions in the comments right down below. And now let's break down our next story of the day and discuss the latest from the macro guru, Raoul Pal, who is suggesting that the Bitcoin market cap and crypto market cap as a whole does something between 5 and 10x for this upcoming bull cycle. Now, you do the math. We have a crypto market cap right now. I'm going to ballpark it at a trillion. We have a Bitcoin market cap. I'm going to ballpark it at a half a trillion, which is 500 billion. So hypothetically, if we were to 10x Bitcoin in and of itself, we're talking about a 5 trillion dollar Bitcoin market cap, which would be half the current market cap of gold. Now, with the entire crypto market cap, we can potentially hit 10 trillion. Now, also note, back in November of 2021, when we hit that all time high of 69 ,000 in November of last year, the total crypto market cap was just north of that 3 trillion dollar market cap. So he's so let's break this down and shout out to Raoul Pal. Here we go. Former Goldman Sachs executive Raoul Pal says the next bull cycle can bring an explosion in the market cap of all of the digital assets. That's right. In a new interview with Altcoin Daily, the macro expert says he expects a huge increase in the adoption of digital assets, and that can cause the total market cap of crypto to skyrocket as much as 900 % from its current value during the next bull market. Quoting the analysts here, obviously, I think we'll go well through new all time highs. I think the whole ecosystem of crypto will go from 425 million users where we're at today. And I think at the end of this cycle, there'll be a billion users by that kind of use cases in which we have talked about. And let's not forget, we have got central bank digital currencies that are known as CBDCs and stable coins. There is a lot going on still. So if this entire space is going to grow 2 .5 X in the number of users, well, the market cap of the entire space is five or 10 X. Send it. Let's go. Pal also says he is closely watching development of layer two Altcoin projects for new use cases, which could boost the value of their individual market cap, quitting him again. And then let's see how people value layer twos in this. We don't really know how layer twos accrue much value. Do we have to have a massive amount of transactions in which case then you need stuff like Ticketmaster with millions and millions and millions of transactions to drive value to those chains because they batched them and batched them down to Ethereum. So there you have it. And to watch this interview, he did Raul Pal, the macro guru with Altcoin Daily entitled best cryptocurrency investing strategy into 2024. Check the show notes, blow the video in the description and let me know your thoughts on his personal prediction. Do you feel post having that the market cap for the entire crypto market can likely 10 X from the current valuation along with Bitcoin surging 10 X to roughly a five trillion market cap? And hypothetically, if the macro guru is correct, where do you think that would likely take the Bitcoin price? Well, let's run some hypothetical math. Bitcoin was the 10 X from the current price action of 27 ,000. Well, that's $270 ,000 per coin. Take that. And as we all know, Bitcoin rises like that, the entire crypto market cap would go along for the ride, including the altcoin. So please let me know in the chat, fam, which altcoins, if any, are you most bullish on in the crypto market? And what are your thoughts surrounding Raul Pal being so bullish on Solana? A few months back, I read in an interview he shared that 80 % or more of his portfolio was specifically in an altcoin called Solana. So I'd love to know your thoughts. Obviously, he has a high risk tolerance as I look at that particular cryptocurrency to be very risky, especially with all that went in with the venture capitalists and SPF and FTX exchange pumping that particular all. So I'd love to know how you feel regarding all of that. And with that being shared, fam, now let's discuss Peter Thiel and his $4 million price prediction, as well as rumor has it, and I'll be covering this as well, that he dumps most of his Bitcoin position at the top of the market practically 30 days before the crash. So let's break this down because Peter Thiel was actually one of the keynote speakers at the Miami Conference for Bitcoin. And here's what he had to share as I transcribed his speech, and then we'll discuss him reportedly making $1 .8 billion cashing out on his eight -year bet around the time he was touting these all -time high predictions. So here we go. He says, the enemy's list is a list of people who I think are stopping Bitcoin. He says there is a lot of them. They tend to have nameless, faceless bureaucratic perspectives, which of course is one of the ways they hide. He goes on to share, we are going to try to expose them and realize that this is sort of what we have to fight for Bitcoin to go up, 10x or 100x from here. Now, just FYI, to give you some perspective, at the time he made this prediction on stage at the Bitcoin Miami Conference, Bitcoin was trading at roughly $43 ,000 per coin. So you run the math. 43 ,000 times 100x is over $4 million per Bitcoin. So you know that? Let's continue with what he had to share. The central banks are going bankrupt. We are at the end of the fiat money regime. How many of you agree with that statement? I agree there 100%. The first person on the list is Berkshire Hathaway CEO, Warren Buffett. Thiel put up a picture of Buffett with two of his most famous quotes about Bitcoin. One was rat poison and the other, I don't own any and I never will. I also like to point out now since then, Warren Buffett has much indirect exposure to Bitcoin through Bitcoin mining stock companies and etc. So go figure. If you can't beat them, join them, right? And he goes on. He opined, I think the direct in it. Yeah, and I say also Charlie Munger goes along with him. Now, feel further noted that Buffett has a bias and makes him long on fiat money system and money managers who follow the Berkshire Hathaway executives advice will pretend it's complicated to invest into Bitcoin. I think we call that FUD. Fear, uncertainty and doubt. Now expect nothing less from one of the wealthiest people in the fiat money matrix Ponzi scheme. You know what I mean? So just saying. The next person on the list of Bitcoin's enemies is the one and only JP Morgan Chase CEO, Jamie Dimon, or as Max Kaiser calls him, Jamie the tapeworm. They'll put diamonds picture up with the following quote. I don't call them crypto currencies. I call them crypto tokens because currencies have rules of law behind them, central banks and tax with authorities. Now you guys already know how I feel personally about JP Morgan Chase CEO, Jamie Dimon. So I won't go any deeper there. But anyways, we know he's an enemy of Bitcoin and always has been. The next picture he put up was of the BlackRock CEO, Larry Fink, with the following quote. I see huge opportunities in a digitized crypto blockchain related currency, and that's where I think it is going to go. Now just FYI, Larry Fink is the CEO of the largest asset management firm in the entire world, which owns a large share in virtually all the companies in the S &P 500, and that is BlackRock. They currently have over $10 trillion in assets under management. And for a long time, he was spreading FUD regarding Bitcoin. But guess what? Like I mentioned earlier, if you can't beat them, join them because they just most recently, a few months ago, they submitted their application for a spot Bitcoin ETF, which ultimately means they're going to be introducing this to the institutions which have trillions upon trillions of dollars as there's currently north of $700 trillion in total addressable market, and they want their piece of the Bitcoin pie. So he goes on to share, the PayPal co -founder added that Fink's quote is somewhat representative of the whole genre of Bitcoin attacks that need further context, stating that pro -blockchain is an anti -Bitcoin term, very typically. Feel then brought up the environmental, social, and governance, ESG standards, elaborating the following, the label they have come up with, and perhaps the real enemy is ESG. I think that ESG is just a hate factory. Also like to throw out there, Elon Musk, he stopped taking Bitcoin payments for Tesla, and he says it's because of the FUD regarding this ESG, and we all know it's not more than FUD, and it's already been proven that Bitcoin is more than 50 % clean energy. So the million dollar question, when will the world's supposedly wealthiest man, Elon Musk, when will he start accepting Bitcoin payments again for Tesla? Isn't that a great question, and wouldn't you love to know the answer to that? Maybe you should ask Elon and tag him on X and see what he says. Anyways, feel stressed. You can always ask the question, what's the difference between ESG and the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party? Well, when you think ESG, you should be thinking of CCP per H. Now, he also goes on to share, it is the finance gentocracy that runs the country through whatever silly virtue signaling or hate factory to them, just like ESG, the billionaire concluded. This is what I would call and what you have to think of as a revolutionary youth movement, and we have to just go out from this conference and take over the world. So there you have it, fam. What are your thoughts surrounding Peter Thiel's prediction that we are likely to 100X, and along with his enemies list, as it seems, a lot of the enemies have come around and now have direct exposure to BTC, but it doesn't stop there because around that time he was making this $4 million Bitcoin price prediction. He allegedly dumped most of his position cashing out and with over a billion dollars in profits for his fund. So let's also break this down as this is also very relevant. How many of you were able to watch the speech he gave at that Bitcoin conference? It was epic, to say the least. I recall it now. So here we go. Check it out. Peter Thiel's venture capital firm reportedly made $1 .8 billion closing out its crypto positions around the time when he was an early Bitcoin bull, still predicting the token's price to surge by 100X. And again, from 43 ,000 price action, 100X means over 4 million. Founders Fund had cashed out almost all of its bets on digital assets by March of 2022, according to the Financial Times report that cited people familiar with the matter. But Thiel was still backing Bitcoin, obviously, when he spoke at the crypto conference in Miami the following month. He went on to share where at the end of the fiat money regime, he said, adding that the token's price could increase 100 fold from its level at the time, which was reported at $44 ,000 per coin. That prediction was proven false and as rising interest rates and failures, the high profile firms like Celsius Network, Three Arrows Capital, FTX, Terra Luna dragged the crypto sector into the prolonged bearish winter. Now Bitcoin plummeted by over 60 % in 2022 and was trading at under 17 ,000 by the end of the year. And I believe the bottom currently for the cycle is 15 ,700. How many of you feel that that bottom is in? Let me know, chat. Founders Fund first started pouring money into crypto all the way back in 2014, when Bitcoin was only trading at roughly $750 per coin. So by the time Bitcoin reached its all time high in November of 2021, it had surged 8 ,500 % from that particular level. Not too shabby for a seven year run, wouldn't you say? Now Thiel has a long track record as one of Silicon Valley's most prominent tech investors. He took early stakes in startups, which include Facebook, Elon Musk's SpaceX, and ride hailing app Lyft, and even co -founded PayPal back in 1998. Thiel is also a high profile supporter of the Republican Party and continued to voice his support for Donald Trump since the former president left office in January of 2021. The fund held around two thirds of his portfolio in Bitcoin at one time, but now not has significant exposure to crypto according to FT's sources. So there you have it. Fam, what are your thoughts surrounding his prediction and him cashing out at around that time he was making those all time high predictions of 100X? Let me know, fam. And don't forget to check out cryptonewsalerts .net for the full premium experience with video and to participate in the live Q &A. And I look forward to seeing you on tomorrow's episode. HODL.
"barbara" Discussed on On Being with Krista Tippett
"Something that's interesting to me, I would kind of continuing this trajectory that we started on. And the 1960s were you and I were both around. God was dead. I would say, I feel I experience all the time. I feel like God is making comeback. Now, and now that, you know, what that very tiny word got means when different people use it is, of course, has as much variation as there are lives. Yes. But I feel like people are realizing and I mean the scientists are all kinds of people and all kinds of endeavors are realizing it's not a word we can do without. And it's also a word that has a lot of possibility in it. But now I think that line, which would have been more shocking in the 1960s, is perhaps the death of the church, right? And the emptying of church post lockdown, and so that third move of leaving church was keeping and, you know, there's something interesting about the fact that you or, for example, those thousands of people you're talking about at the evolving faith conference. They're green belt conference. It's like there's absolutely a critical distance from what seems to not have integrity. I think often what seems not to jive with the best original impulses of church. And yet there's something that state. You know, I think of bahn hoffer, right? Very different situation, but talking about religionless Christianity, where the church itself had been a co opted into essential. It's evil. And yet he said there were there were the core impulses, would persist, even if the institution went away. And I wonder if we are experiencing something like that, I'm intrigued by something you wrote from Christian century about the poured out church. This was 2007, and it feels to me like maybe a way that you've been wrestling with this phenomenon. For a little while, with kind of biblical language. I love everything you just said. I would love to, yeah, I would love for you to just rewind and say it all again because I think it is so true that people are talking about loss of faith, loss of God, and I think it's loss of church. I really think it's church that's suffering now. And it was suffering long before COVID put it in isolation, but I think a lot of people during that couple of years, I've talked to them. Who discovered either how eager they were to get back that they weren't going back. So I do think this is about church. And I didn't understand all ties are this way and his colleagues, he wasn't the only guy he just got famous for saying God is dead. But I remember not too long ago, looking back into that theology again and realized that at least some of those people were talking about God emptying God's self into the world. And that's a familiar thing for people who've been initiated into Christian language that Jesus poured himself into the world emptied himself into the world. So I am intrigued by the idea of what it means for the church to be emptying now. And I am still naive enough to believe, well, you just put me in company with barn hoffer. I'm not naive. I did. I mean, you didn't put me in that company, but when you say that he thought the impulse, I trust the Holy Spirit, Christa. That's where I'm still real religious, is I still trust that wind that blows things around and you don't know where it came from and you don't know where it goes, but it's going to blow. And it's blowing all the time and the interesting thing is people my age get so distressed by what is blowing around and then I meet younger people who are just comfortable with that. That's the way a lot of their lives have been. They never expected to have one job or live in one place or loved one person or were not raised the way I am, but I think it's a terrifying time there are a lot of buildings, there are a lot of pensions, there are a lot of people's invested lives that are being shaken, it is also a really exciting time to see what happens next. And I won't know. You know, I just had to work on assault and light sermon. And one thing that has something to do with what we're talking about is in Matthew 5, which is Matthew's version of the sermon on the mount and Jesus turns to the people and says, you are the light of the world. And when I lay that beside what he says in John gospel, I am the light of the world. It's just really fun to play with that. There's a way in which I can't get the chronology to work, but yeah, I'm the light of the world, but let's forget that for a minute. You are. So let's forget about what are you all up to? What's going on there? But. I'm liking your emptying talk. And I don't think that's ending talk. I just think it's emptying. And there's no room to pour anything new into a full cup. And I also feel like there's a way in which you have worked with this very concretely in your life kind of in ministry out of ministry. I mean, so here's something you wrote in that poured out church piece in 2007. The world is where my notions of God have been destroyed, reformed, Jason, redeemed. The world is where I have occasionally been good for something and where I have done irreparable harm. The reason I know this, however, is that the church has given me the eyes with which I see, as well as the words with which I speak. The church has given me a community in which the figure out what has happened to me in the world. Do you ever look back at things you wrote and think? I was so much smarter then. Well, no, but you write things and that you don't know where they come from. There's that mystery. You said something that you didn't know you had to say. But I mean, I think what that describes also is what is what people are still looking for. A relationship between the church and life as it is lived that works in that symbiotic and mutually enriching and mutually challenging way. And probably because I'm episcopalian and it seems sacramental to me that what we're looking for is some way in which our bodies, our hands, oil and water and bread and wine, all the ordinary things are given a bump up into holiness or the holiness in them is seen and held and passed around. And that happens, that happens in the forgive me in the saddest, most worn out little churches. All you got to do is bury somebody or marry somebody or take communion or lay on hands in the whole thing seems like it's worth giving it another try. So sacrament ritual, it's interesting some of the quotes secular books that are coming out now are about ritual. There's a lot of that. Yeah. I've loved also. It was really happy my producer put for me to look at in preparation. It's 1999 essay you wrote on physics called the luminous web, also in Christian century. Do you remember that? I do that also. I do, but I feel like I'm on a PBS show here with your finding all these hidden ancestors and bringing them out. Things I buried long ago. Know that it was so beautiful. I'm just going to read one of the things you said. You were just, I mean, you were talking about the evolution of science and then a physics in particular.
"barbara" Discussed on Overthrowing Education
"It's butt Chevy, and I'm so glad that you joined me in overthrowing education. Not just the podcast, but actually the whole concept. In this episode, I speak with Barbara Smith a longtime very forward thinking educator who is a prolific writer. I was going to chat with her about her book how much does a great school cost, school economies and school values, but then I got to read a draft of the upcoming book, the gatekeepers, why school systems should rethink resisting change. And I kind of got a little obsessed with it. I meant to just give it a quick peek, but then I just kept reading it. So that's really what we ended up talking about in the end. Among other things, we discuss who the gatekeepers are that keep us from moving education forward and creating a better system. Of course, that includes the obsession that the U.S. and other countries have with standardized tests and ranking schools and students and we talked about a whole lot more. This conversation really got me riled up, but in a good way to continue the work so many educators like you are doing to overthrow education. And bonus, we talk about the connection between a certain TV franchise and its connection to better education. So as soon as Barbara's book is released, I'll let you know. Meanwhile, you can find links to her website and the links to other books on the show notes and of course on the overthrowing education website. Also, yes, this episode's foamer show was borrowed from episode 60 with zeyneb baalbek about creating transformative schools because this episode is really about overcoming the challenges to create transformative education. Once again, the awesome Jake Miller joined me in this phone commercial. All right, here is my conversation with Barbara.
"barbara" Discussed on The Dork Forest
"Told my family, they were like, why did you invite him to dinner? And I was like, well, I'm not gonna. That's weird. You're correct. This is not, yes. My favorite year. So, which is a great movie where Peter O'Toole gets invited to queens to dinner. So I have to say, you chose wisely. I thought that when you were in the window, you were maybe moving the reindeer around and Santa came by and told you that you had him in the wrong order. But I think Williams kind of way better. Way better than Santa. Well, it's true. I was eating at Barney greengrass one time in the upper west side. And Frances McDormand was sitting at a table on the other side of the room. Oh my gosh. Almost got up and walked over and lost my mind. And then I decided much like you to leave her alone. So she's trying to lunch. Yep, a little smoked fish. She's trying to live her life, Jackie. Why don't you leave her alone? It's just let her be a human. Barbara Billy, thank you so much for doing the dark forest. This was awesome. Thank you for having me on Jackie. And I would like to plug. I started a podcast. Did you? Yes, it's called flower stories. First episode published by the end of the month. And I'm just going to be talking to people in the industry. So wholesalers, designers, shop owners oh my God. Yes, flower stories. Yeah, send me whatever social media tag that that will be and I will put that in the notes. On Instagram. On Instagram. So it's flower stories or RG? Yeah. Okay. Because somebody 7 years ago took flower stories and posted 5 things and then hasn't done anything since. So, oh. The audacity. The audacity. It makes me want to scream at the sky like Wolverine. You're not wrong. But flower storage, you could get in on the ground floor of flower stories podcast, everyone. So get all that. And you know the rules out there, take care of each other. My hat, my hat, my hat, they're dancing around my hat. My hat, my hat, my hat. Well, what do you think of that? If it looks like a Mexican hat dance and it sounds like a Mexican hat dance, it's most likely a Mexican hack. So take off your head and let's dance. Yay. Oh my God. Why don't we just call that as the end of the show?.
"barbara" Discussed on The Dork Forest
"There's an merch. There's stand up. There's tour guide, you know, you can find out where I'm touring. This is getting long. So let's get into the show. It's happening. I'm Jackie cation. And I'm in my garage. And I am sitting here with a Barbara melee. And you are going to I'm very excited. When this comes out, it's going to be right around your birthday. That's right. April fools. April, fools. That's the 1st of April, you guys. I'm not kidding. And Barbara Miller, her Twitter handle, is at B as in Barbara, MC as in Mick, MC, and then melee MEE. It'll be in the notes, so if you want to follow her on Twitter and at the very least, say happy birthday. Do that. And then, but we're going to dork out about flowers and maybe she might post on her birthday, where you could send her flowers. And that would be hilarious. And because you like flowers, what's happening? I don't know a lot about flying. They're very pretty. Oh my gosh, there's so much I could tell you about flowers. So it all started when I was a wee toddler and my grandmother was a landscape architect. So my earliest memories are hanging out in the garden with her and learning all about plants. But she had 7 daughters. And my mom is the only one who did not also become a landscape of architect. So, yeah. Seriously 6 daughters and they all became landscape work architects. Oh, hi, Catholic much? Bingo. On the nose. I'm familiar with the genre. Yeah, Irish Spanish Catholics. So there we go. Also. So Catholic. Yes. So I wanted to do something that connected with these really great memories I had from childhood, but not sort of, I guess, like, betray my mom. She didn't like it. Well, it just it would have seemed sort of like I was calling out allegiance to a different part of the family, right? If I went and did what all of her sisters did. Can I quickly ask, what did your mother do? She has her master's in child art therapy. So, super different path. We have different paths, but still cool. She might paint a flower. Okay. Yeah. And so yeah, so for some reason to me, that translated to working in a flower shop. And so I got my first job when I was 18. And now it's over 20 years later and I literally have not had a job outside of flowers in.
"barbara" Discussed on Maureen From Quarantine
"Have you rise. Well hello world. It's maureen from quarantine saying hello from one of my all time. Favorite places montecito california right here It's montecito and to get this to give you an idea of where we're at Santa barbara area and just a beautiful area here. And i wanted to just send out the Just the the sound if you will of the c- coupled with the good bibles of the area and it's been a day filled with lots of smiles. Lots of hellos and one. More reason why i gravitate here. People are nice. Hello nice but a concept and to have people actually smile and say hello. And what's but i always noticed. Is that you know. And i haven't episode. I encourage you to check out to on kindness and very simple very short and sweet but it just gives us again that reminder of how important it is for all of us not just in quarantine but always to have a sense of kindness and to surround ourselves with kind people and else better to you. Know go away from anyone or anything. That breeds meanness bullying hostility all the negative scenarios. That indeed are out there and to go to the place of very very simple very very simple. It's it's that love from the heart that cannot be faked. And there's just an exuberance that comes along with that when we're around people who are showering that that sense of as you want aviv if you will. There's a what aviv we are actually replenish. The more we give away with the smiles and the hellos the more we do get that and so obviously. We don't want to cast pearls before swine as i have mentioned and i remind my daughter of that in all of us as well to also choose carefully who we invite into our sacred space and i'll be silent here for a moment and let you hear the ambiance nevada. Nines that's another kind of nice that sound of the sea and just to go to the peaceful plays and then we're replenished and i took a beautiful bike ride here in santa barbara and just you know it's so cool because you can ride for hours and again there's a place where we are we. We we have our own Pathway and people give us our space but at the same time when somebody does Come in our midst various kindness and a sense of a reverence and respect. And so it's interesting. I always find that people who are Coming from this place there's there's an inner self respect to When we are have the wherewithal to exude this kind of Just very very simply. It's just a sense of showing some kindness. Be kind and to go back to that place and we're not in that kind of environment we feel it. We censored there is An energy field and so we can tap into the love so we'll take just a moment here and tap into the love the life force great chee in the universe and again. There's another episode. I have on humanitarianism if you'd like to also Check that and so again. We always take it back to the now back to the moment to the present Which is a gift why they called the president and right now again and let's do a little bit of breath play if you will. We listen to the ocean and i have a gorgeous view of not just the ocean here of by This gorgeous trio send out pictures of it as well. Just big beautiful. Santa barbara tree. I think it's a sycamore and let's do just a few more breaths in this present moment breathing and all the love all the great negative ions if you are. I'm near Bef the ocean the sea or even the beautiful energy nearby with anything in nature. Breathe in all that great It's organic that natural. And there's it's even if you're surrounded by plants to you can do that indoors and you can do that where you're surrounded by trees and go to the place again of nature if you can if not find your sacred space in your and a little place where you can breathe in the beautiful energy and the birds coming around here to send up the good mo jo as well and they're planted firmly and some of these gorgeous. Wow they're just beautiful trees here in santa barbara and so we'll breathe in and release any resentments and he has still stability any meanness that attempted to come into our very psyches. Let it all go medico again. We'll do another breath and keep it real real simple if you'd lie. Put your hand on your tony. There your name is out in graven. Read all the way up in the lease and if you can because we all get very intense try a smile again. If it's not external see if you can get a baby baby smile on the inside just have that sense of smile taking it easy. Oh there's a good song no play find that it's the essence of it is take everything easy. Yeah and in fact. I do have another episode. And it's called easy desert and so the essence of that is being present again is he. Doesn't keep it simple right here right now. Being the moment very braff it's that simple all the thoughts that are not for our highest good. Go away send them away never to return. Let them go release these..
"barbara" Discussed on Encyclopedia Womannica
"About one of the most famous osha of the nineteenth century. Her hobbies included racing powerboats owning a women led garage and collecting rare dolls on her private islands. Please welcome the one. The only joe carstairs joe was born. Marian barbara carstairs in london in nineteen hundred. She was the daughter of fannie. Evelyn bostick an american heiress to the standard oil fortune. Her father was captain. Albert carstairs a scottish army officer. Joe was barely born before. Alpert and fanny divorced. And some biographers have doubted whether albert was joe's biological father throughout joe's childhood. She and her mother lived tumultuous and often conflicting lives fanny was an alcoholic and a drug addict and remarried four times. Her last marriage was to a surge famous for his unique rejuvenation practices. Which involved transplanting monkey testicle tissue into humans meanwhile jo grew up bucking every gender norm. She encountered especially those behaviors deemed suitable for a young oil era like herself. Joe would later claim she came out of the womb queer by the age of eleven she taken to wearing men's clothes rejected other practices deemed feminine and traded her given name marian masculine joe before joe could enter secondary school. Her mother shipped her off to connecticut. Charm school in hopes to joe would pick up high society customs but by the time she turned sixteen. Joe broke out of boarding school and enlisted as an ambulance driver. World war one displeased with her daughter's behavior fanny threatened to cut you off financially unless she straightened up and got married in one thousand nine eighteen. Joe married a french aristocrat and childhood friend. Three years later fanny died. Joe took her money annulled her marriage and was back to living under the carstairs name. As a liberated heiress. Joe used her money to start a women only car service. She called it ex garage. It consisted entirely of women drivers and mechanics and also functioned as a car. Hire service customers included veterans and widowers of war as well as london's elite joe lived above the garage sometimes accompanied by friends and lovers but cars proved to tame jail in one thousand nine hundred eighty five. She funneled at least half a million dollars into speed boats and yachts determined to become a motorboat paean. she won her first trophy with her first speedboat named after former girlfriend she also went on to win the competitive. Deep york's trophy her attempts to win the harms worth trophy. The most prestigious motorboat prize in the world proved fruitful despite multiple attempts and multiple custom made boats. Joe never one. She did however earn herself. A nickname for her dedication to the sport fans knew her as the fastest woman on water. Joe's personal life was a hot topic in tabloids. She was well known around town for her tattooed. Arms masculine fashion. She became even more well known for the group of on again off again lovers. She amassed the group included the likes to luma bankhead. Greta garbo marlene dietrich and dolly wilde oscar. Wilde's niece one of joe's. Most famous eccentricities was a gift from a former girlfriend a twelve inch tall dolls. She named lord todd widely. She became so attached to the doll. She had custom luxury clothes made for it and added its name to her front door. Plaque in nineteen thirty four. Joe bought herself a private island in the bahamas. For forty thousand dollars on the island. She built wail k. A resort hideaway for her famous array of sometimes friends. Sometimes lovers she set up a power. Plant a radio station schoolhouse and even a personal museum on the island. Eventually she purchased four more islands. Chose relationship with whale k. Fell somewhere between owning land and as jo herself later. Put it running country. She gave up for a friends and staff on the island. Stipends for life. Most of them were but he means who lived there. Prior to joe's arrival.
"barbara" Discussed on Business Unusual with Barbara Corcoran
"I think musici- made you find then no doubt your that a lot from trust you Yeah i try to be a good friend. Mike people i try to keep my circle a little bit tight because it's it's hard being in this world and People not having your best interest so the people that have been my life have been my life for a pretty long time. And i tried to make sure that i give back or you know. Stay update with their life and Those are the people i trust because they know where my heart is in or their heart is. I know they have my back. And when you have that in your life you don't necessarily need all of the other stuff laos i think with the phoniness comes with any kind of media business. You start to appreciate the that you just can't take that for granted so funny world out there. Honestly those people become a precious to you. Oh yeah they do. it's fine. It's fine having you know doing doing whatever you please and people being your biggest cheerleader rooting for you and It's you know they make my day. And hopefully i could give them some kind of entertainment or education value back to them for for doing that for me. So you have a new in your life here rumored. I think it's true. Are you gonna spill the beans and tell us about him. I can give you a little bit Give us you know it's a. It's a sticky situation. A bad start. It's china's he only gets worse not in terms of us getting on we get along great The only other doesn't like you gotta push you know he. He works a lot. I'm all over the place right now. He's like waking up at six am and coming home from the office till two. So he. And i were down in florida for a little bit and We're living in this this little community and it's like a gated community where my parents live..
"barbara" Discussed on Business Unusual with Barbara Corcoran
"Second run at tv. I think it turned on by listening to you. I think You being out of the tv spacing. Go back to the law firm and even expanding that mrs working at it being a success. You know the sa- magic tv craziness but a magic. Is that new cards bachelor in paradise. It's there is definitely magic but it also comes with a lot of like. It does some mental damage on every single person. That's on it the amount of ridicule coming off of it on. Doesn't that just tough into skiing. This other things one hundred percent. And i agree with you but it's very hard to do a show like that knowing that you have zero control of whatever narrative and again I don't know. I don't know if i'm gonna do paradise. You know there if you choose to do it. Do just call them up. Colin produces a. Hey it's me how now they have to ask you. Couldn't you ask. I mean i'm i'm sure i'm sure i'm sure if you really really want that you could reach out to them and say this is something i'm interested. Let me know if you guys want me and they would be receptive at least curious enough to dip in and wonder if you might have an interest or of the andrey to no i. I don't think there's any shame on that. If you wanna do it and you could reach out. And i don't think if you don't wanna be disappointing because i i mean this is very selfish. I think people watching didn't get enough of you. And i think he will already casted to die and you're gonna go in that direction. You re well beautiful. You sound intelligent. People remember you a lot of the contestants are not remembering all. I thought you had a presence hosue luhrmann. The show did not have says all good one learning and she's a good one. But i was told anyone mentioned by who but i think i was told unlike..
"barbara" Discussed on Business Unusual with Barbara Corcoran
"I went on the show Do you have any concerns that it could hurt your image as an attorney be taken less seriously wonder percents It's actually funny. Because i wasn't taking it. I i didn't apply for the show i got on someone. Recommended mir applied for me. And i was not even telling a good buddy. This china actually don't know who it was. And i'm so tired of figure out who it is but i think that happens quite often Maybe one of those business parties. I don't know. I didn't have any into like producer i didn't. I didn't know anyone that working number of those stories. Yeah so. I don't know how i got contacted but when i did I was so funny. Because i was at lunch with all my siblings. And they were just like what to show you some idea. They knew it We would watch it here. And there. I mean i. I wouldn't say my brothers knew it too. Well but they definitely are familiar. Watched a couple episodes either with me or their past girlfriends or girlfriends. Whatever so Yeah they knew it and one of my brothers kind of like lafayette often go through the process. He was like you know. See see how this stuff goes like. You're in such a different world like go through and see how it goes and you know he he. He kind of prefaces like he was just like just learn as much as you can. So he's like even if you're not going to go through the process and see how the entertainment business works and i was like. Yeah i can idea my other brother. Who's a little bit more hard This is the older brother. Roads were no. Yeah so it was like a family feud to be completely honest. One of my brothers was like that's funny. Give it a shot. My brother was like absolutely not he was like you don't know how this stuff works. What about if you on the show and you get drunk and you make a fool of now. Yeah so let me take you back to the big happy family image of only five minutes ago. You siblings jumped all over. We all jump all over each other. We're very blunt with each other. Your me reaction before they even open their mouth will you. Should i do that. what would you know. I was definitely confused. But i was definitely interested in my mindset is always try something once and to see what direction like. That's why i love traveling so much going and learning about different cultures and stuff like that teaches me who i am so so i was like i. I was confused definitely. But i was definitely interested at the same time because this could be like a cool learning experience. You know like who who knows how this works. I'll never get this opportunity again to be in this position to learn about the entertainment industry and to see how this works you. You have no idea what could happen. So she siblings kinda immediately took a vote on the whole thing was for half again. I would say. I would say just about that. And then where did you land that day. Definitely gonna try it. You didn't want to miss it. I kind of i cited more with the brother who is just. He's like the more laid-back one. And i was like yeah. Let's just go through the process and see how this works. You know and There was no. It wasn't hurting me in any way you didn't even then at that children. Aw yeah no you're right so so for that Those were definitely discussions. Because i was like. Oh man what about if. I go on the show..
"barbara" Discussed on Business Unusual with Barbara Corcoran
"I lost my voice. Like what are that. Is you with any with that. Was exactly tactically. Good ten minutes from. I thought they were going for. My son was sitting in the courtroom. Put the president scary. See dad's running this firm. He's still active in know. My dad's actually eighty three years old. So he kind of is more retired so who runs it my siblings for the most part collectively. They run the yes. No my oldest brother has been there the longest His name's mike. So how key is thirty four about to turn thirty five and a couple of days actually He has been there the longest so he has more of the say. All of us have different roles in the very clear. What the roles are yeah. I would say they're pretty clear My sister and i one or more of the newbies it takes. It takes a while to really years. Have you been I've been there probably for maybe three or four years now. Yeah so not too long. But it's the old movie it is but there's there's so much to learn An especially just were so we have really good relationships with clients or whether it's on that and whether it's actually doing the property tax work we do a lot of these buildings for several years so knowing that specific building. It's going to be easier for my brother to go in and say already know this like the back of my hand i've done i've dealt with this building the past five years like you know he could do in his sleep with asa comes in. We're doing different buildings and it's like okay. Well i don't know this building. Why did why did the property taxes to get cut last year. What were the reasons behind it. So it's a big shift their onscreen heaven projects name. Buildings gives you totally valley. Wake your territory. We're actually in all fifty states which is cool so each sibling kind of has their own region or people in the firm..
"barbara" Discussed on Business Unusual with Barbara Corcoran
"Don't say this kind of joke to them because they're not going to respond. Well see read people. Well also resolved you. Think i think so. I think that's what comes with it so you go off to college major marketing. Yeah but you don't go into mark and you become an attorney which is a group grind. I mean to really put that kind of study time and effort Why would you change. Was i would say if i if i had marketing. To being attorney in their opposite ends inspector couldn't be more unrelated. There actually were but the coolest thing about law is even with the greet a degree behind. You can kind of go into any field which my parents and my siblings definitely reiterated to me growing up there like listen you know. I actually wanted to be a dentist. When i was younger i was probably six or seven years old. I wanna i wanna dentistry. You wanted to be a strange child. I know i know know. I know. I've never had brees. So perfect they look like they're fake. I know sure there were no they aren't. I've never had braces but Growing up it was just kind of something right. I'm gonna go to all the schooling to become a dentist. And then what about if i don't like it so with law. I was kind of like if i go into law. I can go into any industry that i want and i could figure that out so it was. It was definitely a change in terms of marketing. And then going to lie you. Oh that's very random. But i'm kind of glad i did that with my position that i am today doing social media staff and then doing lost off so it works out so once the other i wouldn't go into the social a little bit but i'm curious about the dynamic at the place where you work your father's company with how many siblings forging they're also so there's there's five of us total there. Wow one sibling is not an attorney raider. He decided to go off and he grows hump north carolina so very different compared to us in that aspect but In in the office. It's it's a crazy dynamic because growing up with each other. We're all very blunt..
"barbara" Discussed on True Crime Brewery
"Brian and jason. The boys were kept from seeing their paternal grandparents and barbara encouraged the boys to colossus his parents. Me ma and pa doors for it had written letters to barber in the boys. Newt sent them gifts. At christmas and barbara sent a letter of thanks in january but she forgot to mention her upcoming wedding with russ well arrest new his mother father wanted to be biological grab parrots and just weeks after the honeymoon is he and barbara. Were having sunday dinner with his family. After church barbara announced that she was pregnant. not long afterward. Ross told his mother. That barbara had miscarried. But doris just wondered whether she'd even been pregnant. It seemed awfully fast that after. Barbara's house was sold. She and rust decided they would buy a new house and after they bought the new house they spent about ten thousand dollars remodeling. It russ always kind of been a big spender. I mean nowhere near what barbara was but a bit of a big spender and we know that barbara love to spend money so the two of them together were kind of a disaster. We're just and he let her have control of money too so he didn't really know all that she was doing bird move. Russ yes but you know it was very important. Heard have more staff and better stuff than else she had to impress. Yeah certainly this remodeling wasn't the first time. The door estate noted that barbara had really expensive tastes he for rest and barbara's wedding the women at barbara's church had given a bridal shower for now. Barbara had doris tells that one church member but as a gift they were cheap barbara told her and she wouldn't use them and besides the house by her head. But a new cadillac seville and responded to be m w and then they had this house filled with new furniture and a big old wapping big-screen tv yet. But barbara was jealous. She was afraid to let russ out of her sight. She would go to all of his games and stay close to him. Especially female students were around but you kind of can't blame her because he has a history with teenage girls which he probably should have been in prison for. Yeah so barbara. Started running and weightlifting and her new exercise habits made her look better than she had years. She also tanned and cut her hair. Short putting in blonde highlights then. She began to wear contact lenses instead of glasses wore makeup and dressed her expensive clothes for a while. She was a bit of a bombshell. Russ's parents doris and now really wanted to be close to barbara just for restless sake. But they're feeling was at barbara didn't want to be close to them. Barbara and rest would come to their house for sunday. Dinners after church. Barbara never seem to wanna stay and soon. She began making excuses to leave early and meanwhile at her job. She continued with her flirtatious ways. She giggled and keesa salesman. She said suggested things to them. Rbis france did know about sexual comments at work. But they all knew about preoccupation with sex. She often talked about how much she likes sex and she couldn't get enough of it. Rosas fans also knew that rests and barbara had a very sexual relationship. When talked on the golf course turned to sex sometime suggested that. Barbara's wild in bed. That's what i told my golfing as when i play. Actually i say chill barbara. That's good ross..
"barbara" Discussed on True Crime Brewery
"Money was planning to buy our own house. She wanted to be near her parents so she began to search in their neighborhood. The first how she went to see was only a couple of blocks from appearance home and it belonged to rush sticker and his estranged wife. Jo lynn rusted been living there alone since their separation. Although rusted mentioned it with barbara showed up he was having some doubts about whether he really wanted to sell the house and he ended up settling with joe lynn and the house off the market barbara was having a sexual relationship with a younger man at this time. She couldn't bring him home while she lived with their parents so she hurried up. Bought a house where she could have sex with this man. So barbara dotted new three bedroom brick house at five five one. Six genesee street located diagonally across street from the house where rastegar lived when things got more serious with the younger guy. Barbara talked with him about a future together but he wanted children of his own and barbara had had a tubal ligation. After her second child so when she told him about the tubal he ended their relationship. So that's when barbara probably made her decision. That the next time she found a guy she wasn't going to tell him about that tubal. Okay so i would think at some point. This subject has to come up. Well she's going to lie about it said. Tell me a little bit about russ so ross was going to be. Barbara's next victim was born in the same hospital as she was just five months earlier and like barbara hughes the oldest child in his family recipe. Parents had decided that if their child was the son they would name him for his father so he would be alison. Russell stagger third as father went by ow so restless called rusty till he got older and as called s growing up as a pretty athletic kid. He enjoyed water sports particularly and on summer weekends. The family went to nearby lakes to swim and ski. He played little league baseball teams football teams and by junior high. He was the football team star halfback but he had suffered several injuries by playing sports after injury to his back. His one by dr that. If can continue to play footba he could possibly become permanently disabled. Though that's that for the football career. I would hope so. But he did make the baseball team and he played in the outfield and as a catcher by high school. He decided he wanted to be a high school coach. He was fit guy. Strong had a wonderful personality of the girls liked him. One female admirers later said that he had this. Robert redford type of appeal. Pretty high preuss. Yeah he had many female friends and could have his choice of dates but throughout high school. He only had one steady girlfriend. Her name was linda whittaker and he had begun dating her junior high russ's parents were never worried about him. They knew that he was responsible. He did well in school and he was very involved with the church as well after graduating from college. In nineteen seventy two russ spent a semester student teaching in carry near raleigh where he would be close to his girlfriend. Joe lynn windows out of the picture by now he asked then he got a college girlfriend khokar to lynn the following year. He became a junior high. Phys ed teacher and assistant coach his even temper. His persistence and his optimism really inspired confidence in his students. And many of these kids came from poor families and he would use his own money to help the by shoes and other stuff they need it. He even had them over to his house for meals. Sometimes or you take groceries to their homes search. Oh lynn just to him and they got married in..
"barbara" Discussed on True Crime Brewery
"Maybe she was taken those two things and kind of trying to augment her life would surprise me now now with this new job which she did actually have right yes. She did actually have the out. She had to move should have to live in high point so she started looking for an apartment there right away. Larry's parents were pretty relieved. Actually the she wouldn't be sustained there. She seemed to be up to things and they didn't want to know about these things. So barbara moved all her belongings out of the floyd's house into a new two bedroom apartment in highpoint and on october sixteenth. She started her new job. North carolina national bank as a clerk in a consumer loan department. Larry returned from his marine training for months later and settled in his apartment with barbara. Now it's too late for him to do student teaching that year so he took a job at sears. Downtown highpoint where he sold carpet furniture and curtains and on sundays larry. I'm barbara went to visit. His parents. family. Dinners that doris made. Barbara definitely wanted a more exciting life than that though. Oh absolutely she seemed like she was trying to look better than other people by buying things she couldn't afford and we know that her mother did the same thing but she was even worse. She was always buying new clothes jewelry and things for the apartment. She never seemed happier than when she was buying something. Especially something expensive that she could show off to others but then barbara did like her apartment and less than a year. After she moved into it she found a small house for rent so that was a step up for them. Barbara's preoccupation with sex began to come out in her conversations at the bank where she were and people were a little weirded out by that her boss began getting complaints from other women about. Barbara's open talk about sex and how bothered them. Apparently she'd give them some really. Hannah raunchy details about the sex. She at home with her husband. She was also openly flirtatious with male employees and customers. Barbara made friends with other women in the office. But then she'd do something and they'd be turned off and they wouldn't wanna be with their anymore like for example she'd ask for help with her work from the other women and then once her work was done she'd leave early and they'd be backed up trying to finish their work so that didn't go over. Well she just wasn't a team player as they say no. She wasn't no a big part of her job was processing loan. Applications and payments from car dealers in.
"barbara" Discussed on True Crime Brewery
"Hitting on her had sexual theme kinda. Yeah something wrong in her. Mind there and again. I think we could go back to her childhood at for at least part of that. Yeah well we don't know how anti-sex his her parents were right right. Would you still there battisson sex before marriage so it was a horrible thing but we don't have really anything that says how much they hammered. That point home. No we don't. But i think the church was pretty strong about it especially this was a while back. Were so that summer barbara returned from a trip to greensboro and said that she had checked by the draft board and had bad news for larry. She told him he was about to be drafted. So larry talk to his dad. Who encouraged him to ask for. Deferment he had a wife and a child and he was still a fulltime student for at least another six months. But larry said no. I'll have to face my military obligations sooner or later. So he just said i might as well go ahead and get it done. And he joined the marine reserves. Now that way he'd only have to be away for six months of active duty then he could return to do a student teaching and finish his degree. But later the fords learned that larry had not been in danger of being drafted at all. Barbara had actually made this up and leary's parents suspected that barbara was trying to just get laid out of the picture so she could see other men or you know from our standpoint today. It's easy to say the draft boards. Not gonna tell this guys wife that has been drafted. Yeah he's going to get this official letter from the board saying you're lucky numbers up boy come on in. Yes if they thought about it a little. They would have figured that out. I think you're right. Yeah so. Larry went to san diego for his basic training. And this left barber and twenty months old brian living with his parents now.
"barbara" Discussed on Dyking Out - a Lesbian and LGBTQ Podcast for Everyone!
"Who doesn't like the other people are. What's the gossip water the dynamics and eating it up and we love that. The house is called the women's house and hoping that now it will be called the women's house once again. That's so funny and thank you for explaining that for me because you know we have a document. We have our notes for the episode. I see women's house and i go. What did i miss in dyke world this week. Women's house like the women's house. I haven't heard of this funeral speaking of women and older lesbians. Can we finally talk about it and finally talk about it the fact that we watched the two of us on. We both watched it new year's eve but it comes out this week so we can actually talk about our opinions on it. We also got to watch this. Qna moderated by julianne moore. Yes resident lesbian straight actress. Julianne moore right right. S trying to make enough. How how do i describe. Julian moore is somebody who has thrice played a queer woman. Yes well and very strange real life. There was a great moment in the queue in a where right at the beginning. She asked barbara the woman who plays one of the two main lesbians. Yeah you know her inspiration for her role and she was like well. Actually i watched you and the kids are all right. So i really got what i needed from that. What's you being a big old. Which part were you watching the one. Where julianne moore sex mark ruffalo. Dick was that part of the kids are alright that your inspiration. The coddling bed while they watched gay male porn should have watched ammonites though. I guess it wasn't out yet. But yeah i did love this actress though barbara sakala. Yeah she's only read her name. She was so great in this movie and both of them were grey and this was a great example of doing a story that is about lesbians and one of them doesn't wanna come out of the closet so we have happiest season and we have this and one of the film's doesn't right because these stories do exist so we can still tell them but do it in a way that unexpected. That's that's more nuanced that okay. This film is truly the best story about two old. Since grace and franky. I love it so much as of now. It's one hundred percent on rotten tomatoes for good reason..
"barbara" Discussed on Dyking Out - a Lesbian and LGBTQ Podcast for Everyone!
"I think the only thing that she said was bar. If you're going to have sex just do it in the house. They'll do with girl. Yeah garage let's out together. See saw i and welcome to daikin out a podcast that promotes equality by being equally excited about gay marriages and divorces. I'm caroline berchet. I'm melody kamali and today we're taking out with musician. Barbara gresko about mother. Daughter dykes but i some announcements. You know the drill. Find us on apple. Podcasts rate is five stars writer review. Say hi we love.