37 Burst results for "Maxine"
A highlight from News Block: Did SBF Try to Pay Trump Billions Not To Run? U.S. Debt Hits $33 Trillion, Chase UK Banning Crypto, Honda Now Accepts Bitcoin
"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. Bitcoin has been on the move this week, breaking out above its 200 -day moving average and climbing back above $28 ,000 a coin for the first time since mid -August. Despite its volatility, Bitcoin is now up 68 % on the year as it enters October. And October, by the way, has garnered the nickname, Uptober. It has typically been one of Bitcoin's best performing months. It's gone up an average of 22 % in October over the last 10 years. Some believe Bitcoin's recent price performance is related to increased awareness about the unsustainable nature of the US debt. Our national debt recently hit a concerning milestone when it crossed $33 trillion for the first time in history. According to the Treasury Department, this is a result of fiscal spending increasing nearly 50 % from 2019 to 2021. In other words, government officials went on a spending binge the last couple of years. And given the rise in interest rates, the US government is now spending more to pay interest on our $33 trillion in debt than it does on national defense. Billionaire hedge fund manager Ray Dalio, who has written extensively on how we are about to reach the end of the long -term debt cycle, is warning that we might be close to a deleveraging event. The long -term debt cycle refers to the idea that over long time periods, typically 50 to 75 years, economies accumulate larger and larger amounts of debt with each short -term business cycle. This all culminates in a peak where the debt becomes unsustainable and sparks a large deleveraging period marked by reduced spending, falling asset prices, slower economic growth and debt reduction. In a recent interview, Dalio was quite blunt. We're going to have a debt crisis in this country soon. How fast it transpires, I think is going to be a function of that supply demand issue. And so I'm watching that very closely. The reality of the debt problem was all too apparent in a recent report from the Institute of International Finance that showed that global government debt has hit a record $307 trillion, the title of the report, In Search of Sustainability. Now, Bitcoiners have been sounding the alarm about the debt problem for many years, but now the narrative appears to be going mainstream. Bloomberg published a short documentary titled America's Looming Debt Spiral. So the media seems to be waking up to the fact that this debt is unpayable. The solutions, well, they can choose to default, which would be catastrophic and politically untenable, or they can choose to try to print their way out, which would devalue the dollar even more. Scarce assets like Bitcoin will ultimately be the beneficiaries as the debt spiral continues and investors are finally starting to recognize Bitcoin as an asset to protect themselves from the debt doom loop. All right, shifting gears, much of the focus this week will be on FTX and its founder Sam Bankman -Fried, whose criminal trial is set to begin this week. SPF faces seven counts of fraud and conspiracy related to the collapse of FTX. If found guilty on all charges, SPF could spend the rest of his life behind bars. FTX customers, investors, and employees will all be testifying in the trial against the infamous former poster child for crypto. In a 60 Minutes interview Sunday, author Michael Lewis, who's famous for The Ranging Interview about SPF and the book he's releasing about his rise and fall titled Going Infinite. Lewis had spent more than six months traveling with and interviewing SPF in the lead up to FTX's collapse. A letter from a talent agent from Creative Artists Agency said that Lewis likened SPF to the quote, Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader of crypto. Clips from that interview went viral on social media, including one in which Lewis says SPF was trying to pay former President Donald Trump billions of dollars not to run again in 2024. He also said there is an SPF shaped hole in the universe that now needs filling and that FTX was quote, a great real business. Overwhelming consensus on Bitcoin X, Twitter was Michael Lewis was casting FTX and SPF in a favorable light, despite operating one of the largest frauds in financial history. And heading into the trial, the timing and tone of this interview raised some eyebrows given that Lewis said the book was a quote, letter to the jury, which appears to suggest the jury should read the book potentially influencing the outcome of the court case. The trial will be dominating headlines for the coming months as the industry and millions of victims follow it closely to see what happens. FTX is still a topic of discussion in Washington DC, where the company came up in a hearing in front of the House Financial Services Committee. That's where SEC Chairman Gary Gensler was grilled for more than five hours on SEC oversight. Much of the conversation revolved around its enforcement actions toward the broader crypto industry. Democratic Senator Maxine Waters, who strangely called Bitcoin, Bitcoin during the hearing, asked Gary Gensler about ways he would protect investors from frauds like FTX and Terra Luna. Now I have to mention this was the same senator who met with SPF on multiple occasions prior to FTX collapse and even commended SPF for his candidness and willingness to talk to the public after the company went bust. Gensler and the SEC have also come under heavy criticism from Congress for meeting with FTX behind closed doors and also for the lack of clarity around the regulatory approach to the crypto industry. One notable exchange during the hearing was when Gary Gensler was asked directly by Republican Congressman Patrick McHenry whether or not he considered Bitcoin a security. This was Gensler's response. Well I think the staff of the SEC have also ended prior to the hearing. I'm just asking you this question and this is not a gotcha. I thought there's going to be an easy softball into harder questions. Do you think Bitcoin is a security? No, I think I've said this in the past that I think that it doesn't mean a Howey test. I'm asking to answer my question now. This is not supposed to be hard. I know I said it does not meet the Howey test which is the law of the land about being an investment contract. So it doesn't meet it's a commodity. Is that fair? I would say it's not a security and then the test is otherwise for other laws. Many of the questions directed at Gensler were around the SEC continuing to reject multiple spot Bitcoin ETF applications. Despite the congressional pressure for an ETF approval, the SEC continues to delay them. In the last week the Commission delayed its decision on several prominent ETF applications including ones from BlackRock, Bitwise, ARK Invest and Invesco. These delays came earlier than many expected and the SEC noted that the announcement was expedited due to the risk of a government shutdown that was narrowly avoided over the weekend. The next date to watch will be January 10th when the SEC will have to make a decision on ARK Invest's filing. And finally this week Bitcoin has not only been the topic of courtrooms but boardrooms as well. Companies continue to take different approaches when it comes to embracing or rejecting this new monetary technology. We saw two major companies take very different stances this past week. The first came from Chase Bank in the UK when it put out a notice to customers that it will be banning crypto linked payments and transfers citing the fraud and criminal activity associated with crypto. Chase UK justified this censorship announcement by stating that the bank is keeping its clients money safe and secure. Now it's no surprise to see Chase taking the stance given that Bitcoin threatens its core business as a financial intermediary. With Bitcoin there's no need for Chase to be a middleman and take fees with every transaction. Meanwhile Honda appears to be making moves to accept Bitcoin for payment. The Japanese car giant has entered a partnership with a blockchain payment system called FCF Pay. This partnership will allow customers to use cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin to purchase or lease Honda products in lieu of traditional fiat currencies. In the coming years I think companies will continue to be forced to make a decision on how they will approach the growing demand for Bitcoin. Some companies like Honda will benefit from embracing the tech while others like Chase will probably lose ground to competitors that do recognize the benefits that Bitcoin can bring to their business. That's it for the news block your subscribe to coin story so you never miss an episode. This show is for educational purposes and should not be construed as investment advice. Until next time keep stacking.
Fresh update on "maxine" discussed on CoinDesk Podcast Network
"I love his optimism. But the important thing is, they're talking about it. They're diving in, they're trying to get educated. I think progress may not be the progress of the pace that we'd like to see, but it's definitely progress. It's massive. We had congressmen posting, you have to understand the difference between an algorithmic stablecoin and a collateralized stablecoin. The idea that they would have done that in 2018 is they were like, stablecoin, what? They've come a long way. Where do you see the biggest opportunities overseas? So, I live in New York State, and we have a regulatory regime out of the financial services that I think is relatively sophisticated. It used to have the reputation, the bit license of being very slow and hard to get, and it still is. But they've tripled their staff, they're all crypto-fluent, and they're actually regulating. And they have the rules that, an FTX couldn't have happened under New York regulations. So, it's very thoughtful. They're interacting with a lot of foreign regulators. So, I'm just an advisor to them. It's a very deep perspective, because this is what Maxine Waters got upset, because PayPal decided to launch their stablecoin under NYDFS regulations, right? Listen, you have a major sector of financial services that is not regulated by Washington that people forget about. The insurance industry, it's all regulated at the state level. So, if DC doesn't get its act together, I know you have a very small chance you'll be wrong. But if that's the case, if you took Florida, let me take it, forget Wyoming, but if Florida were to set up a DFS, so you had a red state and a blue state with sophisticated crypto regulation, they might just leapfrog whatever's going to happen in Washington. So, I think that's an optimistic take on it. It also plays on the idea that the United States is the ultimate decentralized system, right? It is one of its advantages. It kind of is pre-blockchain decentralization. All right, listen, four and a half minutes to go. Why don't we just explore really the number of advisors who, I mean, there seems to be interest in this space. People have been curious about it for some time. There's a number of prominent advisors who are out there promoting it. But the uptick is still difficult, right? We talked about custody and other things. What do you see as the single most important thing that needs to happen to get this community more engaged? We talked about the Bitcoin ETF, but what can be done? I'm not on the product side, but I can tell you what I get here from my internal partners. It really is a ton of education. We need to continue to educate, and we also need to continue to make the experiences easier. Because when I think about it, it's challenging. I heard many panelists speak over the course of the past few days talking about advisors need to spend more time advising and less time administering. And if we could help them do that, I think that could drive adoption. I'm an investment person. So I'd say, especially now, put half a percent of your clients portfolios in Bitcoin or more. It's a good time of long term because I'm afraid of government debt. And I just I don't know when that could may not be our lifetime, but that's the biggest risk to our financial system now, I believe. And then number two is cyclically. This is a great time because you've got the happening next next year in the second quarter. That's always been bullish for crypto, maybe less so as each cycle goes through, but it's been bullish. And the Fed has probably stopped raising rates or it's close to the end. So that's an actionable investment idea. I believe it. Does the sector break free of that risk-asset correlation? I mean, I'm not liking the word correlation, but is there that between other cryptos? Yeah, because it seems like there are times when crypto is sort of like doing its own thing, but certainly when it's been sort of through this rate cycle, it's been vulnerable to that. Well, just a couple of observations. I always say the Bitcoin is like an eight year old child, right? It's just a maturing asset. About a year ago, people were like, I don't need Bitcoin because it's highly correlated to NASDAQ. Now the correlation in NASDAQ is almost zero. Not that I love correlation, it's a statistic. So I think it's evolving over time. And yes, it is highly correlated to the rest of crypto right now. But I think that could change. Yeah, I think the high correlation is just straight fake news. I think it's legitimately untrue in a general sense. If you look at Bitcoin's history for nine out of the last 10 years, its correlation has been below 0.25. It was only in that one year of the most extreme QE we've ever had to S &P 500 has been below 0.25, which is effectively zero. It's only that one year with the extreme QE that the correlation spiked to like 0.5, 0.6, which still isn't that high. Like any asset, it's driven by multiple factors. Macro is one of them, but crypto specific is the other one. Historically, that's the primary driver. It's only because we had trillions of dollars of stimulus and zero interest rates. So if we're in that environment, of course, that's going to dictate things. But in any normalized monetary and federal environment, it's going to have a very low correlation to risk assets, effectively zero. At least that's what it's done historically. Pretty much everything became a risk asset or a non-risk asset. Tesla wasn't trading based on the number of cars it sold. It was just trading on a risk basis. But long-term, crypto is driven by crypto factors, which are not stock factors, which is what makes it so valuable in portfolio settings. Any final word from you? One thing I would just say is we talked a lot about Bitcoin and crypto. I would say personally, I don't think they're the same thing. Bitcoin is a crypto asset. Crypto as a broader thing, when people often talk about it, they're talking about smart contract platforms, decentralized application. Many of these tokens have different economics and they have very different fundamentals when you look at the technology. So I would just caution people to think about it. Yes, this is an alternative asset class, but they are not all the same. It's very late to start defining terms, but there's like 20,000 tokens out there. And when I talk about crypto, we just talk about the 100 or so that have some economic ecosystem involved. So it's software that someone is paying for some level of functionality related to that software. So yeah, that triggered my thought there. Alrighty. I think that's all the time we have for now. I didn't see there was a question about real-time settlement. Sometimes I didn't see it, but we answered that. I think there is, the answer is yes, there is going to be real-time settlement in the global financial system as a technology. Thank you so much for your time. A round of applause for the panel, please. Thank you. Today's show has been produced and edited by senior producer, Michelle Musso and associate producer, Ryan Huntington. Our theme song is The News Tonight by Shimmer. Thanks for listening.
A highlight from Congressional Republicans Lash Out At Gensler
"And at the end of it all, after dealing with several more non -answers from Gensler, an exasperated ogles closed the hearing with the call to open up the floodgates, hit him with subpoenas, get the information we need. The obfuscation, the not answering questions, I'm sick and tired of it. Dude, you wear tap dancing shoes better than Fred Astaire and enough is enough. It's time that questions are answered and that we have the information that we need. Welcome back to The Breakdown with me, NLW. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on, guys? It is Thursday, September 28th, and today we are talking about Gensler's combative hearing. Before we get into that, however, 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. Well, friends, we had yesterday another hearing featuring SEC Chair Gary Gensler. This was a House Financial Services Committee oversight hearing. And what makes this one a little bit more interesting, even in the Senate hearing that we heard last week, is one, it had some interesting lead -in in the fact that a bipartisan group had just sent Gary Gensler a letter encouraging him, in the strongest possible language, to approve a Bitcoin spot ETF. And two, it had the setup for some very interesting fireworks heading in. And indeed, that is exactly what we got. Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry set the agenda from the beginning with his opening remarks. He addressed Gensler saying, Last time you were before the committee, I voiced my concerns regarding your reckless approach to rulemaking, lack of capital formation agenda, crusade against the digital asset ecosystem, and unresponsiveness to Congress. So many things changed, so many things remain the same. Those are the same issues on the docket today. McHenry went on to accuse Gensler of doing nothing over the past five months to remedy the legitimate and often bipartisan concern expressed by this committee, adding that this is disgraceful and that their patience was wearing thin. Now, the Republican critique of Gensler's rulemaking agenda is that a huge number of rules have been proposed during his term without an economic analysis being performed on their cumulative effect. Regarding the crypto crackdown, McHenry rebuffed Gensler's constant assertion that the law is clear. He stated, your actions have created more confusion and lasting damage. Indeed, he said that contrary to the SEC's role of consumer protection, that Gensler's actions had, quote, pushed legitimate digital asset activities outside of regulated financial institutions where consumers are best protected. Keep in mind, this is all in the opening statements. McHenry went on noting that the SEC's regulation by enforcement agenda has been ineffective and has been on a massive losing streak in the courts. Still, the main point, the main thrust of McHenry's opening, was that it was unacceptable that the SEC had not engaged with Congress. Wrapping it up, McHenry said, the SEC is not above the law, nor is it unique. I do not want to be the first chairman of this committee to issue a subpoena to the SEC, and you should not want to be the first SEC chair to receive a congressional subpoena. Either we find a path forward where the SEC recognizes Congress as a co -equal branch of government and is responsive to our oversight duties, or my option is to issue that subpoena. It's time for you to consider the lasting consequences of your actions and what that means to the SEC's reputation long -term. While your time in this role may be temporary, the repercussions for your actions may be permanent for the agency. It was a fierce opening that sent the signal right away of what we were in store for. Now, a couple other quick notes around other opening statements. Democrat Ranking Member Maxine Waters used her time to rail against MAGA Republicans for pushing the government into a shutdown, and effectively defended the SEC's agenda on all fronts, and asserted that their rulemaking agenda was moving quote thoughtfully and effectively. Now, Gensler himself also got a chance to give an opening statement, and most of his time was spent on justifying the agency's regulatory agenda. He claimed overall that the rulemaking process had been measured with ample time and consideration given to public comment. Now, from there we moved into the question section of the hearing. McHenry as committee chair got to go first and used his questions to focus on Bitcoin. He asked Gensler whether he stood by his previous comments that Bitcoin is not a security, which Gensler evaded by talking in circles, never reaching a point. Notably frustrated by this process, McHenry snapped, I'm asking you to answer my question now. This is not supposed to be hard. Unable to get a straight answer, McHenry moved on to his point that there is currently no regulator with authority over Bitcoin's spot markets. He asked whether Gensler believed legislation should be passed to close that regulatory gap. To the surprise of no one, Gensler continued in his noncommittal manner, acknowledging the existence of said gap but failing to engage with the need for legislation. After that, McHenry left the crypto topic to press Gensler about when he can expect a response to document requests. Becoming ever more frustrated with Gensler's mealy -mouthed answers, McHenry said, This should not be the hard work of a chairman. You have 30 major rulemakings, but you won't even provide basic documents to us. Your unresponsiveness is non -compliance and we'll have to take action if you're not willing to comply. Now Maxine waters again as ranking minority member got to speak next. She, too, continued on the crypto theme, although she used her time to accuse the industry writ large of quote gross violations of the law that end in investors getting ripped off. She asked Gensler what the SEC has done to quote shut down crypto firms and whether quote crypto firms are getting the message. This, of course, mainly served to set up Gensler's usual sound bites. This is a field, he said, that's rife with fraud, manipulation and scams, and the American public is still getting hurt by the non -compliance in this field. Waters also used this chance to castigate Republicans who quote too often protect crypto firms. Now it was very clear listening to Waters that she wants the public to see the crypto industry as just Luna and FTX, to extrapolate them to everything and effectively shut the industry down. Now moving into the rest of the questioning, much of the substantive discussion centered on SEC staff accounting bulletin 121. Better known as SAB 121, this measure requires financial institutions to place intangible assets on their own balance sheet rather than in segregated customer accounts. The rule has been widely criticized for making crypto custody essentially unworkable for banks. Dissatisfaction was expressed from numerous representatives, including one of Gensler's usual allies, Brad Sherman. Sherman noted that the rule lumps all intangible assets together from real estate to crypto. He suggested that specifically designed rules for vastly different asset classes would be more appropriate. The most robust questioning on this topic, however, came from Republican Mike Flood. Flood put to Gensler that his staff did not consult with prudential regulators on SAB 121, which Gensler acknowledged. After stating that he had personally looked into this issue, Flood noted that the Accounting Standards Board had not published any guidance around crypto custody. This contradicted Gensler's comments from a previous hearing when he stated that the SEC was simply applying existing accounting rules. Flood said quote, With regard to SAB 121's potential effects on a bank's balance sheet, it's fair to say that fact pattern we have is that the SEC is not just going out of its lane, but it failed to comprehend the existence of any conflict with prudential rules. He suggested that there are only two explanations for this action. Either the SEC knew there was no justification for SAB 121 and chose to do it anyway, or that there were fairly obvious mistakes made during that process. Flood concluded saying quote, The case of SAB 121 raises the question of whether the SEC is compromised. Now, as you might expect, minority whip Tom Emmer lined up to take his shot with a series of rapid -fire yes or no questions. The main thrust of his questioning was around whether Gensler's history as a partner at Goldman Sachs had colored his agenda at the SEC. To get a sense of Emmer's opinion on this, just look at his tweet from yesterday where he said, Fact, Gary Gensler is not an impartial regulator, and his answers to my questions today prove just that. He's made a career of being relentlessly loyal to the largest institutions in America at the clear expense of innovation, competition, and everyday Americans. One example, Emmer presented Gensler with a quote he previously gave about bank executives being concerned about depositors moving money into crypto. Emmer asked, Can you assure this committee that your style of regulation by harassment towards digital asset innovation is to the benefit of every American and not driven by your desire to protect industry incumbents? At another point, Emmer asked whether Gensler believed that all crypto tokens were securities, which was, once again, avoided with a rambling noncommittal answer. And all of this built up to the big finale in which Emmer said, Mr. Gensler, despite your years of rhetoric, I'm convinced you are not an impartial regulator. Instead, it's clear you are working to consolidate your own power even though it means crushing opportunities for everyday Americans and, frankly, the financial future of this country. Even the federal courts are highlighting the damage you, sir, are doing to our constituents and they are telling you you don't have the legal authority to accomplish your goal of squashing competition in the financial markets. Now, while this was extremely satisfying to watch if you happen to agree with Emmer, in general, I find that this type of interaction is exactly why these hearings are so much about and not really about productive anything. This was a chance to articulate the Republican position against Gary Gensler. There's no real place for listening. It's about laying out a narrative. Now, in this case, I happen to agree with Emmer's narrative, but it still doesn't make for the most effective governance. Another notable line of questioning came from Democrat Richie Torres. Torres used his time to dig into the issue of whether crypto should be governed by securities law. He said, I worry that the term investment contract has become so infinitely malleable and I worry that when it comes to crypto, your interpretation of the term investment contract has no limiting principle and therefore could invite arbitrary and capricious enforcement action. Torres referenced an August report from six law professors which examined the history of the Howey test. That report had noted that no Supreme Court ruling has ever determined the existence of an investment contract scheme without recognizing one or more contracts underlying that scheme. When pushed to provide a case that contradicts this research, Gensler was unable to do so. When Gensler began to waffle, Torres cut him off, stating that, This is a question to which you should know the answer because the definition of an investment contract is the central issue. That's what determines the extent of your authority. That's what determines the applicability of federal securities law to crypto transactions. Your inability to answer that question is baffling to me. Switching tactics, Torres asked whether purchasing a Pokémon card would constitute a securities transaction. Gensler, as always, was unable to give a straight answer, stating that he would know what the context was, although generally he acknowledged that it would not be. Torres followed up by asking whether purchasing a tokenized Pokémon card would be considered a securities transaction. He asked Gensler if, For you, the process of tokenization is what transforms a non -securities transaction into a securities transaction? Gensler, of course, did not get to a real answer and just fell back on restating the elements of the Howey test. One other topic that you might be wondering if it came up was the Prometheum question. Prometheum was, of course, the first crypto firm to obtain SEC registration as a crypto brokerage, despite the fact that that licensing seems to give them no ability to actually offer digital asset trading. Prometheum is also minority -owned by a prominent Chinese firm. After Gensler failed to express any serious concern with the Prometheum situation, Congressman Ralph Norman noted that the SEC had taken 10 weeks to respond to a letter on the issue. He said, Andy Ogles brought the four -hour hearing full circle, saying, And at the end of it all, after dealing with several more non -answers from Gensler, an exasperated Ogles closed the hearing with the call to, So, what can be drawn from this hearing, if anything? Well, Gensler appears to be stubbornly sticking to his plan to evade document requests and oversight from Republican representatives. Over the four -hour hearing, there were few, if any, answers from Gensler that produced any new information or even, frankly, attempted good -faith engagement with the questions. Throughout the hearing, Gensler acted as if he knew there would be no serious repercussions and he could continue to treat congressional oversight as a joke. Republicans, for their part, are clearly fed up and ready to act. McHenry began and ended the hearing with a threat to subpoena the SEC and Gensler to compel a response to the numerous document requests that have gone unanswered. The threat seemed to carry little weight for Gensler, who seemed more than willing to allow that controversial action to play out. Now, on the flip side, establishment Democrats appear entirely disengaged with the legislative process and committed to the current strategy of naming failed crypto projects and demanding that the SEC continue its rampage throughout the industry. No senior Democrats appear at all concerned that the SEC is losing in court, as long as that litigation remains a roadblock for the industry. Representative Torres remained a bright spot and one of the few Democrats breaking with his senior colleagues. His questions showed a deep understanding of the legal issues surrounding token lawsuits and the need for additional clarity and crypto regulation. Overall, the hearing really just confirmed what we already knew about Gensler and his leadership of the SEC, which is, of course, that it seems very unlikely that anything will change. However, Republicans have now clearly reached the end of their rope and are ready to play hardball by using subpoena power. As Bill Huizenga put it to Gensler, what's your plan? Because we've got a plan. Until next time, guys, be safe and take care of each other. Peace.
Fresh update on "maxine" discussed on Evening News with Art Sanders
"High expected in the mid 60s currently in downtown Seattle 55 degrees under cloudy skies news radio 1000 FM 97 7 your station with Eric Heintz good morning it's 445 here are some of your top headlines an election for the new speaker of the house is set to be held next Wednesday a candidate forum for a speaker will be held next Tuesday with the election being held the following day Kevin McCarthy says he will not run again following the chamber's decision the is FBI announcing the results of an operation to investigate crimes against indigenous women and children in Seattle and nine other cities investigated more than 220 cases and made several arrests and sports the Sounders can wrap up an MLS playoff berth tonight as they host the LA galaxy it is now 445 wanna streamline your morning routine without spending a lot of money to do I'm it Maxine Frost will discuss it on today's consumer tip the Office of Inspector General is taking over for the the investigation into whether Seattle police violated department policy as comer force Jackie Kent explains the Office of Police Accountability referred the case due to conflict of interest the Seattle Office of Accountability Police launched its investigation in July after receiving several complaints about police video from it 2021 shows a Trump flag and a mock tombstone of 19 year old Demarius killed in a police shootout we're learning the OPA director during the
A highlight from 1269. Gary Gensler DESTROYED By Congress! FULL RECAP | Crypto vs SEC
"All right, so Gensler faces Congress, and it was a showdown for the ages. You guys do not want to miss this one. We've got a whole slew of clips from the entire hearing broken down into a very short run for you. So it's worth your time. Make sure and stick around for it. My name is Paul Baron. Welcome back into Tech Path. All right, so let's get into it. Let's just start off the top of the hill. And this, of course, is Mr. Patrick McHenry going in to the intro. Let's cut to that. So many things changed. So many things remain the same. Those are the same issues on the docket today. This means that in the last five months, you've done nothing to remedy the legitimate and often bipartisan concern expressed by this committee. That is disgraceful. Let me be clear, Chairman Gensler, our patience is wearing thin. Among your expansive rulemaking agenda items, there is not a single initiative aimed at improving access to capital. Third, your efforts to choke off the digital asset ecosystem, which has created real harm for consumers in our markets, is clear to all. On the other, we've seen your ad hoc regulation by enforcement approach to digital assets on a losing streak in the courts. You refuse to be transparent with Congress regarding your interactions with FTX and Sam Bank and Freed. Your lack of responsiveness to this committee's legitimate oversight continues to be unacceptable. And I want to finish here. So let me be clear, I do not want to be the first chairman of this committee to issue a subpoena to the Securities Exchange Commission. And you should not want to be the first SEC chair to receive a congressional subpoena. Either we find a path forward where the SEC recognizes Congress is a co -equal branch of government and is responsive to our oversight duties, or my option is to issue a subpoena. It's time for you to consider the lasting consequences of your action. All right. So McHenry kind of laying down the law there. And one thing he said that was a little confusing to me was a co -equal branch of government. They're really they're not a branch of government. So I was a little surprised at that. But let's go on the other side and listen to what Maxine Waters had to say. The chairman just indicated that his patience is running thin. Mine is thinner with the opposite side of the aisle. That said, I want you to know that you're doing exactly the job that the American people want and is shaping up to be the most pro worker, pro investor, pro small business SEC since FDR created the agency. My patient is wearing thinner than the chairman's patient. Let's get on with it.
A highlight from 682:SECs Power Struggle: Congress, ETF Delays, and a Pivotal Hearing
"Good evening, and welcome to The Crypto Overnight -er. I'm Nick Ademus, 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 10 p .m. Pacific on Wednesday, September 27th, 2023. Welcome back to The Crypto Overnight -er, 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 the SEC's ongoing tango with the crypto industry. From Gary Gensler's controversial stance ahead of a congressional hearing to the SEC's foot dragging on Bitcoin ETF approvals, the regulatory landscape is becoming a battleground. And don't think Congress is sitting idle. They're stepping into the ring, demanding answers and action from the SEC. Buckle up, it's going to be a rollercoaster of a night. US Securities Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler has been vocal, and his recent statements ahead of a congressional hearing are stirring the pot. Gensler testified in front of the House Financial Services Committee, and we're going to get to his testimony in a bit. He's holding fast to his stance that most cryptocurrencies and crypto firms fall under federal securities laws, laws that, mind you, have been on the books for decades, according to his testimony. Gensler's view is a direct challenge to the crypto industry's ethos of decentralization and financial freedom. He likens the current state of the crypto market to the 1920s, before federal securities laws were in place. A comparison that's not just a stretch, but a leap back in time, ignoring the innovative nature of blockchain technology. Again, during his testimony today, he reiterated his belief that Bitcoin is not a security. He stopped short of saying that Bitcoin is a commodity. When he was asked if he believes that Bitcoin is a security, Gensler responded that he, the SEC staff, and prior chairs have said that it does not meet the Howey Test. However, he was reluctant to say that Bitcoin was a commodity during a follow -up question. When talking about Bitcoin's categorization, he said, quote, the test is otherwise for other laws. Again, refusing to answer the question. Gensler is not without his critics. Patrick McHenry is the chair of the House Financial Services Committee. He was the one asking questions about Bitcoin and receiving non -answers in return. McHenry accused Gensler of lacking clarity, and McHenry's point is valid. How can you punish digital asset firms for not adhering to laws when it's unclear if those laws even apply? It's like being ticketed for speeding when there are no speed limit signs. On the other side of the aisle, some Democrats like Maxine Waters are siding with Gensler. They believe that existing securities laws can work for crypto firms, but let's be real. This isn't just about regulation. It's about control. The government wants a piece of the crypto pie and they're using outdated laws to stake their claim. The House Financial Services Committee has advanced two bills. One aims to transition a digital asset from being a security to a commodity. The other looks to regulate stable coins. Both are clear indicators that lawmakers are scrambling to catch up with an industry that's already miles ahead. While Gensler was testifying, crypto entrepreneurs were in Washington for Coinbase's Stand With Crypto Day. They met with lawmakers and discussed how crypto is creating jobs. It's a counter narrative that needs to be heard, especially when the SEC is painting the industry as the Wild West. The SEC, under Gensler's leadership, is pushing for crypto compliance based on antiquated laws. That not only stifles innovation, but also contradicts the very principles that make crypto a beacon of financial freedom. And as the government tries to rein in the crypto world, the industry is fighting back, making it clear that they will not be easily tamed. Gensler's testimony is a pivotal moment for the crypto industry. His unwavering stance that most cryptocurrencies should be regulated as securities is a red flag. It's a philosophical clash with the ethos of decentralization that many in the crypto community hold dear. Gensler's comparison of today's crypto landscape to the 1920s is a thinly veiled warning. He's essentially saying that the crypto industry is a Wild West that needs taming. Now let's not forget, the crypto industry isn't Wall Street. It's a new frontier with its own set of rules and innovations. But Henry's criticism of Gensler is noteworthy. It reflects the frustration that many feel about the SEC's unclear guidelines. How can crypto firms comply with laws that aren't explicitly defined for them? It's like being asked to read a book, but the pages are blank. The advanced bills are a mixed bag. While they offer some regulatory clarity, they also paved the way for more governmental oversight, which could stifle innovation. As we unpack the SEC's heavy handed approach, it's clear that the regulatory web around cryptocurrencies is tightening. Gensler's testimony is sure to fan the flames of the ongoing debate on governmental control versus financial freedom. But folks, this isn't the only arena where the SEC is flexing its muscles. The SEC's recent move to extend deadlines for Bitcoin ETF applications from ARK21 shares and GlobalX is emblematic of the same regulatory hesitance. It's a systemic issue. The SEC's rationale, market manipulation and weak investor protections. But as many of you know, the real crux of the matter is control. The same control that the government is keen on exerting over the broader crypto space. And let's not overlook the timing here. While Gensler prepares to defend his stance in Congress, the SEC is simultaneously delaying decisions on Bitcoin ETFs. And why? All under the shadow of a looming government shutdown, adding another layer of complexity to this regulatory maze. And it's not just individual critics or lawmakers putting the SEC under the microscope, it's the entire crypto industry who is watching and waiting. Which brings us to the SEC's recent move to extend deadlines for Bitcoin ETF applications from ARK21 shares and GlobalX. Another chapter in the ongoing saga of regulatory hesitance and it's happening as the US government teeters on the brink of a shutdown. ARK21 shares and GlobalX had their hopes dashed when the SEC pushed back its decision deadlines. ARK's new deadline is January 10th, while GlobalX has until November 21st. This isn't the SEC's first radio. They've got 240 days to make a call after starting a review. But this time they've acted well before their interim deadlines. Why the rush? That looming government shutdown might be the culprit. ARK Investment Management and 21 shares have been in the game since 2021. They faced SEC rejections before. GlobalX is a newer player. They aim to offer investors a safer way to get Bitcoin exposure, but the SEC isn't biting. True to form, they cite market manipulation and weak investor protections as the reasons for their reluctance. Now, a federal court recently called the SEC arbitrary and capricious in its ETF decisions. Despite this, the SEC is continuing to drag its feet. ARK's CEO, Cathie Wood, expected this delay. She believes the SEC will approve multiple Bitcoin ETFs at once, if at all. Meanwhile, the SEC is also reviewing applications from big names like BlackRock, Fidelity, VanEck, and Invesco. ARK21 shares was leading the pack, but now it's anyone's game. The SEC's hesitance is a sign of the regulatory uncertainty that's stifling innovation in the crypto space. And as the government faces a potential shutdown, this regulatory limbo could extend even further. So really, this shutdown could not have come at a worse time. But shutdown or no shutdown, the SEC has been dragging its feet on crypto for years. So let's be real. This is less about protecting the investor and more about maintaining control over a financial system that's rapidly evolving without them. The recent court ruling that called the SEC's past decisions arbitrary and capricious is a signal that their time of unchallenged authority is coming to an end. Cathie Wood expects more than one Bitcoin ETF to get approved eventually, and she's probably right. The SEC can't hold back this tide forever. And they need to be careful because first mover status brings a huge advantage in this kind of market. The delay might be frustrating, but it's also a sign that the SEC is feeling the heat. They're running out of excuses and with each delay, they're losing more credibility. So while we wait for the SEC to make up its mind, the crypto community gets stronger and the traditional financial system gets a little more nervous. The clock is ticking and it's not in the SEC's favor. While the SEC continues to drag its feet on Bitcoin ETF approvals, citing concerns that many in the industry see as smokescreens for control, it's not just the investors and financial firms that are losing patience. The political arena is starting to bubble with dissatisfaction and it's coming from both sides of the aisle. In fact, recent court rulings and bipartisan demands indicate that the SEC's longstanding resistance to crypto innovation is reaching a tipping point. Lawmakers have decided they've had enough of the SEC's hesitation and are now stepping into the ring guns blazing. And trust me, they're not missing words. A bipartisan group of lawmakers urged Gensler to approve the listing of spot Bitcoin ETFs immediately. This comes after that court ruling we were talking about involving Grayscale Investments. Grayscale secured a win when three judges in the US Court of Appeal ruled that the SEC had to re -review its bid for a spot Bitcoin ETF. This was after Grayscale sued the SEC for rejecting its proposal. This exposed the SEC's double standard. The court specifically addressed the SEC's differential treatment of spot Bitcoin ETFs in similar funds based on futures contracts. The lawmakers argued that a spot Bitcoin ETF is indistinguishable from a futures Bitcoin ETF. The lawmakers in question are representatives Mike Flood, Tom Emmer, Richie Torres, and Wiley Nickel. They argued that a regulated spot Bitcoin ETF would increase investor protection by making access to Bitcoin more transparent and safer. They sent a letter to Gensler, stating that Congress has a duty to ensure that the SEC approves investment products that meet requirements set out by Congress. During Gensler's testimony today, McHenry did not mince words. He called out Gensler's lack of responsiveness as unacceptable, which is funny because the SEC, the very agency tasked with enforcing transparency, is itself under fire for being opaque. The irony is palpable. McHenry's frustration isn't isolated. It's part of a broader sentiment that's been building up for months. The SEC has been aggressive in its enforcement actions against various crypto entities. Yet it's the same agency that oversaw one of the largest financial crimes in U .S. history, and within the crypto industry, no less. Congress wants answers, and they want them now. They specifically targeted Gensler's communications with FTX. McHenry said, quote, "'You refuse to be transparent with Congress regarding your interaction with FTX and San Bankman Free.'" Now, this is crucial. FTX was a major player in the crypto space, and any interactions between it and the SEC could have far -reaching implications. I remember back then that people were accusing SBF of setting things up with the SEC to be more favorable to FTX than the competition. McHenry revealed that the committee made multiple requests for documents from the SEC. Seven months pass, they've received zilch. Not one single non -public document. McHenry's patience is wearing thin, and he's made it clear that the SEC is not above the law. McHenry is calling for a path forward, one where the SEC is responsive to congressional requests. If not, they're looking at the first congressional subpoena issued to the SEC. This showdown is a reflection of the growing distrust between regulatory bodies and those who hold them accountable. And let's not forget, this is happening in the backdrop of a crypto industry that's already skeptical of centralized authority. McHenry's ultimatum to Gensler is a significant moment. It's a challenge to the SEC's authority and a call for greater transparency in an industry that values it above all else. The ball is in Gensler's court. Will he play or will he forfeit? Either way, the crypto community will be watching closely. The SEC has been all too eager to slap lawsuits on crypto companies. Yet when it comes to their own dealings with FTX, one of the industry's major players, they're as tight -lipped as a sealed vault. What are they hiding and why is it taking a congressional threat of a subpoena to get some answers? McHenry's frustration is palpable and frankly justified. The SEC is supposed to be accountable to Congress and by extension, the American people. Their lack of responsiveness is not just unacceptable, as McHenry puts it, it's a breach of public trust. And let's not forget the irony here. The SEC, which has been so keen on enforcing transparency in the crypto world, is itself becoming opaque. This isn't just hypocrisy, it's a red flag. If the SEC can't be transparent about its interactions with FTX, how can we trust them to regulate an industry that's all about decentralization and transparency? The bipartisan push for immediate approval of Spot Bitcoin ETFs is a significant development. It's not just a win for the crypto community, but it's also a slap in the face for the SEC. The agency's inconsistent stance on Bitcoin ETFs has long been a point of contention. The court ruling in favor of Grayscale adds legal weight to the argument that the SEC's current position is, in fact, untenable. What's even more intriguing is the bipartisan nature of this push. In an era where political divisions run deep, the united front from both sides of the aisle speaks volumes. It suggests that the benefits of a regulated Bitcoin ETF, increased transparency and investor protection, are universally acknowledged. As I have long said, if crypto becomes a left versus right issue, both sides will lose. So it's good to see the left and the right working together on something for once. The SEC's reluctance to greenlight Spot Bitcoin ETFs is a blockade on financial innovation. This is especially glaring when you consider that futures -based Bitcoin ETFs have already received a nod. This differential treatment is not only consistent, but also discriminatory. Gensler's oversight hearing was a pivotal moment. The lawmakers are not just asking for explanations, they're demanding action. And given the court's ruling and the mounting pressure from Congress, the SEC might finally have to yield. This is not just about one type of financial product. It's about the broader acceptance of cryptocurrency in the financial ecosystem. A Spot Bitcoin ETF could serve as a gateway for mainstream investors, making it easier for them to enter the crypto market. And let's not forget, easier access means more capital inflow, which could significantly impact Bitcoin's value, and by extension, the entire crypto market. So what happened? In the showdown between Gary Gensler and Patrick McHenry at the House Financial Services Committee, the SEC's stand on regulating most cryptocurrencies as securities collided head on with the crypto industry's ethos of decentralization. Gensler likened the crypto landscape to the 1920s, a comparison met with skepticism and criticism. The SEC extended deadlines for Bitcoin ETF applications from ARK21 shares and GlobalEx, citing market manipulation and investor protection. But let's call it what it is, another play for control. And this comes amid a looming government shutdown, adding another layer to an already complex regulatory landscape. A bipartisan group of lawmakers is pushing back against the SEC's hesitance on approving Spot Bitcoin ETFs. This comes hot on the heels of a court ruling in favor of grayscale investments, adding legal weight to the frustrations with the SEC's inconsistent policies. Lastly, McHenry's calls for transparency in the SEC's dealings with FTX and other crypto entities culminate in a broader sentiment of distrust. He made it clear that the SEC's lack of responsiveness is unacceptable and even threatened the congressional subpoena. The overarching theme tonight is the intensing struggle for control and clarity between the SEC and the crypto world. On the one hand, the SEC is holding fast to ancient regulations that don't align with the ethos of the crypto industry. On the other, Congress and the courts are increasingly pushing back, demanding answers and more rational policies. This power struggle is affecting everything from how digital assets are classified to the approval of new financial products like Bitcoin ETFs. This regulatory tussle dictates the rules of the game, affecting your investments, your financial freedom and the future of the crypto industry itself. The struggle is far from over and each move has consequences that resonate throughout the crypto community. As we wrap tonight, it's clear that we're at a crossroads. The decisions being made by these institutions will either open new doors for the crypto industry or erect walls that stifle innovation and financial freedom. What's certain is that Congress is paying close attention to Gensler and exerting pressure on him to act soon, for better or worse. And that's going to do it for us tonight. I want to thank you, my listeners, because when you stop listening, I will stop talking. If you enjoyed tonight's show, then please like, follow, subscribe, leave a rating or maybe a review. And in the meantime, we'll see you tomorrow night. See you next time.
A highlight from SEC GARY GENSLER HEARING & SUBPOENA SOON? COINBASE CRYPTO ADVOCACY WITH NANCY PELOSI!
"Welcome back to the Thinking Crypto Podcast, your home for cryptocurrency news and interviews. If you are new here, please hit that subscribe button as well as the thumbs up button and leave a comment below. If you're listening on a podcast platform such as Spotify, Apple or Google, please leave a 5 star rating and review. It supports the podcast and it doesn't cost you anything. Well, folks, as you all may know, Gary Gensler testified before the House Financial Services Committee today. He got grilled. He got a lot of pressure questions and things that he was shaking and unable to answer. It's the same old nonsense. And I'm sure many of you saw the clips, so I'm not going to play a whole bunch of clips for you, but I'm going to give you the big takeaways. What can we expect next? And McHenry, Patrick out of the gate, started grilling Gary Gensler. He asked him, is Bitcoin a security? And Gary was like stumbling, like he couldn't even answer it. And of course, you know, Patrick McHenry was like, what are you doing, man? I'm giving you softball questions. You can't answer me. Is Bitcoin a security? So Gary Gensler continued his clown show. This guy's a scumbag regulator, as I've been saying for a long time, and needs to be fired. But the big takeaway from what Patrick McHenry said, folks, he threatened Gary Gensler and said, don't make me have to send a subpoena. And he highlighted that Gary has not sent documents about FTX. He highlighted Gary's losses in court and much more. So I think the next step, you know, I haven't seen this level of threat about a subpoena from these folks. So I think we're getting there, folks. And I'm actually going to be interviewing Congressman Warren Davidson, who also did a great job grilling Gary tomorrow. And he's going to I'm going to ask him about the subpoena and what are the next steps. And of course, he highlighted his SEC Stabilization Act, which essentially fires Gary Gensler and replaces that chair seat, adds another commissioner and an executive director. So it makes the SEC less political and more balanced. And he has some great questions to Gary. You know, he even alluded to the EITH Ethereum free pass. Some of you may have seen the clip. So he did a great job. And once again, I'm interviewing him tomorrow. So be sure you're subscribed on the podcast as well as the YouTube channel. And Tom Emmer also brought some heat on Gary Gensler saying, I'm convinced you are not an impartial regulator. And he went on and did a press conference about this. And Gary Gensler is a bureaucrat who does not answer to Congress and much more. So, you know, similar types of comments that we've seen historically. But I think the subpoena threat was the big takeaway for me. The other stuff was, you could argue, was said historically and said before and other hearings with Gary Gensler. Now, Democrat Richie Torres did a great job of talking to Gary and getting specific, like he highlighted, is buying a Pokemon card a security? Gary said no. So he said, well, what if that Pokemon card got tokenized on the blockchain? It's a den of security. And that's where Gary was going back and forth and saying he needs more details and yada, yada. But great questions by Representative Richie Torres, very laser targeted in detail where Gary is just like caught off guard and he's trying to dodge the questions. So Gary continues to get exposed. And I like what happened today. I think the clips and all the news that are coming out of it, while they may not be very much actionable, where Gary is getting kicked out tomorrow, right? They do paint Gary Gensler in a very bad light. And remember, I've said many times, a lot of politics is simply optics. And if you have bipartisan support against Gary Gensler, that's not good. He's not going to be in that seat for very long. So it's great to see Democrats coming out against Gary Gensler. Now, quick word from our sponsor folks, and that is Uphold, which makes crypto investing easy. I've been a user of Uphold since twenty eighteen. They have ten plus million users, two hundred and fifty plus crypto currencies, and they're available in one hundred and fifty countries. You can also trade precious metals and equities on Uphold. If you'd like to learn more, please visit the link in the description. Also, a great comment from Representative Andy Barr to Gary Gensler on capital markets. He said, if the U .S. capital markets are a gold medalist, you are the Tonya Harding of securities regulation because you are kneecapping the United States capital markets with the avalanche of red tape coming out of your commission. Wow. That is a pretty strong remark there. Many of you know about the Tonya Harding story. If you don't look it up, Nancy Kerrigan and Tonya Harden and someone who was sitting behind Gary Gensler started flashing the Coinbase stand with crypto NFT shield. Many of you have seen that. And someone also highlighted the stand with crypto logo on a piece of paper. So this is similar to what happened with the guy who did the buy Bitcoin behind Janet Yellen years ago. So they put this right behind Gary. So it's pretty funny. This is another one that's going to go in the record books. And on that note, the SEC did acknowledge that the 1 .5 trillion dollar asset manager, Franklin Templeton, spot Bitcoin ETF application. Now, that doesn't mean anything because we need an approval. But things are moving ahead for these new applicants. Now, as all this was happening, guess who was in D .C.? Brian Armstrong and the Coinbase folks. Pretty incredible. And they did this whole campaign where they're at the Hill and a Brian Armstrong tweet out here at our nation's capital for a stand with crypto day with 40 founders from across the country. It's time for America to join the rest of the G20 and get some clear rules on the books. So great move here by Coinbase because the juxtaposition of what Gary is saying and what a big publicly traded crypto company is doing with a whole bunch of founders in D .C., educating and providing advocacy is really, really great. So I love this. And you hear you see Brian posted some photos, he said a great meeting with Speaker Pelosi. Now, all feelings about Nancy Pelosi aside, this she's a Democrat, folks, and I think this is a very smart move, Brian. Very, very smart move, because today even Maxine Waters was praising Gary Gensler. Oh, he's the knight in shining armor. And Gary, you know, you've been doing your thing, protecting Americans from these crypto scammers. Right. So remember, just like two years ago, she was hugging up FTX saying she loves Sam Beckman Fried, blowing kisses, taking campaign donations from FTX. So she's can be bought and sold right pretty easily. And I really like this. Coinbase is playing chess here while Gary Gensler is getting grilled. I love it, love it, love it. And they took a whole bunch of photos here at the Capitol Hill. So smart move by Brian. Really, really smart move. Now, finally, Kraken sets sight on stock trading. So Kraken, the crypto exchange, they're looking to expand their services. And, you know, this makes sense. If you're ordering already an exchange where you sell crypto, you can easily move to stocks. And then I know some other folks have been looking to tokenize stocks and sell those. So this is a pretty big move. And we're going to see that these crypto exchanges are going to expand to other markets. And with the advent of tokenization, you know, they're going to tokenize a lot of the traditional financial markets and assets and commodities and much more. And allow people to easily get access to them globally, 24 seven trading and much more. So obviously this would put them up against like Robinhood, essentially right where you have stocks and you've got crypto in the mix. So I think it absolutely makes sense. Well, folks, that's the news. Let me know what you think. What did you think about Gary today in the hearing? And once again, I'll be interviewing Congressman Warren Davidson tomorrow. So be sure to check out that interview once it's published on Friday. And I'll talk to you all later.
A highlight from 676:GOP vs CBDCs, JPEXs Collapse, and Vivek Ramaswamys Crypto Vow
"Good evening and welcome to The Crypto Overnight -er. 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 10 p .m. Pacific on Tuesday, September 21st, 2023. Welcome back to The Crypto Overnight -er. Yes, but we do have the news, so let's talk about that. Tonight, we're diving deep into the House Republicans' latest move against central bank digital currencies. We'll also unpack the turmoil surrounding JPEGs in Hong Kong and what it means for global crypto regulation. GOP presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy has some bold plans for crypto policy, and you'll want to hear them. Meanwhile, the Republic of Korea grapples with a significant offshore crypto stash, and PayPal pushes its stablecoin into Venmo. And don't go away, we have an update on the never -ending Mt. Gox saga. House Republicans advanced a bill opposing U .S. central bank digital currency efforts. The bill, known as the CBDC Anti -Surveillance State Act, aims to prevent the Federal Reserve from issuing a CBDC to individuals. It was introduced by Representative Tom Emmer and has gained the support of 60 members in Congress. The bill has passed the House Financial Services Committee and will next face a congressional vote. Democrats, led by Maxine Waters, criticized the bill. Waters renamed it the CBDC Anti -Innovation Act and argues that it could threaten the U .S. dollar status as the global reserve currency. The bill has also faced scrutiny for its language and its impact on CDBC research. The Federal Reserve has been exploring the possibility of issuing a CDBC, but is not close to developing one. Some conservative politicians, including Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, have taken strong positions against CDBCs. The bill prevents the issuance of a CDBC without an act of Congress. This aligns with the Federal Reserve's stance. The committee rejected amendments to the bill and passed it, recommending it to the full House on a vote of 27 to 20. The advancement of the CBDC Anti -Surveillance State Act is a significant move in the ongoing battle over financial privacy and government control. Emmer's bill is a clear attempt to seize as an overreach by the Biden administration. His concerns about CDBCs turning into surveillance tools echo a broader distrust of government power. Maxine Waters' opposition to the bill highlights a divide not just among politicians, but also in the nation. Her renaming of the bill to the CDBC Anti -Innovation Act suggests that Democrats see CDBCs as a potential innovation, not a threat. However, her stance could be seen as naive, especially when considering the potential for CDBCs to be used for mass surveillance, as is the case in China. The bill's passage to the House Financial Services Committee is a telling sign of the times. It reflects a growing skepticism about the role of centralized financial systems and a preference for decentralized solutions. The rejection of amendments to the bill, especially those that would allow the Federal Reserve to study the Chinese digital yuan, indicates a reluctance to even explore centralized digital currencies. All that said, I don't see it passing. I've said many times that when crypto becomes a left versus right issue, both sides lose. The same thing goes for CDBCs. This bill likely doesn't stand a chance of becoming law because I don't see it passing the Senate. As divided as Congress is, I don't see the two sides putting down their torches and pitchforks long enough to do some good for the country. From lawmakers playing defense against CDBCs in the U .S. to a complete offensive on crypto exchanges in Hong Kong. Next up, the whirlwind around JPEGs. And hey, if you want to stay ahead of such storms, hit that subscribe button.
A highlight from MAJOR Mt. Gox Update! (Bitcoin Sell Date Delayed)
"Let's discover some crypto news today. September 21st, it's 1130 AM because we always start on time here, and we got Drew and AJ on the ones and twos. How are you two doing? I'm doing great. Nice white tee, DZ. Nice white tee. Yeah, thank you. Well, I got the V. You got the regular, right? Yeah, you got the regular. Alright, so tomorrow, I'm going to have a deeper V, okay? We were just talking before the show. I want such a deep V that Salt Bae would be embarrassed. He would turn beet red from wearing the deep V, so maybe we have to get it that cut. Drew, your wife actually makes clothing. Will she make a custom deep V for you so we can match? This is absolutely going to happen. Top D with the deep V. Yours has to be in camo. Alright, guys, we're going to talk about Jerome Powell, some of the remarks after. They didn't change the rate hikes, what they mean. Also, we got Bitcoin at Mt. Gox has been moved. What's going on with that? When are these coins going to hit the market? When is this Mt. Gox Bitcoin going to hit the market? Is it going to dump Bitcoin's prices? Is it going down 10K, 1K? So we're going to talk about that as well. We got to talk about Maxine Waters and X potentially turn into a payments platform. Linda Yaccarino, the CEO, tweeted out something last night. We're going to look at that as well. And we got some XRP news. It's going to be a great episode, so please hit that like button, everybody. Are you all feeling good? Are we feeling red? You know, the market's down, but I still feel pretty good. You feeling good? I'm feeling good. Alright. Let's go to blue. Alright, alright. We're also going to have charts with Kelly at the end, too, so it's towards the beginning. Alright, well, let's talk about Fed Chairman Jerome Powell. He spoke at a critical press conference after the interest rates decision. Here are the details. We're just going to break down some of the key takeaways. As expected, they did not increase the interest rate, kept it constant between 5 .25 and 5 .5. And here are the important excerpts from Powell's statement, everybody. We cannot have strong employment market without price stability, so we got to get the price stability in line. Consumer spending is quite strong still. Rebalancing in the labor market is expected to continue. We keep scrolling here. There's a long road ahead for reducing inflation to 2%. And the fact that we decided to keep the policy rate constant does not mean that we reach the policy stance we wanted or not, so they're still leaving themselves open for an interest rate hike. A lot of people think there is going to be an interest rate hike, not the next one, maybe the one after that, maybe in the beginning of the year. And last but not least, we're pretty close to where we need to be. I wouldn't attach greater importance to an interest rate increase. So they're trying to minimize any market impact. I wouldn't attach greater importance to an interest rate increase. I wouldn't care that much if we increase rates. Does that signal that they are going to increase maybe one or two pauses from now? I think that's signaling a strong maybe with a capital M. Yeah, I think a big takeaway from this is where it says the full effects of the Fed's tightening have yet to be felt. And that is definitely the sentiment here. Like this isn't the first time we paused on the interest hikes and the markets have fallen. You know, the past two days on the live stream, everything's going up. Everyone's saying, oh, the price is going up. I'm sitting here saying, I think this is a bull trap. I think the price is coming down because I was looking at the stock market charts, looking at the DXY charts, DXY still going up because of the previous interest hikes coming into play, stock market coming down. But crypto is pumping. I'm thinking to myself, oh, this isn't this isn't going to hold up at all. We're going to come back down the reality. And that has started to happen today. So there you go. Right. All right. Well, let's talk about Japan's economy as well. Japan's economy on the brink as the end stumbles to 148 year low bond yields. So that's a decade or almost 15 decades right there. As Japan contends with depreciating in and rising 10 year bonds, its economy stands at a unique crossroads. The yen's fall to a nearly 150 year to date low against the U .S. dollar brings with it a mixed bag of economic implications. I'm surprised they had the yen that long, you know, throughout all the world wars and everything. Yeah, true. Yeah, yeah. I mean, that's I mean, but still 150 year low, 150. The Bank of Japan now faces the intricate task of maintaining currency stability and keeping yields low amidst a high public debt environment. Complicating the test further is the yen dollar carry trade, which could intensify the pressure on the yen as the interest rate difference between Japan and the U .S. widens. So we're going to be keeping an eye out on that. We did lose the Internet, but it looks like we got it back. All right, Russia. Let's talk about Russia here. Let's rush into this next area. Russian Central Bank replenishes gold reserves to 2023 highs amid economic sanctions, according to a report by Kitco. That's where I use all my silver pricing data. Data from the IMF's international financial statistics reveals that Russia's central bank increased its gold reserves in August, apparently returned to the initial levels at the start of the year. Twenty three hundred tons. It was later confirmed by the World Gold Council. That just sounds like a shadowy group right there. The World Gold Council sounds like a bunch of bond villains. Kitco also reports that Russia is bolstering its reserves to mitigate the impact of Western economic sanctions, particularly those related to its invasion of Ukraine in February. Often we see Ray Dalio made this big, bold prediction as we see an empire on the decline. Debt is relative. And so, yeah, America's debt's terrible, but Japan's is worse. China's is worse. You know, everyone else is worse. So a lot of people use that data point, say America's debt can just get as bad as it wants to be, as long as it's not that bad relative to the rest of the globe. We're in no worry whatsoever. The other side of that coin would be, well, people will eventually stop buying debt and what are they going to start buying? They're going to buy gold, maybe some digital gold as well. So I'm expecting gold to go up. But silver silver price still lags gold. Have you ever done a deep dive on gold versus silver? I wonder if people even want that. Just would you want gold, silver data or you just want only crypto? I remember like a year ago, we were talking about doing a video that was I think we did a video that was like Bitcoin compared to gold and then Bitcoin compared to silver and then silver compared to gold. And it was it wasn't the most interesting video, in my opinion.
A highlight from 1262. Anti-CBDC Bill Vote! | 27 to 20 Stablecoins vs CBDCs
"You do not want to miss this one, we're going to be breaking down the CBDC vote that happened yesterday in DC. Also taking a look at a number of clips that'll give you some alignment as to what the future of CBDCs here in the United States might look like. We're going to break all that down for you. It's going to be a good one. My name is Paul Bearer, welcome back into Tech Path. Before we get started, I want to thank our sponsor, that's Tangem. And this is all about self -custody. When you think about CBDCs, you got to think about self -custody. Check out tangem .com, you can learn a little bit more about their wallet. They do slim as a bank card, secure as a bank vault, store, buy, earn, transfer, and swap thousands of coins and tokens. If you want to use their card, you can do so with two different types. You can get the classic wallet, or you can get this new Tangem wallet that is a new type of card that's going to give you optional seed phrases. You can order these in three -card packs, so it's very easy. I would suggest doing that, spend a little bit extra for that. Use our discount code to help kind of soften the blow there. But it's a great value, check it out, we'll leave a link down below, it does help the channel out. Let's get into a couple of the things that happened yesterday. The two I want to focus on are these right here. The Power of the Mint Act, and then also the CBDC Anti -Surveillance State Act. These were the two that were focused on primarily. And I want to go to an intro clip real quick to give you kind of a framework of how this all started there in D .C. Listen in. Today we'll consider a slate of legislation to bolster our national security, protect Americans' financial privacy, and shield our financial system from the risks associated with the potential central bank digital currency, or CBDC. Unlike decentralized cryptocurrencies, a central bank digital currency is a digital form of sovereign currency that is designed and issued by a government and transacts on a digital ledger that is controlled by that government. If not designed to emulate cash, could give the federal government the ability to surveil and restrict Americans' transactions. This is not just alarming, it's downright un -American. We've already seen examples of governments weaponizing their financial system against their citizens in China. We need to counter China by being the best version of ourselves. This bill expresses that sentiment that, yes, we're going to innovate and we're going to lead on blockchain and we're going to lead on digital assets, but we're going to do so the American way. And the way we do that is decentralized. We don't do this by centralizing it in a central bank. We can achieve the innovation potential of blockchain and the immediacy of payments and the frictionless payments future with what we did in July. And that is to create a regulatory framework for stablecoin. All right, so there's some fire in the belly of the lawmakers. I like what I'm hearing so far. This sounds pretty good. But we get into more. And remember, there's always a bad guy. So let's go, maybe girl, we'll go to the next clip with Maxine Waters. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Unfortunately, Republicans are marking up one bill that is not bipartisan. We do know that 130 countries around the world are racing to develop and implement a CBDC. What will happen if CBDCs issued by other central banks gain traction as a preferred method of payment in international trade transactions? Are we comfortable allowing the Chinese yuan or currencies from other countries to overtake the U .S. dollar as a principal global reserve currency? Republicans are making baseless attacks against the CBDC that does not even exist. So with that, I yield back the balance of my time. All right, so Maxine in rare form, I shouldn't say rare, normal form with her. She's, of course, for the idea of CBDCs. The other thing, a lot of what she said could be applied to stablecoins. And what we're seeing around the world, this is the first time I think we are chasing other governments who are actually trying to suppress their citizens. I would kind of be in a position or the camp of not going that direction. I like what I'm hearing so far. But let's go into our next clip. This is going to be Mr. Sherman listening. And allowing the Federal Reserve to continue doing what they're doing, literally recruiting and hiring people in the San Francisco Fed office to build a central bank digital currency is the financial equivalent of allowing the empire from Star Wars to build the Death Star so long as they promise not to turn it on. I'm struck by the hypocrisy of the advocates of cryptocurrency. They come in and they say cryptocurrency is wonderful because it's digital and it's high tech and it's innovative. And then they propose a bill which, in the words of the ranking member, is an anti -innovation bill. And they describe the U .S. government as Darth Vader. They describe any attempt to enforce American laws as the action of Darth Vader in the empire. As Sam Bankman -Fried has demonstrated, crypto is perfect for hiding from your creditors. And while his body may be in jail, his money cannot be found. I yield back. General McNeil's back. Thank you. I just have some, you know, obviously I'm opposed to this bill, but I just want to know what I'm arguing against. All right. You can't make this stuff. What am I going against? I don't even know what I'm going against. All right. Well, the point is, is that Sherman's usually in that kind of position. Anti -innovation. I thought that was a rare little piece right there. Both these guys are going to go against anything that I think the Republicans or even to a certain extent, the bipartisan Capitol Hill lawmakers will go when it comes to crypto or anything that is even related to blockchain. Let's get into our next clip. This goes into a little bit more about the unbanked. Listen in. And the idea that this is somehow going to help the unbanked is insane. Because when you ask the unbanked, why are you unbanked? A lot of it is because of surveillance capitalism. A permissionless system would be something more similar to Bitcoin. You could digitize it. And frankly, that's why a lot of people have been drawn in the unbanked and underbanked community to crypto currencies like Bitcoin. I think one of the speakers for this bill said that people aren't banked because they oppose the quote surveillance state. People aren't banked because they don't have any money. It's amazing. The people who aren't banked are the people who don't have any money. I'd be willing to support this bill if it also ended crypto. Well, that's an interesting statement there. When you go to the FDIC site, this is the 2021 FDIC national survey of unbanked and underbanked households. Look at some of the data here on this. An estimated four and a half percent of U .S. household, approximately 5 .9 million were unbanked. This is 2021. OK, likelihood of this is much greater. Remember, we have a lot of immigrants in our country that in many cases also are coming from countries who they've seen their banking system maybe not work out so well for them. And they are very, very skeptical because of that. Some don't have enough money to meet minimum balance requirements, as cited, but around 21 percent. But most don't trust banks. This was the second most cited main reason for not having an account. Avoiding a bank gives more privacy was the third most cited main reason, 8 .4 percent. Further into the report, this was a piece right here. Who are the unbanked and underbanked breaking this out? Most is distrust of banks, inconvenient locations, high bank account fees, needed products and services are not offered by banks, poor credit history, you know, check system, etc. Typical challenges I think a lot of people in the unbanked sector face. Let's go to our next clip. I think this is a good one right here. This gets into the privacy side of things. I think there's what 2000 stable coins that are out there right now. None of them, none of them protects the security of American citizens privacy. And when an American citizen puts all their information out in the private sector and it's available to 200 different retailers and banks and and other governments, there is no expectation of privacy. That's our problem here. Some of my colleagues gloss over the fact the whole reason they're collecting the data in the first place is the government makes them collect it. Frankly, if you don't agree to spy on your customers, you don't get to operate a bank in the United States. You don't get to operate a money service business in the United States, essentially get permission from the government to act as a financial services institution. So long as you spy on your customers. About million 350 pieces of evidence sitting over at the Treasury on private sector activity, these giant, enormous government databases, which have been hacked, both the IRS and others, Office of Personnel Management and others do present tremendous targeting by bad actors. You know, this is really where it gets into the destruction of personal privacy. And this is the problem that we do face in our society. Some of the countries that are already down this slippery slope, countries like China, as an example, right here, China's central bank digital currency. This is the digital ID to deduct fines instantly from your digital wallet if you're caught for speeding or jaywalking by a surveillance system. So right there, this kind of shows the actual crime of jaywalking now portrayed on basically a bulletin board in front of everyone. And then, of course, automatically deducted. These are the kind of invasion capabilities. Talk about, you know, search and seizure. This is going to be able to break down the walls of search and seizure and do things within our own economies and within our own society that we would never dream of, especially around the Constitution. This is China right here. Super SIM cards now featuring new digital yuan functions is this super SIM card right here. It's going to function as a digital yuan wallet, smart card and I .D. cards as the nation's CBDC pilot continues. So this is going on to phones and will make its way into a position where you can no longer utilize because you have digital wallet. Now your wallet and you're going to be able to use this in a way in which you go to a grocery store, you go to any retailer and you use that as a payment for form. And that's where they can lock it down. And that's exactly what I think these lawmakers are fighting against. Let's go to our next clip. This will continue to show you a little bit more about this slippery slope of privacy. Look at my uncle and my cousin helped me get a cell phone that is linked to a Chinese bank card so that I could buy anything pleasing and I have to pass facial recognition identity verification, which is insane, because all I want to do is just spend my gift card balance on this debit.
Dry Scalp and Wig Woes? Maximize Moisture With Keisha's Expert Tips
"The first question comes to us from a lady out in Baltimore. Her name is Maxine Baltimore Malland out here on the East Coast. So now she says her hair is very dry. This is what she writes. She is a wig wearer. That's what she put down. And her hair, she said, is braided underneath. Any steps to get moisture into her hair. Any advice is dry under the wig. What advice would you tell Maxine, Keisha? Well, the first thing I would like to know is if this is a daily wig, is the wig sewn down or is she pulling it off a mannequin head and putting it on every day? You know what? She didn't say. But are you able to address the different scenarios for us today? I can. Sure. For those who are wearing sewn down wigs or what we call tacking it down, depending on if it's the lace front or something like that, you should be able to, honestly, I'm just going to keep it real, peel your wig up in the back. Oh my. Okay. Wow. And get you, I'm just going old school. So, get some hair grease or some oil that you can put on your scalp in between those cornrows, those braids, and then pull your wig back down. Especially if it has the lace front in the front. Now, if you are a daily wig wearer where you just put it off and on, I happen to be one of those. Like a hat. Yeah. Basically, you put it on like a hat or a beanie. And so that means if she's taking it off and on every night, she's probably wearing some sort of wig cap. Take the cap off, put some oil on your scalp. I suggest if you're able to use any of the nut oil, nut -based oils like an almond oil, those are very, very good on the scalp. People tend to go for coconut oil, but coconut oil doesn't always penetrate scalp. It will sometimes just sit on it and create another barrier on the scalp, which is not helpful at all. So that would be my suggestion. And then my suggestion, if she's a daily wig wearer, take your braids down once a week and shampoo your hair and do a moisture, do a deep condition. That's important. When you're done with it, blow dry it, braid it back, and I'll braid it back down if she's able to do that herself. But that part is very important. Wow. Well, I tell you something, I am just blown away literally by this. No, I really am. That's really good advice. And it seems to me, everything that you said, there was one common common, you know, commonality, and that was that you want to add some kind of moisture in to your scalp. Oh, and drink water. Drink water. Why is that important? Because you need to moisturize from the inside out. And if you're on any type of medication or type of regimen, it's going to change the way your body receives moisture or hydrates. So if you're able to drink more water, definitely drink more water, and you should see a difference. As you moisturize from the top and, you know, hydrate from within, you should start to see a difference in your hair and in your scalp.
A highlight from PayPal Launches Stablecoin That Could Change The World! (But There's A Catch...)
"The safest, easiest way to pay just got easier or at least has moved further into the cryptoverse. Online payment behemoth PayPal has launched its own stablecoin, becoming the latest TradFi company to make the attempt. You may remember Meta, the parent company of Facebook, trying to shove their own stablecoin down our throats and subsequently shuttering the project in early 2022. Will PayPal USD, aka PYUSD, succeed where others have failed? We're going to dive into the pros and cons. It's time to discover crypto. If you're new to the cryptoverse, you may be wondering what exactly is a stablecoin. It's a coin for horses. I'm kidding. It's all in the name, baby. A stablecoin is meant to do exactly that, maintain a stable price. Many of them are pegged to the US dollar. It's a way for investors and traders to keep their assets on the blockchain without having to deal with extreme price volatility. Well, at least that's what's supposed to happen with stables as long as they maintain their peg. If you want an example of what happens when a stablecoin loses its peg, take a look at our video on Terra UST. In case you've been living under a rock with all your cash buried in some dragon's lair, PayPal has a veritable monopoly on online payments. Founded in 1998, the company went public in 2002 and was soon taken over by eBay. Fast forward to today, the company has expanded astronomically and subsequently gobbled up would -be competitors like Venmo, Zoom and Zettle and many others. It also boasts 435 million users at time of recording. The original team is actually referred to as the PayPal Mafia. You'll recognize some familiar faces including Elon Musk, Yammer's David O. Sachs, LinkedIn's Reid Hoffman and Jawad Karim, who co -founded our own little slice of paradise, YouTube. So my question is, with Elon Musk's historic ties to PayPal, will the PayPal stablecoin become the favored cryptocurrency for X? Unseeding would -be Prince of X, doge? Leave a comment below and tell us what you think. PayPal's stablecoin release also comes a couple months after the announcement that Celsius will use it to distribute payments to its creditors, a decision that has sparked outrage and questions from Celsius's creditors. Raking in fees for millions of bankrupt Celsius isn't a great way to start your stablecoin debut. Now, PayPal has been interested in crypto for a while. They first allowed customers to buy, and hold a short list of cryptocurrencies back in 2020, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin and Bitcoin Cash. Then in 2022, they finally began supporting crypto withdrawals and deposits in and out of PayPal. And PYUSD is their latest attempt to make a name for themselves in the Web3 landscape. They announced its development at the beginning of 2022, but then pulled back citing regulatory issues. Was it you, Gary? But I guess their concerns are no more because there are full steam ahead with their stablecoin pursuits. Okay, enough about lost funds and heartbreak. Why would PayPal want to get into the stablecoin game in the first place? Well, it turns out stablecoins can be quite a lucrative business worth around $120 billion. PYUSD's top competitors Tether and USDC both have remarkable profits this year. Tether is projected to bring in $6 billion, while Circle, the parent company of USDC, has brought in $779 million so far this year. If PayPal can capture even a percentage of this market, they could bring in some serious bank. How do these companies do it? Well, both USDT and USDC maintain their peg by holding cash and investing in US Treasuries. And the yields of these Treasuries have soared to 5 % recently, so they're able to bring in a lot of profit and able to add to their reserves. PayPal intends to follow a similar model with the stablecoin being backed by USD bank deposits, US Treasuries and US Treasure reverse repurchase agreements held in custody by Paxos. You may recognize the name Paxos for managing the soon -to -be -deceased Binance stablecoin BUSD, which Binance has taken off the market due to SEC lawsuit. RIP. PayPal has announced that Paxos will begin issuing monthly reserve reports in September 2023, and these reports will be verified by an external and supposedly impartial accounting firm. Can we just get Kevin an Oscar? Remember, guys, having a public and verifiable proof of reserve is so important, not only for stablecoins, but also for exchanges. Make sure you do your research before you buy or send your crypto places. PYUSD is an ERC -20 token written in Solidity and running on the Ethereum blockchain. You can exchange PYUSD for fiat as well as send it to other PayPal users and buy crypto on PayPal's platform. You can also buy from PayPal's merchants, and PayPal will send PYUSD to make the purchase. There are zero fees to send this stablecoin to other PayPal users, but there are fees for buying cryptocurrencies and withdrawing PayPal USD from the platform. Currently, you can withdraw or deposit PYUSD and it's compatible with Metamask and Coinbase Wallet, soon to be supported by Venmo. A week after PayPal's stablecoin mania hit the media, Ledger, one of the top cold storage wallet solutions, announced that its users would be able to buy crypto with their PayPal accounts. Coinbase has allowed American and Canadian users to buy crypto with their PayPal accounts for a while, but recently, Coinbase partnered with PayPal to bring this option to users in Germany and the UK. This comes in handy since PayPal decided to pause crypto purchases on its own platform in the UK, citing financial regulatory shifts. With all these exchanges supporting PayPal accounts to purchase crypto, it seems like only a matter of time before Ledger and other wallets begin to support PYUSD as well. Currently, you can get your hands on some PYUSD on Coinbase, Kraken, Gate .io and Crypto .com if you don't want to buy it from the PayPal platform. Right now, we're a little less than a month into their release, so are people actually using it? Well, it seems like members of the crypto community have been a bit wary so far. The block reported that smart money is avoiding the coin and smaller investors are as well. And really, can you blame them? Most people are still traumatized from the Terra fiasco. And why would you switch your funds from Tether or USDC when they've stood the test of time? There have also been concerns about PYUSD launching on ETH and associated high fees. And there are real regulatory concerns here in the US. Congresswoman Maxine Waters, the top Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, was quick to wag the finger at PayPal and yell, Shame! Shame on you! She's mad at business as giant as PayPal would move forward with a stablecoin without federal regulatory framework. She may want to point that finger right back at herself because the Fed is at fault here twofold. One, they allowed PayPal to get this giant. And two, they can't figure out how to actually regulate the space. Probably due to our officials being older than dinosaurs. Look at this! Are you kidding me? Another issue that has some worried is that PYUSD is centralized and has a sordid history of randomly freezing people's accounts. And last year, the company threatened to fine users up to $2500 to posting misinformation. After immense backlash, PayPal retracted the statement saying it was an error. The terms and conditions of PYUSD also state, PayPal can stop supporting the stablecoin at any time without informing holders. All of this has members of the cryptoverse worrying that PayPal would arbitrarily freeze or deduct PYUSD from their accounts just like the big banks are able to do. Well, don't freeze up yourself. Hit that like button and subscribe to the channel to discover more crypto. PayPal freezing accounts is not good. We want control over our funds and the right to privacy. But just for context, Tether and USDC are centralized as well. Tether is held by an international company, and USDC boasts BlackRock, Fidelity, and Coinbase among their investors. So nothing is totally safe. And while it's great PYUSD has added the trove of stablecoin options, the space really needs more decentralized stablecoins. Okay, so now I want to mention a few reasons PYUSD makes me feel bullish for crypto in general. Anytime a TradFi company gets into crypto signals wider adoption. And PayPal could be going after a completely different retail demographic for PYUSD, which would explain the slow adoption. But the coolest thing about PayPal launching a stablecoin is the ability to pay for things IRL without taking funds off the blockchain. You can already use PYUSD to pay millions of merchants through PayPal. This kind of thing has started on a small scale elsewhere, but PayPal is going to majorly increase mass adoption. I don't think we're far away from being able to pay our rent with crypto through Venmo or PayPal. And that kind of thing makes me bullish. It gives me chills up my spine. Guys, I can hear the bull market calling. Can you hear it too? And it says, Wind Moon. That's all for me. Thanks for watching Discover Crypto! Hit that like button on your way out. And we'll see you at the top.
A highlight from Ron Hammond Interview - Congress Next Move with Crypto & Stablecoin Regulations & SEC Gary Gensler Upcoming Hearings & Bitcoin ETFs
"This content is brought to you by Link2, which makes private equity investment easy. Link2 is a great platform that allows you to get equity in companies before they go public, before they do an IPO. Within their portfolio includes crypto companies, AI companies, and fintech companies. Some of the crypto companies you may recognize include Circle, Ripple, Chainalysis, Ledger, Dapper Labs, and many more. If you'd like to learn more about Link2, please visit the link in the description. Welcome back to the Thinking Crypto Podcast, your home for cryptocurrency news and interviews. With me today is Ron Hammond, who's Director of Government Relations at the Blockchain Association. Ron, great to have you back on. Always a pleasure. Thanks for having me again. So Ron, Congress is back to work, if I'm not mistaken, this week. And I want to follow up on the two bills that were in the House that were marked up, the stablecoin bill, as well as the market structure. What can we expect? Could we expect some of these bills to go to the floor to get voted on? What's the latest? Definitely. So just to recall here, there were two big votes, as you alluded to, the stablecoin votes, as well as the market structure bill. Those were in the committees. That's kind of the first step in terms of getting a vote in the House floor. So these cleared the committees. We actually had six Democrats and all the Republicans vote for the market structure bill, which was a huge surprise. Again, that was a really tough bill. It was very dense. But at the end of the day, they got across the finish line and set it up for what hopefully is going to be a good bipartisan bill vote, hopefully sometime in the fall. And then for the stablecoin bill, that's where we saw a little bit of derailments. We saw the White House get involved literally hours before the vote happened. We thought that we would probably get a decent amount of bipartisan support, potentially even getting Maxine Waters, the chair of the Democrats Fine Service Committee. But unfortunately, the White House got involved. It was mostly around the issues of state versus federal regulators. And we have state regulators like NYDFS, the New York banking regulator, who say, look, we believe that we have the role to regulate stablecoins. We've been doing it for quite some time and we have a good regime. We believe that we have a role here. Whereas the folks at the Federal Reserve and Treasury and now the White House are saying, I think actually it should be done more at the federal level. And we've seen more Republicans line up as well as New York Democrats line up with the state pathway and the more broad consensus of the Democrat Party, more in line with the federal pathway and following the White House. And so now we're going to go here to September, October, November. It's a pretty busy time right now here on Capitol Hill. But the biggest thing right now is a shutdown. It looks like there's going to be potentially a shutdown happening at the end of the month. So everything else, including the crypto bills, FAA reauthorization and a whole slew of other issues out there, will get put on the back burner until we can actually fund the government. And it looks like this is going to be quite the dramatic push. And so we potentially could see votes on these bills in October, but maybe actually November as well. And the longer that it takes to get these bills voted on the House, it means it gets less time for the Senate to potentially take these up as well. And in order for that to happen, though, we need to have a strong bipartisan support for both bills. And I think that's going to be the main crux here is that if the Democrats in the House would get a decent amount support that bill, it gives more of a reason for the Senate Democrats who do control the Senate to say we would actually take a piece or look at that piece of legislation. But until then, they need a strong bipartisan support and a vote in the House. And again, I would probably look at October or November for those. Oh, boy. Yeah, this shutdown is going to throw a monkey wrench in the whole process. And to your point, everybody's going to be focused on that. That's the higher priority. OK, so October, November, we could expect something. Now, the stablecoin situation is pretty interesting because, like you said, the NYDFS, you know, they obviously ordered BUSD Paxos to shut down BUSD issuance, but they approved PayPal to go issue their stablecoin. So it seems like a power struggle here. And who do you think might win this battle? You know, Maxine Waters pushing for the Treasury and the Fed to do things on their end. But we know they're exactly. So there's a lot of players involved here. So we have the crypto industry lobbying mostly for the rules of like, look, we just need a framework. We don't really engage too much on the state versus federal pathway for us. A regulatory framework means the businesses know what they can and can't do. And there's a licensing regime in place. On the other end, though, we have the banks lobbying, for example, and they're lobbying for more of the fact that only banks should be the ones issuing stablecoins. It shouldn't be Circle. It shouldn't be Paxos. It should just be the banks. And then finally, the same front, we do have the federal regulators and a little turf war in terms of the state versus federal, who is the big dog here in terms of the regulators. Now, that battle happens all the time for a variety of financial bills, not crypto in particular. And so I've seen this play out several times. Usually the Fed wins in most of these fights. However, we're seeing a larger majority of members of Congress supporting that state pathway and again, including the Republicans being all in lockstep. There were no defections on their end. We saw defections more on the Democrats side. So the numbers do favor the Republicans and the Democrats who are supporting NYDFS and others. But at the same time, the White House is a very strong force. And that was enough to get several Democrats who were lined up potentially to vote for in support of the stablecoin bill to back down. And again, most notably Maxine Waters as well. So it remains to be seen. I call this, it's in the holding pattern right now because there is a bipartisan push to get this done. I mean, even Maxine Waters, even though she voted against it, she put out an article a couple of weeks ago saying, look, I think we need to get stablecoin regulation done, especially with the narrative more picking up now recently, a big tech in the finance. And that's more in regards to X or Elon trying to get some money transmitter licenses for Twitter, whatever you want to call it these days. And that also builds off the Libra Facebook narrative. And so I think what we're seeing now is that there's a lot of things in play right now. There was a report in 2021 from the Biden administration saying Congress has to act on stablecoin legislation. We cannot do this alone. We need to have a congressional authority. So there's impetus here. So we'll see how that happens again on that front. But I'm still shocked even to this day that we were able to get more folks to support the market structure bill, not the stablecoin bill, because that dynamic, it seemed like stablecoins was almost good to go. But of course, it's politics. Something always happens at the last moment. And in this case, the White House got involved. And I think that's also important to highlight, though, the White House would not have gotten involved in this stage, if they didn't think this bill was going to become law. Nine percent of bills don't become law. But in this case, they did weigh in. And I think that's because they thought that, look, this is the time to weigh in. So my hope is that we can still be optimistic in this being done in some shape or form. But someone's going to have to negotiate a little bit here. And right now, both camps are pretty firm in their positions. Hmm. Boy, I can't wait to see how that plays out. But it seems, you know, given that stablecoins very much will obviously deal with the currency and the Fed and Treasury control of currency, I can imagine that they want to make sure they have their stamp on it. So you have the market structure bill in the House, but there's also the Lummus Gillibrand bill in the Senate. Is that making any progress or could that even be an option? Or is it just on hold as well? I wouldn't say it's on hold. I think it's a really important marker in the Senate. I mean, look, it's very different from the market structure bill that's in the House for Patrick McHenry. There's no question about it. But at the same time, the Senate really hasn't had a regulatory framework bill besides Lummus Gillibrand. And if you recall last Congress, the FTX bill or the Digital Commodity Consumer Protection Act, DCPA, that was the other major regulatory framework bill. So there is impetus. There is bipartisan support in the Senate to get something done. But I think what's going to have to happen is the House needs to pass their bill, their market structure bill, and say, look, there is a clear bipartisan desire to move forward on crypto regulation and market structure regulation. Senate, here is a bill where you hope you take up either some elements, all the elements, or even just build off the work that we've done in the House.
A highlight from Crypto: It's So Over. We're So Back.
"Welcome back to The Breakdown with me, NLW. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on, guys? It is Sunday, August 27th, and that means it's time for Long Read Sunday. Before we get into that, however, 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 friends. Well, today our theme is where we are in the cycle. I think we are in a very transitional moment and both of the pieces today have something to do with exactly that. The first is by John Rizzo, the Senior Vice President for Public Affairs at Clyde Group and was featured on CoinDesk on August 16th. The piece is titled How PayPal Upended the Crypto Debate in Washington, D .C. John writes, As the end of July arrived, House Financial Services Committee Republicans achieved its goal of passing a bipartisan stablecoins bill. Still, they left D .C. without the broad bipartisan vote Chair Patrick McHenry had labored to achieve. The session ended with new recriminations over old disputes, namely the degree of federal versus state regulation in a new regulatory framework, casting a dark cloud over the prospect of legislation that could garner support from McHenry, Ranking Member Maxine Waters and the Biden White House. And then PayPal and Paxos entered the chat. The surprising unveiling of PiUSD may be the accelerant needed to forge compromise in D .C. and bring about the legal enshrinement of a comprehensive regulatory framework for stablecoins. It may also represent a new, more aggressive strategy for how American fintech companies deal with the federal government and D .C. regulators. Now Rizzo continues to explain just why it's such a big deal. There are a couple parts to that. First, he says the sheer scale of PayPal's reach is really significant. As he puts it, with the flip of a switch, hundreds of millions of users can access and transact in stablecoins through a service with which they are already familiar. But the second piece is the contrast to Libra, which obviously became DM, which was Meta, then Facebook's failed stablecoin project that was announced all the way back in 2019. Rizzo writes, had it succeeded, DM would have presented two challenges which were discussed publicly at the time for the federal government to wrestle with. Libra stablecoin would have launched when the U .S. lacked a comprehensive regulatory framework for stablecoins, meaning it would exist in a legal and regulatory gray space. Beyond that, he writes, its regulatory challenge would have been turbocharged by the fact that Facebook's billions of users would have had access to this sort of regulated, sort of not regulated crypto token overnight. Now while PayPal is not at the scale of Meta and Facebook, Rizzo says, it is at a scale that creates a new urgency to actually reach a compromise and figure out a regulatory framework that is workable. And as he points out, that pressure didn't exist when only a handful of Democrats broke rank to vote in favor of McHenry's stablecoin bill. As he puts it, Democratic policymakers in D .C. who resisted McHenry's stablecoins bill in search of a better deal must account for the prospect that stablecoin adoption and usage could speed up rapidly soon, heightening some of the risks that D .C. policymakers identified when assessing stablecoin regulation. Interestingly, Rizzo also points out that PayPal is operating in an area where the federal government's ability to intervene is actually somewhat limited. The piece continues, forcing financial policy innovation without the pre -approval of regulators is daunting unless you operate in the one area of financial services primarily regulated by states. That's PayPal's ace in the hole. It's the reason it could partner with Paxos Trust and change the pool of potential stablecoin users overnight. Its core business, money transmission, is regulated through a state -by -state licensing regime, meaning the federal government's ability to impose a cost on PiUSD's backers for launching a stablecoin without seeking prior approval is limited. Basically, Rizzo's argument is that in this launch, PayPal claimed power instead of asking for permission. He concludes, Having observed power up close during 14 years of federal service, achieving a result in D .C. is not always about winning the competition of ideas. Instead, influencing power is about power and leverage. Supporters of stablecoins and market participants now have leverage over the federal government in a way that didn't exist weeks ago. It could grease the wheels for a comprehensive regulatory framework for stablecoins in Congress and begin an era in which American crypto companies forced the federal government to deal with them on their terms. Alright, so that's piece number one, and instead of discussing it alone, I'm going to read the second piece and then we'll talk about them both together. The second piece is by Daniel Kuhn, also on CoinDesk, and has the great title, The End of the End of Crypto. Daniel begins, Trying to figure out whether crypto is here to stay isn't as simple as tallying up the industry's wins and losses. For a while there, it genuinely seemed possible that the US SEC could wipe crypto off the map. Then again, there's practically a cottage industry of people who've made it their business to count all the times bitcoin or crypto supposedly died. However, as Daniel notices, it seems like the overall mood of the crypto scene has shifted. Daniel writes, Beginning with BlackRock's surprising move into the realm of crypto ETFs and running through PayPal's just -launched stablecoin, it seems like most of the major crypto news headlines are pointing a way forward. Daniel also points to Ripple sort of winning, SPF going to jail, and 3AC getting sued once again. So, Daniel asks, is the bottom in? He's not sure, but he does point out that, Now that the SEC has finally unloaded its worst against sector giants Binance and Coinbase, FedNow didn't siphon off all interest in crypto and meaningful legislation has passed never -before -seen hurdles, it seems like the worst is over. So what are the risks that remain? Daniel points out things like, The proposed custody rule changes that could put crypto in a hostage situation, DCG's bitcoin trust unraveling, and zooming farther out, quantum computers that could one day break cryptography's back. As he says, there's likely plenty of tail risks and black swans and bitter ends ahead. However, as Daniel says, At this point, it seems clear enough now that Bitcoin is battle -tested, and while governments may want to step up oversight of crypto, the real anarchic core of all of this is basically untouchable. There is a technological force loose in the world that enables completely permissionless transactions and that inspires others to build and build and build, creating a functionally self -perpetuating loop. So, okay, these pieces go together, both I think under the theme of the title of the second one, The End of the End of Crypto. And why I think this is such a compelling title is that in the period after the collapse of FTX and the unveiling of the fraud of SPF, this industry was on very, very fragile footing. I hardly need to say this to you guys as you've all lived through it, but between Operation Chokepoint 2 .0, deplatforming from banks, the ceaseless grind down of prices, one could be forgiven for losing some amount of hope. Now, of course, for those paying close attention, not all that much hope was actually lost. People were fighting fiercely against government overreach, builders were still doing all sorts of weird things, and of course, Bitcoiners didn't care really what anyone else thought. And yet from the outside looking in, we have just gone through a two -part inflection point moment. The parts are exactly what Daniel pointed out. On the one hand, BlackRock planting its flag, which by the way was reinforced by BlackRock CEO Larry Fink on national TV a number of times, and then PayPal exerting its influence, which was of course the subject of the first piece we read. These aren't crypto -native companies rising up, these are traditional finance companies coming back in, or rather saying they never left and that they believe more people are coming in the future. It might not have mattered to those who are still here listening to the breakdown this many months into the bear market, but for the people outside who will bring new energy and new capital into the space, these things are signals and they're big ones. And so yes, I believe it is true we have had and experienced the end of the end of crypto. Until next time, be safe and take care of each other. Peace.
A highlight from The Massive Significance of the PayPal Stablecoin
"Welcome back to The Breakdown with me, NLW. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on, guys? It is Saturday, August 12th, and that means it's time for the weekly recap. Sort of. Before we get into that, however, if you are enjoying The Breakdown, please go subscribe to it. Give it a rating, give it a review. And 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, friends. Happy Saturday. At the end of this week, I had to travel a little bit last minute. And so my choices were either one, skip the weekly recap altogether or to do something just a little bit different. So obviously, I decided to go with doing something just a little bit different. And basically what you're getting is a long read Saturday on top of a long read Sunday, which is coming tomorrow. Tomorrow's episode is a fun walk down memory lane. If you are interested in Bitcoin, the piece is actually from twenty nineteen. I think you'll really like it. And for today's weekly recap, I have two pieces that are obviously much more contemporaneous. And I think in some ways do certainly reflect big themes that have been on display both this week and last. The first is by Brian Brooks and Charles Calamiris. And of course, Brooks was the acting U .S. comptroller of the currency in twenty twenty and twenty twenty one. And before that, the chief legal officer at Coinbase and is now a partner at Valor Capital Group. Calamiris is now dean of economics, politics and history at the University of Austin, and was the chief economist of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency under Brooks. The piece they contributed to the Wall Street Journal was called stable coins can keep the dollar the world's reserve currency. And if you listen last week to long read Sunday, you will have heard this argument. Stable coins, they write, blockchain based assets backed by bank deposits and treasury securities are at the heart of a dollar based revolution happening throughout the developing world. Their price is supposed to stay steady, often at one dollar. Think of them as digital versions of prepaid cards with the potential to be important tools of American soft power in a world where the role of the dollar is in question. Stable coins aren't merely a more efficient means of electronic payments. With some economists and policymakers worrying about de -dollarization, i .e. the eclipse of the US dollar as the world's reserve currency, stable coins could bolster the post -war arrangement in which the dollar's dominance helped foster global trade and the biggest reduction in global poverty ever. But that can happen only if Congress implements a sound and stable regulatory framework. That is why House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry's bill to regulate stable coins is vital. It would establish federal and state oversight for stable coin issuers, impose qualifications for reserve assets, and implement rules on redemptions and public disclosure. It's hard to argue with these seemingly bipartisan goals, and Mr. McHenry has collaborated on the bill with Representative Maxine Waters for more than a year. Yet, at last week's vote on the measure, Ms. Waters and most of her Democratic colleagues pulled their support, with no clear reason for their sudden change of heart. Did they suddenly decide stable coins aren't important? Any tool that could boost the US dollar should be considered. Dollars as a share of reserves held by foreign central banks have fallen in the past generation. In 2000, dollars represented almost 73 % of global central bank reserves. Today, the share is around 59%. Though much international trade and many commodity transactions are still settled in dollars, this year, large countries including Brazil and Argentina entered bilateral agreements with China to use the yuan and their local currencies for trade settlement. Rumors abound that a summit next month, including Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, will consider creating a new currency arrangement. While leaders of the so -called BRICS countries deny an impending currency union, Anil Suklao, South Africa's ambassador -at -large for Asia and BRICS, said, The days of a dollar -centric world are over, and BRICS nations intend to settle trades in their local currencies in the near future. This year, Saudi Finance Minister Mohammad al -Jaddad said Riyadh is open to settling oil trades in currencies other than dollars, once an unthinkable idea. U .S. policy hasn't boosted global confidence in the dollar. The asset freeze on dollar holdings in Russia's central bank imposed after Russia invaded Ukraine, while understandable politically, shocked investors and central bankers, who realized for the first time that the dollar may not be the safe store of value it once was. A de -dollarized world would damage the U .S. The dollar's reserve status reduces U .S. borrowing costs, which is crucial in an era when government borrowing and spending are at a record high and still climbing. Reserve status also insulates the U .S. government, banks, and the general public from foreign exchange risk. All things being equal, reserve status also allows American consumers to buy foreign goods more cheaply, since foreign producers would rather have dollars than other currencies. The nationalist and anti -colonialist impulses behind de -dollarization in the developing world aren't likely to help citizens of those countries. Argentina's decision to price trade deals with China in Yuan and Pesos may reflect Argentina's national pride, but the country's 114 % annual inflation rate means that workers there will see their purchasing power quickly decline. And that's nothing compared with Zimbabwe's 175 % rate or Venezuela's 400%. At the end of last year, 17 countries had inflation rates above 20 % and 57 had rates above 10%. This is where stablecoins come in. Faced with the dismal prospect of saving their wages in local currency stored in local bank accounts, more citizens of high -inflation countries are opting to use dollar -backed stablecoins as a synthetic savings account. Dozens of startups offer stablecoin savings and payment options in Latin America and Africa, often in countries whose leaders are vocally and visibly moving away from the dollar. Dollar -backed stablecoins have market capitalization in the hundreds of billions of dollars, and they support transaction volumes many multiples of that amount. These offerings are attractive to ordinary people in those countries because they don't require an account at a local bank, only an internet connection. In addition, many stablecoins pay interest and have no minimum balance fees and low or no transaction fees. More important, they free people from tyrannical developing world monetary policy and allow them to store the value of their hard work in relatively stable dollar form. Stablecoins could be to finance what Voice of America has been to diplomacy. They can communicate U .S. monetary policy directly to the people living in other countries when American efforts to engage other governments aren't succeeding. If stablecoins flourish, citizens of other countries will increase the demand for dollars independent of, and perhaps contrary to, their government's political decisions. But for stablecoins to succeed, U .S. politicians need to agree that redollarizing the global economy is important. The McHenry Bill is a good place to start.
A highlight from Why Post Malone Is Against CBDCs
"Welcome back to The Breakdown with me, N .L .W. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on, guys, it is Friday, August 11th, and today we are talking about everything from an SEC appeal to post Malone discussing CBDCs. Before we get into that, however, 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. All right, friends. Well, at the end of this week, I got called away for some urgent, very quick travel, and so I've had to scramble my schedule a little bit. Given that, you can kind of think of today's episode as a little bit of what the weekly recap normally does, doing a sort of grab bag show of a bunch of things we haven't had a chance to talk about yet, and tomorrow I'm doing sort of a hybrid of Long Read Sunday and a weekly recap where I read a couple essays that I think were about the most important things that happened this week. Then Sunday you get a throwback Long Read Sunday that is really fun. And anyways, all of this is my way of not having to deny you shows as I traveled. So with that, let's get into this grab bag and where we're going to kick off is with the SEC and Ripple. The SEC has indicated to the court that they will seek to appeal last month's Ripple decision. If they are allowed to proceed, the regulator will ask the court's permission to appeal the parts of the decision which went against them. In a letter to the court, the SEC indicated that it would appeal, quote, the courts holding that defendants programmatic offers and sales to XRP buyers over crypto asset trading platforms and Ripple's other distributions in exchange for labor and services did not involve the offer or sale of securities under the Howey test. Now of course, you'll remember that last month's decision found that direct sales of XRP tokens to institutional investors violated securities law, while sales to retail investors through exchanges did not. This is obviously a major significant moment when it comes to the question of whether tokens are securities or not. It's so significant, in fact, that some congressmen have suggested that the notion at the core of the decision, which is that tokens can be offered in a sale that constitutes a securities offering, but that that doesn't necessarily make the tokens themselves securities, should be named after the judge who made that doctrine, i .e. the Torres doctrine. Anyways, the point is this was a big deal. The SEC are requesting what's known as an interlocutory appeal. That's an appeal that occurs over a decision partway through a legal case before it is fully decided. The regulator claimed that dealing with the appeal at this stage could save the court from dealing with two separate trials in the future. The SEC proposed that they could file a brief outlining the appeal in more detail by next Friday. Ripple has the right to respond to this letter and will similarly be able to respond to a full brief. Now separately, the judge has laid out directions for Ripple and the SEC to schedule a trial date in Q2 of next year. The trial will deal with the outstanding matters from last month's order, specifically the allegation that Ripple executives aided and abetted the company in breaching securities law. This trial will not reopen any of the issues that were already decided last month. The SEC is expected to ask for the trial to be postponed until the appeal is dealt with if they are successful in their application. Now Bloomberg senior litigation analyst Elliot Z. Stein gave a little bit of context about what happens next. Stein wrote, That of course brings up the question, will it actually happen? Paradigm policy director Justin Slaughter says he thinks yes. He tweeted, It's odd they waited until the trial schedule to appear, which is why I thought no interlocutory appeal was coming, but that likely won't prevent Judge Torres from granting the appeal request. Former lawyer Scott Chamberlain thinks the opposite. He writes, Judge Torres denies the request. She studiously avoided new law. She found the token is not the security, accepted the SEC's characterization of the transaction buckets to be analyzed, and simply applied Howie and its progeny to the SEC's chosen buckets. SEC failed because the undisputed facts didn't support all the Howie prongs for two of its three chosen transaction buckets, not because Judge Torres shifted the legal goalposts on the definition of those prongs. So next up, we're waiting to see if Judge Torres grants this request. Next up, Representative Maxine Blow a Kiss to SBF Waters is apparently concerned about PiUSD. On Wednesday, Representative Waters released a statement regarding the PayPal stablecoin announcement. She wrote that she was, PayPal instead, of course, chose to launch the stablecoin under the regulatory framework and supervision of New York State. Waters implied that the state regulation is inadequate compared to as yet hypothetical federal regulations. She wrote that, quote, Now, Waters is, of course, the ranking Democrat member of the House Financial Services Committee and has been in charge of negotiating stablecoin legislation over the past 15 months. The Republican sponsored stablecoin bill was finally passed by the committee during a tense hearing last month. In that meeting, Waters voted against the bill, but several younger Democrats defected from their party line to vote with the Republican majority. The stablecoin legislation is now eligible to be introduced for a vote on the House floor. Waters key issue with state regulation is that it removes the Fed as the final arbiter on stablecoins. During debates around the stablecoin legislation, she had said, The Republican bill undermines the Fed's role as our central bank, making it harder to protect the economy against inflation or support maximum employment if stablecoins are broadly adopted. Now, of course, Republican committee chairman Patrick McHenry does not share Waters concern that putting dollars on a blockchain will threaten to collapse the power of the strongest central bank in the world. On Monday, he remarked on the PayPal announcement by saying, This announcement is a clear signal that stablecoins, if issued under a clear regulatory framework, hold promise as a pillar of our 21st century payment system. In her statement, Waters also suggested the Republican bill had slim chances in the Democrat -controlled Senate urged Republicans to, quote, come back to the negotiating table to craft a bill that actually works. Now, Twitter response on this was about what you would expect. Castle Island Ventures partner Matt Walsh said, Maxine Waters is, quote, deeply concerned that PayPal chose the NYDFS path versus the federal path. Federal path for issuing a stablecoin literally doesn't exist. What planet are we on? Austin Campbell tweeted, Politician blocking federal legislation concern company did not file for federal license that doesn't exist because of said politician blocking legislation. You don't get to burn someone's house down and then call it a fire hazard. Next up, crypto infrastructure firm Fireblocks have disclosed a set of vulnerabilities which they are referring to as Bitforge, impacting a number of popular crypto wallets. The vulnerable wallets use multi -party computation or MPC technology, which is typically used in advanced user -facing and custodial applications. Fireblocks are classifying Bitforge as a zero -day vulnerability, meaning that it hasn't been discovered by the developers of the affected software or hackers in the wild. Coinbase, Zengo, and Binance have all collaborated with Fireblocks to fix the vulnerability within their custody systems. What's more, Fireblocks have said they reached out to other teams that might be impacted in accordance with a 90 -day responsible disclosure process. The biggest worry is that this vulnerability was found in MPC wallets, which are intended to be some of the most safe wallet designs in the world. Fireblocks said in a statement that, If left unremediated, the exposures would allow attackers and malicious insiders to drain funds from the wallets of millions of retail and institutional customers in seconds, with no knowledge to the user or vendor. Fireblocks characterized an attack exploiting the vulnerabilities would have been practical. They highlighted that the complexity of the vulnerability meant it was highly unlikely that a bad actor would have discovered the issue in advance of Wednesday's disclosure. Now MPC wallets add an extra layer of security by re -encrypting a private key and splitting it into multiple parts to be stored across multiple devices. The intention is that no single trusted device can access the crypto wallet without assistance from additional trusted parties. The Bitforge vulnerabilities would have, allowed a hacker to extract the full private key if they were able to compromise only one device, which of course would have undermined the entire multi -party security design. Overall, the whole process seems to have been a win, at least in the sense that this was discovered before it was exploited. Still, it's just a reminder that even when it comes to self -custody, things are scary out there. Now let's close with a little bit of a whistle -stop tour in the world of CBDCs. In the UK, the Bank of England has set up an advisory group for its central bank digital currency as it enters the design phase of the project. The British CBDC, which is still not officially referred to as Brickcoin, will be designed with help from a panel of experts across finance, economics, business, and more. The BOE said of the academic advisory group, In February, a consultation was conducted on the digital pound, which concluded in June. The BOE plans to run its own experimentation and design phase over the next two years, according to people familiar with the matter. The BOE will also be recruiting members for its CBDC engagement forum, which was set up to help it, quote, No word yet on whether the Orwell estate will be consulted on the CBDC design. Moving over to Russia, that country will enter a new stage of its CBDC program next week with real -world testing across 13 banks. A law authorizing the issuance of the digital ruble was signed into law last month, while the Russian central bank's testing and design process has been ongoing for over a year. In Wednesday's announcement, the central bank said, quote, The deputy governor of the central bank said that citizens should be able to access the During this pilot phase, 13 banks will test the digital ruble with a select group of their clients. The testing will focus on digital wallets, peer -to -peer transactions, purchases of goods and services using QR codes, and simple automated payments. The central bank announcement said, Now, lastly today, both on CBDCs and in general for our show, pop star Post Malone spoke extensively about what he saw as the dangers of a US CBDC in an appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast this week. Now, rather than me summing it up, let's just listen to a clip from that exchange. Apologies in advance and listener beware for the colorful language. I decided it made more sense to leave it and warn you than to censor Joe and Posty. So how do you feel about the government's digital currency that they're working on? No fucking way. No way. That's what I think. I think that's checkmate. That's game over. That is fucking checkmate. Because if they apply that to a social credit score, if they decide somehow or another that you need some social credit score system and it's for the benefit of society, and they outline that they can track your behavior and your tweets and all your things, you get a score. Already doing that. They just haven't released the fucking report cards. Well, they don't have the kind of freedom that they'd like. They didn't send the report cards home to the parents yet. Everything already is imprinted. Everything is already tracked. Everything is already there. But they just can't control you to the same extent that they would like. What they would like to do is to be able to strip you of your money and to be able to lock you down and then make sure that you comply so that all the other people also comply because they don't want to be stripped of their money. They don't want everything they work for just be taken away instantly overnight and be powerless. No one to call. No one's going to answer your phone. They just decided you fucked up and the rules are the rules and so then where does that money go? Who takes your money? When people start profiting off of confiscating people's digital currency, it's going to be a real fucking problem. It's not all fucking currency is digital. Yeah, but the idea of them controlling all of the money. And it's all unilateral. It's all the same fucking thing. That's a problem. And here's the problem I think is that people are going to do it due to convenience of it. Now one strain of commentary that I saw around this was Bitcoiners being flustered that neither of these guys mentioned Bitcoin. And while I understand where they're coming from, boy is that the wrong takeaway from this. Post Malone has 31 million followers across Twitter and Instagram. He's one of the biggest musicians in the world full stop. Rogan gets 11 million listeners per episode on average, even when it's not a huge celebrity. I think in a lot of ways this conversation about the concerns that come with the central bank digital currency is going to resonate a hell of a lot more for a lot of people given that there wasn't some specific coin solution being shilled. Now of course for us Bitcoiners, we know we have a preferred alternative, but you have to think if we're playing the long game, having people be bought into the fact that there might be a problem here is much more important than forcing them to adopt a preferred solution right away. So to the extent one cares about this set of issues, I think this was a pretty seminal pop culture moment, even if orange coin wasn't on set. Anyways guys, that is going to do it for today's episode. I appreciate you listening as always and until tomorrow, be safe and take care of each other. Peace.
A highlight from 1206. Stablecoin Frenzy Triggering a Bull-Run?
"All right, so let's get into some stablecoin news today. There is a frenzy in the market and some of the things that have been happening, of course, with PayPal, you've learned a little bit about that here on this show, but there's also starting to be some impacts on the rest of the crypto market. We'll try to break down maybe the winners and losers here that could play out. This is going to be a big one. My name is Paul Baron. Welcome back in the Tech Path. Let's get into a couple of news stories today. And then I've got some clips that will line up for you that I think you guys will start to get how all of this plays into the future of crypto. And I think this is all a good thing. Very bullish news. So let's start up here on the top. Watchaguru says Fed is now going to require approval before state banks can issue, hold or transact stablecoin payments. This, of course, is pretty good news because when you think about just the Fed, remember that they run all the supervisory activities FDIC including insurance, all those kind of things for a bank, even the overnights, all that is handled through the Fed. So this approval or the ability to get this approval is a big deal. So the goal of the Novel Activity Supervision Program is what they call it, is to foster the benefits of financial innovation while recognizing appropriately addressing risks to ensure the safety and soundness of the banking system. The program will integrate into the Federal Reserve's existing supervisory process, meaning that will banks be able to get stablecoins approved, meaning you'll be able to grab a stablecoin within your banking system. The question would be, what kind of stablecoin would that be? Could it be a bank stablecoin? Could it be something like what PayPal is doing or USDC most likely going to be the culprit here? So a lot happening around this. All of this is good news because with stablecoin adoption, in my opinion, comes the adoption of crypto in general. And that starts to flow into Web3 activity and all kinds of other things. Let me jump over to another quick note here. According to Bernstein, this analyst, this is a stablecoin market will experience a massive rise. And he's basically saying, we think this thing's going to grow 22X in five years. Now, if you think about that, you're going from $125 billion to around $2 .8 trillion. That's a significant growth in the market. Further in the article, major global financial and consumer platforms are expected to issue co -branded stablecoins. We've talked about that many times here on the show. It's going to happen. And then other potential stablecoin issues like Amazon, Alibaba, Tencent, Apple, Google, others. I don't know if Apple will be in there. Maybe they will when they finally open up to crypto. We'll see. Report also states stablecoin regulation has more political support than crypto regulation. Very interesting. This is something we've talked about here on the show as we've felt like stablecoins would most likely get the first win. regulatory That still could be the case. If you go back to a lot of our videos where we broke down a lot of these hearings, go back to our playlist. Just check our channel. There's a big playlist in there of all the hearings. And I want you to watch the one with Maxine Waters and Patrick McHenry. Basically, it's the Dems and the Republicans going at it. And there was a little bit of slowdown on this. So the good thing is, is this may speed that up in the long term here. Further in the report also warns that stablecoins still face a number of challenges and risks such as legal uncertainty, technical glitches, competitors and hacking. You know, kind of like banks. They also face those same challenges. I don't think this is really anything new. I want to get over to a clip. And this first clip we're going to go into is a little bit of the timing of how all this is transacting. Listen in. What made you change your mind? Why now? We do think that stablecoins are the killer app for blockchain technologies. Innate advantages in terms of cost and programmability and settlement time of stablecoins are something that we cannot just sit out. We see that there is demand for additional tokens in this space and we see the regulation moving forward. And that combination of things maybe is the right time to step. All right. Some good things here. I think the fact that the timing is along with the demand and I would agree with that speed of light transactions, the ability to move in a lot of different markets and across borders is going to be a pretty significant win on how stablecoins can be used. So that is a good thing. Let's go over to this next clip, which gets into the regulator pushback a little bit. Listen in. Have you faced any pushback in developing the stablecoin? Because, I mean, PayPal is a very big company. We already saw that regulators around the world didn't let Facebook do this. Why are regulators going to let you do this? We are a regulated financial institution. We have been in this business for more than 20 years. We are bringing to bear all the infrastructure that we have built over the years in terms of being regulated in multiple countries, in terms of risk management, in terms of compliance. And we think that that's a key asset. That is a difference in the approach that we are taking. I agree with that. You know, we've talked about that also is that PayPal and many others that we've kind of hinted at here recently on the show is that there are some key players that will most likely get the ability to execute on this much faster. Any kind of money services business such as PayPal would be a natural. I think there will be some others that will be kind of the second tier that could be a natural evolution of potential stablecoins. So I think the fact that they're going to be able to get some regulatory clarity because of their current licensing and how they're set up as a money services business is a good thing. And I know that there's a lot of people on the fence about it. And I would love to get you guys' feedback. For you, is this a pro or negative to what's happening in the crypto markets as a whole? Just let me know. If you think it's bullish or bearish, let me know. Drop some comments down below. I want to go over to another clip here, and this is talking about the PayPal stablecoin versus fiat and how they're going to be handling that. Listen in. Why does this work better than fiat? If you think that when you are doing payments with digital currencies, you can settle in times that range from seconds to minutes. When in traditional payment methods, sometimes you're sending a wire internationally and that can take three to five days to settle. So when you are a merchant and you're intrigued about accelerating the time that it takes you to receive money, this has a very, very good application for that. All right. So in my opinion, this will also be used by a lot of businesses. B2B payments will be a big part of this, being able to utilize PayPal. It's already kind of built into the e -commerce systems that are out there in a lot of the Web 2 formats as it is right now. But to be able to enhance that immediately and get immediate payments instead of ACH, which sometimes takes at least a 24 -hour and sometimes longer. If it's on a Friday, it's over the weekend. But he's right. Wires are much longer. They're very costly. It's not immediate settlement and you can't track it. So all of those are beneficial to taking this onto the blockchain. So I would agree with them. I want to go over to another clip here and this is talking further about why this works for PayPal versus other stablecoins. Listen in. How many more stablecoins do we need? First of all, it's obviously the access to our two -sided network. The second one, where I think that we help, is fiat connectivity. The ability to move quickly, to acquire PYUSD quickly from your PayPal balance and pay with your bank account or with your debit card or when you want to sell it and take it out, be able to do it seamlessly. And last but not least, obviously the regulatory and compliance angle. As we said, we have been in this business for 20, 25 years. All right. So I think he's hitting on the point that you've got almost 500 million users. Average balance, we showed this the other day in the PayPal video, average balance around $450 to $500 per user on average. When you think about that and how much money could go into a yield -bearing stablecoin, that's pretty significant. In fact, it would be significant enough that it could move the market in a very, very big way. So I think this all is pointing to one direction. Who wins this on the backside? Obviously, we've seen ERC -20 being the core and kind of the backbone of most stablecoins, and obviously that is the case with PayPal as well. But I'd love to kind of get you guys' thought. If we had to choose, whether it's Tether, USDC, a PayPal stablecoin, and I know we have people watching us from 165 countries plus, what would you choose? Would you choose Tether, USDC, PayPal? What would you go with? Listen to this clip. See what he had to say about that. PayPal, it's bigger than Tether. So you could hypothetically outmarket them. Is that the goal here, to eclipse Tether both in terms of market cap and mass use? As of last weekend, I think there were about $120 billion in stablecoin. We don't think that's where it stops. We expect that one of the things that this will do is to increase the pie and increase the move towards stablecoins. All right. So, you know, yes, that's what he means. They're going after Tether. That's what this is. You have half a billion people on this around the world. Tether is a much more global stablecoin. And I think it has the most to lose against PayPal if PayPal is successful. This doesn't automatically, and it's not an automatic slam dunk for PayPal because there's a lot here. The other thing that plays into this, and if you think about the future of how, you know, just normal people out there that are transacting in small amounts, what is it that is being used the most? If you think about Venmo or even Zelle, to a certain extent, we know the problem with Zelle. Venmo has some benefits. PayPal obviously owns Venmo, and there's a great tie in here. This clip kind of explains how Venmo could be integrated in. So listen into this one. You mentioned in the press release yesterday an imminent Venmo integration. What would that look like? You will be able to send dollar denominated value from a Venmo account to a PayPal account. That's something that is one of the most requested features from our Venmo users. They want to be able to send not only to friends on Venmo, but also to friends on PayPal. And importantly, it would also allow PayPal merchants to be able to receive value from Venmo users. And it opens a base of millions of additional customers for them. If you think of PayPal and Venmo as networks that have been sister networks, but kind of separate, what we are doing with this is we are building a bridge between those two networks. And if you do believe that the value of a network increases with the number of members of those networks, now you are adding all of a sudden tens of millions of users that you can send to, that you can receive to, and millions of merchants where you can pay. So in terms of the network effects and the network economics and that flywheel of adding utility for a Venmo user, it allows you to very quickly be able to expand the base of friends, family, merchants that you can interact with the comfort of the Venmo account and the Venmo brand that you're used to. Yeah. And I think with Venmo, you've got, of course, another 70, 80 million in use. And the advantage there, of course, is just simplicity. And the key here with any kind of stablecoin is how easy is it to access? Right now, if you want to get to the USDC, most likely you're going to have to go through a Coinbase or other exchanges out there. This making it a simple process with an app you already have in your phone today already set up, whether it's PayPal or a Venmo, this starts to open up the, I think, the gate, the floodgates for where all of this is going to be going. And when you think about that, there's a couple other companies that are starting to maybe kick the tires. Microsoft and Aptos Labs teaming up on some new AI tools, and you'll recognize this a little bit. Remember Aptos Lab, they were the developer of the Layer 1 blockchain started by Facebook. And this was, of course, the company that scrapped Diem. Now, remember Diem was one of, formerly Libra, it was one of the initial stablecoin ideas from a entity. So much like what is happening with PayPal, Facebook had attempted a different kind of scenario and why it failed makes sense because it wasn't necessarily a money services thing. So anyway, Aptos, of course, surged on this about 15%. So it's up. Right now, Wednesday, the press release was pretty straightforward, leveraging Microsoft's infrastructure now to deploy some new offerings basically with AI and blockchain tech. This will also include their new chatbot, which is Aptos Assistant, which will answer questions about the ecosystem, all that good stuff. AI and blockchain tech are quickly converging. This is something I have talked about for quite some time. You have two major technologies starting to merge together, and that, of course, is AI and blockchain. I want to go to this clip right here also, which gets into how gaming will play into this, especially from Apple. Listen in. You mentioned that stablecoin being used for payments in online games and other Web3 apps. Is Web3 gaming a meaningful part of your business that you're planning for? If you think about mainstream games, mobile games, games that you would play in your console, that economy is about $100 billion in digital goods that get transacted today. And if you are a developer who are selling digital goods in any of these platforms with the current payment infrastructure, it can take you up to 15 days to receive your proceeds. That's where those advantages for micropayments, for streaming payments, for things like accelerated settlement can be applicable in the whole gaming ecosystem way beyond the early stage Web3 games that are available today. This is an ERC20 token. It is deployed on the Ethereum network, so it's very easy for mainstream exchanges and support it.
"maxine" Discussed on Thinking Crypto News & Interviews
"Jeremy Hogan, attorney, Jeremy Hogan said the individual defendant's trial will begin May twenty twenty four. That means final judgment in this case won't be entered until late summer twenty twenty four at earliest. An appeal would go well into twenty twenty five. The glove is, on the other hand, delays are good for XRP and Ripple hashtag legal clarity. So, folks, these are the facts, right? And not to get emotional or bias or whatever it is, these are coming from straight from attorneys. But once again, you're going to see media headlines that are going to bring a lot of fun around Ripple and XRP. Right. So just be prepared for that. And we'll have to keep putting out the facts there. Now, Attorney John Deaton's crypto law, they put out some items here regarding the pretrial schedule. They said a fact check on pretrial schedule issued by Judge Torres. Ripple is not going on trial. Judge Torres ruling that XRP token is not a security is not going to trial. The trial will not decide matters of law. Only one narrow set of facts in dispute. The remaining dispute over the facts relating only to Chris Larson and Brad Garlinghouse were explained on pages 30 to 34 of Torres decision. And this once again, these are the facts, folks. So just be prepared once again for FUD that may be coming out there. Let's move ahead. So Maxine Waters, I tell you, she's unbelievable. Maxine Waters calls for stablecoin guardrails after PayPal debut. Waters says consumers are at greater risk of harm at the hands of bad actors without legislation. But yet she and the Democrats were the one holding up the stablecoin bill that Patrick Henry was trying to get pushed through. Remember, they had a walk out. There was a lot of back and forth. And eventually that bill, while they did mark it up after 13 hours and a lot of back and forth, the White House did put a stop to it. So it's like, well, why don't you why did you block the regulation then? These people are unbelievable. But we know she is working directly with the Fed and the Treasury and the Democrats and they're up to something. You know, it goes back to they are concerned that the control of money will be out of their hands. Remember, the money printing machine has to keep going. Right. And of course, they're probably trying to delay certain things because of CBDCs that are coming and who knows whatever else. Right. Maybe they're banking cartel campaign donors are probably telling them to block it. We'll have to wait and see. But it's unbelievable. Like you were the problem. You could have got the stablecoin bill before. It's so stupid. Here's a quote of what she had to say. I and Democrats on the committee have been working diligently for 15 months on legislation to help address this issue and create an environment where consumers and the economy would be protected in the event of a cooperation like PayPal decided to launch its own. Once again, why the hell did you push back on the bill? Waters previously pushed back against the stablecoin bill, saying that the extreme wing of the Republican Party forced the House Financial Services Committee to address a trove of anti ESG, anti investor and wholly anti capitalist bills in the late July. Waters echoed that dissent on Wednesday, contending that there's no chance that Republicans current version is signed into law. She urged Republicans and Chair Patrick McHenry to return to negotiating table. Specifically, the Republican bill gives stablecoins like PayPal USD that are issued under state regimes a seal of approval, but blocks the Federal Reserve from overseeing and enforcing any federal standards. But she continued on Tuesday. The Federal Reserve detail its plans for expanding oversight of crypto related activities at the banks. These measures include requiring state member banks to obtain written approval from the Fed before using distributed ledgers or other technologies to conduct payments activities as principal, including by issuing, holding or transacting in dollar tokens. The other thing here, the states are are moving faster than the federal government. If Maxine Waters and these clowns would get their act together, you know, all this nonsense they were doing the other day. Guess what? They would be maybe ahead of the states right as the federal government. But as usual, as usual, folks, just nonsense after nonsense. So the states will keep doing their thing. And there's many states that are very pro crypto and we know Wyoming and many others. So it's her own fault. Now, here we've got some news that three hundred and eighty five billion dollar investment firm Carlisle Group co-founder, he was interviewed by Bloomberg and he said the mighty BlackRock is willing to have an ETF in Bitcoin. Maybe Bitcoin is going to be around for a while. You don't say everybody is capitulating. They all have to capitulate. All the naysayers, right? They will all bend the knee to the crypto asset class. So this is David Rubenstein and he's the Carlisle Group co-founder and co-chairman. So it's amazing how all these naysayers over the years are capitulating folks. Now, Coinbase launched their layer two network base and it is now live on the Ethereum mainnet. So this is a L2 solution for Ethereum. I feel like there's a million layer two solutions for Ethereum. It's kind of unbelievable. But look, more competition, right? So more than one hundred decentralized apps and service providers will operate on the network at launch. So this is interesting what Coinbase is trying to do here. So base, the Ethereum layer two network built on Optimism's OP stack is officially opening its doors today. Coinbase first revealed its intention to build base in February when CEO Brian Armstrong detailed what he was calling the Coinbase secret master plan. The launch of bases in the mainnet marks an important milestone of this plan. Jesse Pollock, head of protocols at Coinbase, told Blockworks developers have had access to base since July 13th, and a number of users have already bridged their eith to the layer two network through a portal proxy contract. Members of crypto's degen community also moved to make themselves at home on base once the doors were ostensibly opened at launch. More than one hundred decentralized apps and service providers will operate on the network. In the first week of what base is calling an on chain summary, users can mint multiple NFT designs and artworks to celebrate the launch. A handful of ecosystems and dapps will also be publicly available for users, including prominent players such as Uniswap, Aave and Compound. Here's a quote. We really see base as the place to bring the next billion people on chain. Pollock said a lot of that is because of our ability to integrate that into these or those consumer experiences and make everything really easy to use. So, look, guys, this sounds great. The only thing I know some people are flagging is, is it decentralized? It doesn't seem so decentralized. It seems very centralized. But at the end of the day, you know, and this people may disagree with me on this. I think we are not in the position where we can hit the ground running with full decentralization. I don't think that we're there yet. I think it's a transition. There's going to be a merge of CFI and DeFi and both are going to run in parallel with each other. But I think maybe 10, 15 years from now, we will have set up the infrastructure and people would have been more confident and we have the proper solutions to go fully decentralized. So I think it's still early. And I know a lot of people are like, oh, no, we need decentralization, decentralization. Yeah, but I don't think the world is able to on ramp into a fully decentralized world yet. Yes, we can have partial decentralization. I think certainly that is happening right now. But there's still a need for CFI. Look, all of us, when we go to buy crypto, we're using CFI on ramps for the most part. So it's going to be a mixture until this thing is fully up and running and there's more people on board and there's next generation apps and blockchains that can really enhance decentralization. So I think base, it is what it is. It may be pretty centralized, but it is with at least a trusted party. And that is Coinbase, a public company that has insurance readily identifiable with their company, with everything that's going on. They have audits, they have a lot of trusted partners and much more. So they're at least a company tier one crypto company, if you want to put it that way. So we'll see how this goes. I think they're going to get adoption because of the Coinbase name, the existing customer base. So let's see where it goes. But this is pretty big now, according to Coinbase, crypto adoption rapidly gaining traction in New York, one fifth of New Yorkers own crypto, according to a Coinbase report. Now, there is an issue, though, with the bit license in New York and certain assets and being able to be traded on Coinbase. New York with this bit license is kind of ridiculous, but I guess people are finding a way around it. So it's pretty interesting what's happening. So when it comes to owning crypto, this makes New York one of the top 10 states in the United States, California, New Jersey, Washington, Colorado, Utah, Florida, Alaska, Nevada, Massachusetts are also on that list. New York is also on Coinbase's list of top 10 states, which with the largest average value of cryptocurrency owned by crypto owner, meaning that it has its fair share of whales as part of the exchanges. United States of Crypto Project Coinbase surveyed New Yorkers to understand how residents are approaching digital assets. Roughly one in three New York residents surveyed found that cryptocurrency makes the system more fair. Overall, Coinbase notes the state has nearly 700 blockchain organizations and over 50 percent of Fortune 100 companies have pursued different initiatives focused on crypto web through your block chain. So adoption continues, my friends, even in very strict regulatory environments like New York. Finally, Russia to commence digital ruble pilot testing with 13 banks, the pilot program for the digital currency will begin on August 15th. Folks, the token economy, right? How many years have I been talking about it? It's coming. Everything running on the block chain, including fiat currencies and every central bank will be running with some CBDC. Which block chains they choose is the big question, right? We know there's Hedera, there's Algorand, there's the XRP Ledger, there's even Ethereum and there's many more. Which ones they will pick will be very telling. Some may develop their own, but we'll see where they go with it. You know, if they're going to do a private block chain or a public. Now, we know, for example, Ripple, you know, with the XRP Ledger, they have a private ledger version of the XRP Ledger. So that facilitates the CBDCs and so forth. So it's coming, folks. So just be prepared. Don't don't be surprised next year. You start seeing some CBDCs coming in in the in the economy in different parts of the world. I think it's it's right around the corner, especially with stable coins being launched by different private companies like PayPal and much more. Well, folks, that's the news. Let me know what you think about this filing for the ability to appeal, as Stuart Alarati said. And remember, watch out for the FUD. It's coming, folks. But as of today, the law, not someone's opinion, but the law is that XRP itself is not a security. Secondary market sales are not a security, regardless of what the headlines you see over the next week or so. Anyway, let me know what you think. Leave your thoughts, comments below. Hit the thumbs up button. Hit the five star rating on the podcast platforms and I'll talk to you all later.
A highlight from SEC GARY GENSLER APPEALS RIPPLE XRP RULING! COINBASE BASE & MAXINE WATERS STABLECOIN REGULATION
"Welcome back to the Thinking Crypto Podcast, your home for cryptocurrency news and interviews. If you are new here, please hit that subscribe button as well as the thumbs up button and leave a comment below. If you're listening on a podcast platform such as Spotify, Apple or Google, please leave a five star rating and review. It supports the podcast and it doesn't cost you anything. Well, folks, we got some very big news and the SEC versus Ripple lawsuit. So the SEC is looking to appeal some of the decisions from Judge Torres. Here James K. Filan or attorney James K. Filan, I should say, tweeted out the following SEC files letter outlining its basis for filing a motion for leave to file an interlocutory appeal regarding programmatic offers and sales to XRP buyers over trading platforms and Ripple's other distributions. He says the SEC seeking a stay of all proceedings pending appeal is not unexpected. So James actually spoke about this back in December 21st, 2022. And I think we all know the SEC was going to appeal, right? Because on one hand, even if they don't win the appeal, they want to do it from an optics standpoint. So they don't look weak because if they just took their loss and ran with it, the entire industry right now is really emboldened and feeling confident that they're going to be able to beat the SEC and the wins have been taken out of Gary Gensler's sales. Even Congress, members of Congress who have crypto bills like Patrick McHenry, Cynthia Lummis and these folks have been using this ruling to say, hey, we got to get crypto regulations pushed through, support my bill, right? We've seen those statements. So not surprised by this. Now something we need to keep in mind is that, look, as of right now, the law based on the ruling is that XRP intrinsically is not a security, secondary market sales are not a security. That's the law. What you're probably going to see tomorrow and over the next few days, a lot of fun. Ripples will be defeated. The SEC is coming back for XRP to make it a security, right? People are going to say a lot of negative things just expected, right? Could it click bait headlines? But this is where you leave your emotions to the side and you think about this logically. Now we have to see how things play out. I don't think the SEC has a strong case here. I think this is more for optics, but I could be wrong. But if we're looking at the possibilities or the percentages that are probabilities, I should say, of what scenario is to play out, I don't think the SEC has a strong case here. I think this ruling stands. Now here's Stuart Alder Roddy of Ripple. He's the chief legal officer. He tweeted out about this news. He said the SEC does not have the right to appeal just yet, which is why they are asking for permission to file an interlocutory appeal. Ripple will file its response with the court next week. Stay tuned. So of course, Ripple is going to push back on this, right? So this is not a done deal that they can just appeal. Like he said, they don't have the right to, but they're going to ask for permission to appeal. So that's an important factor there. Here attorney Jeremy Hogan said, and the SEC continues to make questionable decisions requesting an interlocutory appeal. Note that it is not appealing whether XRP itself is a security, just its losses on the programmatic and individual sales issues. So interesting thoughts here. Now one of the folks replied to Jeremy's tweet and said the Torres ruling on XRP programmatic sales is what led to XRP being a non -security and crypto exchanges relisting XRP, is in challenging programmatic sales, the functional equivalent of challenging the non -security status of XRP. That's a great question. Jeremy said two separate issues, XRP is not a security period, but if the SEC wins the appeal on sales, then Ripple couldn't use exchanges to facilitate sales. And the big question would exchanges keep XRP listed? He said, I think yes, as long as they can verify sales are not being made by Ripple. So to recap, the SEC is not appealing that XRP itself intrinsically is not a security. I think they would absolutely lose that, right? Because it goes back to the orange groves and oranges themselves were not securities in the Howey test. It was the packaging, how Howey put together that investment scheme, but they are going after those exchange sales. And I don't think they're going to win it, but they have the right to appeal. Well, I should say they can appeal, but they have to ask for permission as Stuart said. So let's see where things go. Ellie Tourette of Fox Business, she said the following, from everything I've learned about interlocutory appeals from brilliant legal minds in this space, they are notoriously tricky to get approved. The SEC will need to get blessings from both Judge Torres and the Second Circuit in order to do for this to be granted.
Prosecutors Cite Trump Post in Protective Order Request
"It's the only way the trump team is finally starting a the legal team the new rules they had a legal filing yesterday trump put out a true social post i don't know if you saw it and the truth social post said you come after me i'll come after you it was actually put out the other day of course special tyrant jack smith whose only goal is to put trump in jail before the and silence them so we can't win jack smith ran into court like a little whiny baby i need a part active order crying crying like a little child keep in mind jack smith is nowhere referenced even in the true social post was it about jack smith i have no idea was it a threat was it any more of a threat than chuck schumer the korsak kamana the whirlwind is coming for you is it any more of a threat than maxine waters you get up in their face was it any more of a threat than the uh... the esters outside of kavanaugh's house and a mikoni bears house the answer is no so the new rules are in effect i don't give a damn about your fake threats because when it's our saying it you're like always a threat but when you're going to say it like this is protected speech man speeches in i'm gonna take that rule now and i'm gonna apply it to you and if you don't like it again take the ellipse and attach them to my ass here it is here's the demo this you see this listen that's my ass you can kiss it because i don't care about your oh fake prison principle donald trump shouldn't be talking like this oh but your people can call all trump a nazi can give speeches outside the supreme court nearly inciting they can do that no i'm not there are no principles so if there are no principles
A highlight from 1197. Elizabeth Warren Demands More Crypto Taxes Pro-CBDC Army vs Stablecoins
"So, Elizabeth Warren up to her antics again, this time using taxes, using CBDC, and many other tools to her disposal to try to take a position against crypto. We're going to be breaking down all of this for you guys today. My name is Paul Baron. Welcome back into Tech Path. I want to get into the first story here. Democrat senators want Treasury, IRS, to pick up the pace on crypto tax rules. So a few things that I want to break down in this article so you kind of know who the players are. I'm going to zoom in on this one. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Robert Casey, and then Richard Blumenthal, all involved in this. The idea is pretty simple. Treasury and IRS have until the end of the year to finalize new rules to help close the estimated $50 billion crypto tax gap. Now, this is something we'll break down because this is not necessarily the real scenario. It's what they're proposing out there. The other thing they want to put in here is, without quick action, your agencies are at risk of failing to meet congressionally mandated deadlines and the implementation of the final rule. We urge that you act swiftly and implement strong crypto tax reporting rules for cryptocurrency brokers. All of this, which we'll get into, one of the things the industry has said has become very antsy waiting on guidance, particularly with regards to the IRS defines a broker. Industry observers have claimed that the broker definition is very broad. We all know that because it could include miners and also software developers. That's another problem that already exists in crypto of who is a broker. And then secondly, or additionally, what are we hoping for? An industry perspective that is updated with the 6045 regulation, which basically gives different qualifications based on type of activity. The other thing they break down is it'll hopefully make it clear that not everyone effectuating a transfer of a digital asset would be subjected to a broker reporting. So this gets into some of the details of when taxes do apply, and we'll show a little bit more about this. The letter, the senatorial letter, comes days after the IRS issued new guidance update in 6045 regarding crypto staking, which is the other part of this that's pretty big, in which the agency ruled that staking income, regardless of the gains are realized, will be taxed as income. So you have to think about that for a second. You're staking ETH, you get ETH in return. You haven't sold ETH, but you're taking that as an income. That is the argument I think that everybody, of course, is up in arms about. If a cash method taxpayer takes stakes cryptocurrency native to a proof of stake blockchain and receives additional units of cryptocurrency as rewards, which is what happens here when the validation occurs, the fair market value of the validation rewards received is included in the taxpayer's gross income. So if you are staking, that's a problem. The interesting thing is that you do not take tax gains if you're putting that in a money market and you're getting paid interest. That's not gains until you exit those kind of scenarios. So this is an interesting aspect of how the IRS and how Elizabeth Warren is really putting pressure on it. Another point I want to get to here. This was coming from the 2021 Infrastructure Investment Employment Act, which is where all this came from. But basically, it said if we do not act quickly, that is, if the Treasury and the IRS do not implement these new rules in a timely manner, we risk missing out on roughly $1 .5 billion in tax revenue for fiscal 2024. At this point, you should not give this chance to tax evaders, which is what they're calling crypto people. And I think this is something that people don't realize just how much taxes are being paid by people in crypto. In fact, countries with the most taxpayers currently in cryptocurrency, United States leading the way, number one, Japan, number two, Germany, United Kingdom, and Austria. So you can kind of see we're already handling this because crypto is like any other really asset out there if you think about it. If you take a gain, if you sell an asset and you take a gain, that's a capital gains tax. And it applies to capital gains rules. Those are the same kind of scenarios that play into it. What I don't necessarily think is going to be popular is for them to continue to reach in to these unrealized gains, like taking unrealized gains and taxing them in any other corporate infrastructure, just not necessarily the model in which this plays out. The other thing that income tax is payable on is you're getting paid in crypto. That's revenue. So you're paying tax on that. You get an airdrop. That's a new asset you've received. Getting taxes on that. Staking rewards. That's the other scenario that plays into this. DeFi interest. Mining rewards and then even referral bonuses. All of those are income taxable at this time. There was a couple of things here in a report from CoinLedger that I want to showcase. And this was really kind of going through the people in their survey of who understood when a taxable event occurs. So 65 % of investors correctly identified that selling cryptocurrency is a taxable event. Now you have to sell it for a profit, of course. If you sell it for a loss, that's not obviously a taxable event. But only 38 % of the investors correctly identified that a crypto -to -crypto trade is a taxable event. So this is still questioning and also it's still not completely clear so that the IRS, but also even your tax preparers understand really what's happening out there in the place. And I think, again, this all goes back down into regulation, which will flow into the tax code and many other aspects. This is kind of interesting right here. This was further from the CoinLedger report. 50 % of non -taxpayers don't report because they haven't made a profit currently in cryptocurrency. You have to remember the last two years, really since 2021, almost anybody in crypto, along with other assets out there, have been in the negative. Right now, haven't made a profit, so you're not going to be paying taxes on that. I didn't know I had to report. Some people said that. I don't understand how to report, 12%, and then I don't want to pay taxes, 7%. So that should have been larger. Government doesn't know about my cryptocurrency. Okay, those are the bad guys right there. So the likelihood is if you guys are watching our show and maybe you're brand new to crypto, it's treated like any other asset class. Doesn't have any really differentiation. It is money. If you're taking it as revenue, if you're taking it as income, if you're taking a sale and getting profit from it, you're going to be able to take taxes at that time. Those are taxable events. The other problem is that it's not like an investment if you do lose money where you get to use that as a tax loss. So that's another problem of how this could. Now you can do some tax loss harvesting, of course, obviously you should get with your own CPA to understand how that works. I want to go to a clip here because the clip will go into a little bit about where, and we're kind of transitioning out of taxes into CBDC, but where Warren stands on CBDCs. Let's know what she said. So that's not so hard on stablecoins. The harder one is what do you think Bitcoin is about? If you think it's about being able to transfer value without having to go through banks, and little side note, I think banks have done a really bad job of a lot of the things they're called on to do. Yeah, the biggest advocates of Bitcoin sound like you. Yeah. Meaning they want to break up these big banks have been terrible, right? That's exactly right. And they've cheated consumers and they've kept prices high and they're slow and they won't cash a check. Five to seven days to three to five days. There you go. And it was a huge victory. Huge victory, right? That they only held onto your money for five to seven days. So a lot that banks do wrong, if you think we could improve that in a digital world, the answer is sure you could. But in that case, let's do a central bank digital currency. Are you there? Oh, for a central bank digital currency? Yes. All right, so you can see she's very pro central bank digital currencies. If you look at Warren Davidson's tweet right here, in America, CBDC should be banned. This was one option, a jailable criminal offense declaration of war and implemented. Obviously that was his kind of poking fun at, but banned is the big one is that we shouldn't use it. This is a big scenario that plays out, has been playing out for quite some time on the CBDC front. So let's just understand that CBDCs, if we do get to that, and I think this is one of the reasons that obviously crypto in general has been more popular and started to become more popular around the world, especially in countries that already have problems with their fiat. And I think that is going to be an issue that will continue to face here in the U .S. of how that does play out on a digital currency. If you look at what's happening in China, obviously their social credit system is all tied to eventually to the money. So definitely a problem. Now the other things that play into this is that there could be some scenarios right now where Gensler is going to start trying to do some other things to try to deflect maybe a possible loss that could be coming at him. One of the things that's happening right now, this of course, hacks crypto founder used investor funds to buy almost four and a half million Black Diamonds. This is the SEC. So this again is nefarious actors like Richard Hart and others that have been in the crypto space. Listen, this is not the only place that has those kinds of actors out there, but this is a good example of just how the SEC is trying to go in and deflect a little bit. Here was one of the things they charged, SEC charges 18 Utah defendants with a $50 million crypto fraud scheme. So again, Gensler and the SEC are on the warpath right now. And I always wonder why, because these are small fraud. And I look at this, they're definitely not a Binance, they're not an FDX, and they're definitely not a Coinbase. So why are they going out after these very low hanging, I'm sure they should, but it's almost making mountains out of molehills in the kind of scenario that this is faced into right now. Are they maybe setting up for deflecting off of a potential big loss, such as possibly an approval through the House on these crypto bills? Just to give you an idea of just how close Gensler is to the regulatory and the political landscape, look at the timing here. January 12th, this was 2023, he sued Genesis. During that time, we had the House Financial Services Committee announcing their subcommittee on digital assets, so nice timing there. February 12th through the 14th, Wall Street comes in and says they've issued a Wells Notice for Paxos. At the same time, you had a committee hearing on crypto crash, why financial system safeguards are needed. Then you had this one, March 19th, he goes in and he publishes the op -ed in The Hill, and then you had the Senate Ag Committee saying we're going to do these crypto hearings. Then he does April 27th, and you can kind of see it just all ties in to activity that's happening in the political forefront. He is coming in, or the SEC coming in, and timing is everything. So the reality is that all of this is going to play into the hands, I think, of the industry and also to the lawmakers understanding what the SEC's overreach has been. So it's going to be one that will probably play out in a very short period of time. I want to go to this next clip of Ron Hammond from Blockchain Association. Listen in. At least in the market structure bill, which again, got more votes than the stablecoin bill from Democrats, which blew everyone's mind in D .C. No one expected that to have ever happened. We were expecting like four or five. We had six Democrats join. Stablecoins were expecting 12 or so Democrats to join. We only got five. All right. So simply kind of taking a little bit of a victory lap of what has happened here recently on the House floor in terms of the committees and getting ready to send both of these bills to the House for a potential vote. This will happen in September. Let's take a listen to this next clip on Hammond on Gensler. And I think the market structure vote in particular just shows how much he's lost his own party in terms of buying the narrative that, A, the status quo is fine, B, there's no need for legislation, and three, he's doing a good job on the enforcement end. And we saw that on all three arguments from different Democrats fail each time. And I think the fact that there's six Democrats who bucked their own party, who bucked the SEC and said, yeah, we're going to advance the market structure bill forward. Even the House Act Committee said, yeah, we're going to advance this bill forward, too, without any opposition recorded. That's huge. All right. So I think the play out on this, you know, when you look at the current landscape right now of what Warren's attack is, the crypto army, you look at the positioning that really D .C. is doing currently, and now could this play into the political landscape for 2024? Yes, it could. But the bigger play here, I think, is still the regulatory front. And that means that either the SEC is going to lose some of its power and the CFTC is going to come in and start to have a little bit more divvy up of what digital assets and how they're controlled through these government agencies. But really, how does this play out maybe into the future? This note right here from the block, they were talking about the commission being the SEC has so far received 52 letters about these proposed funds. This is in reference to ETFs, with most of them expressing support. So it's very possible that we could see an ETF actually get passed here. And you've seen some of the things we've talked about here on the channel before in the last couple of weeks, you know, everything from the Bloomberg team and so on around the potential of the ETF getting passed, the Bitcoin ETF. If that does get passed, that would be huge for the market, would absolutely legitimize what's happening in this space. And I think it would probably, in most cases, put so much pressure on D .C. that they have to move to going in and actually getting some landscape in play. Most of the comments against the approval appeared in multiple letters from a business consultant calling themselves the due diligence. I think basically this is a bunch of banks tied in behind this and this was the counter argument to what an ETF should be. So there is full political folly in play here and it is happening at, I think, light speed right now, much faster than what I anticipated even. One of the last things here is the comment period wraps up next week. So the SEC accepting letters for the final funds around August 11. So meaning that Gensler is getting ready to have to actually make some decision either for or against or a delay, which is probably what most likely will happen. But the good thing is that, like I said, there's going to be a potential right now which keeps increasing of a potential approval coming from some of the best ETF experts in the world that are analyzing where the situation is and kind of how it's going forward. Additionally, you've got anti -crypto movement now escalating Congress's assault on privacy. This is where a lot of people are starting to look at the idea of cash and just personal privacy, which is one of the biggest issues really around the world. And if you think about just how important that is, this would give you an example, cash matters, free citizens entitled to privacy and the protection of their data. In the UK, 74 % of people say cashless society would take away the people's right to choose. In the U .S., it's 73%. When it comes to purchases, personal preferences should remain exactly that, simply meaning that with a CBDC, we all know what that means, the control of the cash, control of what you spend on, then it gets into the control of what you spend on based on your political viewpoints or other aspects of your life that all start to play it. So cash does pretty much empower citizens to become capable of kind of voting with their wallets. And I think this is a very critical scenario that's playing out right now. CBDCs will be a big part of this. So you've got CBDCs happening, you've got what we're going to be dealing with on a taxable side and then the legislative. So all of this happening right now, literally in 2023, and it seems to be coming to a head very quickly. I think as we move forward, there's going to be two things that come out of this, and that is how these bills start to move their way through Congress and eventually, if we do get approvals, to the president's desk. Here's of course, the Senator Lummis and Gillibrand bill. Just another piece of legislation that is making its way through. Most likely, this is one that will not happen, mainly because of the association and the collaboration, I think, with the ICC. The bill involves a broader swath of agencies, so this is kind of interesting because it gets into the Office for Foreign Asset Control, the FTC, OFAC, FinCEN, et cetera. The SEC is provided also with something that a section -by -section overview claims resolves a long -standing issue with the SEC custody requirements. Probably the bill that will not make its way through, which gives us back to the scenario of the two bills that are currently on the floor that most likely will make it. So good news, I think, in general, bad news for the crypto army and CBDC is still coming to a head, but I think the good thing here is that, in many cases, it's like bad PR is even good PR, but the point is that the industry, lawmakers, finance community, they're all talking about crypto, and in the end, that is good for the asset class. One other thing that did happen, which is kind of interesting, this was a letter to Tim Cook, and we did a full video on this, so I won't go into the detail of this, but mainly it was trying to get Apple to get less and less constrictive on asset classes that are making their way through apps or innovation that are involved with blockchain. One of the things that they got into was purposely limiting choice and stifling innovation at the expense of user experience. This is a problem that Apple kind of faces for quite some time. And we broke down a lot of this, but the big deal is this right here, responding to the following questions no later than 5 p .m. on August 14th. So this is another issue that is coming to a head here in August of Apple having to actually address what's happening in Capitol Hill around the blockchain and the crypto industry as a whole. So again, just another big benefit, I think, for where this market is going. I want to go to this next clip here, and this is again Ron Hammond, on where he thinks Apple's position is. Listen in. But this is a bipartisan letter from the leaders of the subcommittee on innovation. That sends a message that says, look, I mean, Apple's getting hit on a number of fronts, but this definitely sends a message saying, you know, hey, look, you're on the clock right now. We're looking at you. So that committee is going to be taking more of a role over time because we've seen this talk and this narrative of crypto really shift more and more in D .C., at least, talking about the tech itself, which is perfect, is exactly what I want to talk about, the innovation and the technology itself. And that's the Energy and Commerce Committee. That's a bipartisan letter that sends a pretty good warning shot to others in the industry saying, look, you know, crypto is here to stay. We have concerns that the U .S. are probably blocking them out. And that's not good on our watch. All right. So I think this is one of those things, again, that the thwarting of innovation is a concern here in the United States because it's one of the things that pretty much pushed the U .S. ahead of the entire planet when it comes to really capital growth, entrepreneurship, how we grow our own economies, but more importantly, our position in the hierarchy of the global structure in terms of just being the global power. And I think if you consider that, you have to look at what's happening in Europe. And with the EU, markets and crypto assets regulation, this is MICA, this is a regulation that's pretty much been in place, and it's now starting to take form. And one of the things that you have to kind of look at here is their consultation package three. These are all actually happening now. Qualification of crypto assets and financial instruments, monitoring detection, notification of market abuse, investor protection is happening, you can kind of see the things there on reverse solicitation, policies, procedures, all that. System resilience and security access, all that is building. Mainly what is going on right now in MICA is they're prepping to get all of this regulation in place so that they can roll out this program. And when they do, it is going to put the EU at the front and center of one of the biggest asset classes that has ever been created. This is the power of what crypto and blockchain is bringing to the planet. And that's why I think we are seeing all of this scrambling going on here in 2023 in the U .S. Look at the timeline here of MICA. June hits, publication goes out. July, the consultation package one already rolls out. October of this year, we're going to see package two. And then by Q1, that's when that consultation package three goes into play. And then we have early entry into the application and then the rollout by end of next year. So this is pretty significant. Further into their rollout, this kind of, let me kind of zoom out on this a little bit. This shows more background on all the transitional measurements that are going to take place. And this looks complicated, but really what it simply means is these are the deadlines that they're trying to meet to get all of the organizations that are applying for regulatory position in the EU into play so that they can go into the markets with all of these things in a legal way. And I think that is what is interesting. I think they're going to stay very sharp on these timelines because they don't want to look stupid. And right now, the world is watching. Everybody's looking at this. Asia's watching this now. The U .S. is pretty much on a big race with it. I want to go to a next clip here. And this next clip is a little bit more about the BRICs, now why the BRICs matter. And listen to this one. This is an important one. Yeah. So BRICs is a collection of countries that are trying to find an alternative to what they see as the hegemonic dollar based U .S. run global economy. So BRIC stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. But what happened in the wake of the Ukraine invasion is that the U .S. seized Russia's presumably to try to set off a banking crisis. Now, ironically enough, for separate reasons, our banks crashed. But anyway, that didn't work. But the problem, yeah, the problem is that every country on earth saw that happen. All right. And you've got now all these countries that they were never really hostile to the U .S., but they're starting to wonder now, could they come after me? Could they try to crash my banks? But at this point now it's accelerating. And so they've got a meeting coming up in August. And one of the items that may or may not be on the agenda is the prospect of a gold backed BRICs currency. What I think is interesting is that if any country did gold back a widely used currency, that would I mean, it would be catastrophic for the U .S. dollar. Right. That would give the world an alternative sort of payment rail that is even stronger than the dollar is today. All right. So hopefully you guys are seeing how all of this is connected. You go from everything that Elizabeth Warren is doing on the legislative front to basically tax Americans, kind of setting up the scale of what and how this asset class is going to be dealt with, to how we're going to control the digital dollar, which is the CBDC, and whether or not FedNow will play into that in the future. Then you tie into all this regulatory framework. And then lastly, but not least, is BRICs and their importance on the global front. If you look at this tweet right here on World Statistics, GDP at purchasing power parity of the world. Here's the G7. You can kind of see U .S., Japan, et cetera, all the way in there, 45 percent 1993, all the way down to 2028, around 27 percent. The BRICS nations, all the way down to 2028, they will actually accelerate over the GDP of the G7. This is pretty significant because all this was, again, projected by the IMF, the International Monetary Fund. One of the things around this is whether or not, and St. Auge talked about that, Peter, the guy that we just did a clip on, he talked about the importance of this gold -backed dollar or BRICS currency. If that were to occur, that would be, as he said, catastrophic for not only the U .S. dollar, but I think catastrophic for the globe because we would see a shift in power pretty quickly. So here's the alliance right here. This is a scary picture. BRICS alliance will discuss the usage of local currencies for cross -border transactions in the upcoming summit in August. Now, the good thing, the good news, if there is some, is they're talking about using local currency as opposed to gold. Had they used gold, that would have been a huge blow into, really, the future of the U .S. dollar, and they still may go that direction, so you have to be considering that. Again, why is it important to be investing in cryptocurrencies or digital assets? We've just painted out a picture for you and the reasons why all of this flows up in a very interesting domino effect toward how just monetary systems are going to be run in the next 100 years. Stablecoins' potential counter to de -dollarization, that's a big part of this. So in this particular scenario of this article, people familiar with the talk said that the last moment the White House National Economic Council, this was Lael Brainard, dumped cold water on this stablecoin bill saying it didn't put federal regulators in a strong enough role. And remember, if you'll recall, we did a video on this where, of course, Patrick McHenry and Maxine Waters were negotiating that. And there seemed to be an agreement prior to going to the vote. And then at the last minute, Maxine Waters pretty much got the phone call from the red phone and that was dislodged. And then, of course, McHenry went to the floor with what was the old bill that did not have all the changes in it. So again, a lot of politics being played out right here in D .C. And again, this is very important because of the global position and what we are trying to do to essentially compete at a very high level. I want to close this out quickly with our last clip here. This is just the stablecoin timeline from the Blockchain Association listening. It does, unfortunately, hinder it a little bit, but I've had conversations with staff and members of Congress after the fact, and they seem very gung ho in trying to resolve this issue before the whole entire House votes on that bill. But likely what's going to happen is that in the fall, there's going to be a general House floor vote. Every member of the House gets a vote on this, which, again, it's a lot of education. So I've already had some Republicans reach out to me for more the right wing of the caucus saying the stablecoin bill is just a CBDC bill. And it's like, no, it's not. It's nothing related to that. On the left, we're seeing a little more consumer protection concerns and also just the general crypto skeptic concern as well. So August, we're going to have a break and in the fall, you're going to have a vote, right? Exactly. But I think for sure in twenty twenty three, we'll have a general vote on the House floor. And then you can see for yourself what your members of Congress are supporting crypto or guardrails for crypto and which ones say, you know, nah, you know, I don't I think the status quo is fine. All right, so big actions happening this fall and part of this will, of course, will be the stablecoin bill, but also crypto and digital assets in general hitting the House floor. This and as Hammond said, this will be a critical time because the scenario that plays into this right now is it's going to showcase into a lot of what we'll see in the political runs and the campaigns that are being run next year in twenty twenty four. So this could become a little bit more of a voting scenario. So hopefully this has given you guys a rundown. I know it's it's it is a lot here to to kind of digest. If you're new to our channel, we try to break these down. And I promise we're going to try to get these in a little bit, maybe smaller bite sizes. But you can see the breadth of what's happening globally, especially here in the United States right now, because this is a fight for your wallet. And that's why it's so important and that's why we're seeing so much activity happen. You guys are part of the Diamond Circle. Great. Glad to have you in. But if you're not, make sure and join. All you have to do is click the link down below. We we do, of course, a podcast over there, a lot of additional research. I even do additional analysis over there. So it's a great place for you to start here with the PBN team. And of course, it's the best way to get to us. Just go to our website. You can join right there. Of course, if you're not following me at that out there on X, it's just at Paul Baron. We'll catch you next time right here on Tech Path. We'll be right back.
"maxine" Discussed on Think 100%: The Coolest Show
"You know this when a hero shiro's in the movement and so you will have you've already card out your legacy When he when you think about. And i want you to get with this. Is the question now. Speaking to the future. I wanna you tend to speak to them. If you think about. Now this is we're not as obviously Twenty twenty one hundred years from now. We'll be twenty one twenty one They will look back and they will policy here about the amazing stories congresswoman maxine. What are they gonna be like. Man as he was something else They unfortunately because of the climate crisis all things are going on there not only fighting for equality there probably fighting for existence if you can speak to them. Speak to the future right now. Kind of like tom castle. Speaking what would you wanna tell that generation oliver's thing i want them to know is from whence i came. I am one of thirteen children who was raised time on welfare. Who was raised by most of the time. A single mother in-between a couple of marriages and she was run. Said make do with what you got you don't ever say at. Can't you go to school even if you don't have the nobles to walk in the snow and we did that at our little socks were wet and we put him on the radiator and drive them off where we got to school. We didn't have the raincoats. We didn't have everything that we need it and we had to share it with food in certain ways. But you know today the two. We went to church every sunday. She ballots does a little shoes and socks. Those will dresses and with the smoothing. I didn't have electric city and we went to church and we will ask albums features on easter sunday. And you know christmas time when you got to speeches and all of that and during the summer we had bible classes in people's homes but one of the things that bay instilled in us was good values. You know what. I mean how how do you. How do you appreciate in respect others. How is it if you have something you must share it with others. Who don't have anything. And so these values sick with us. And i want young. People were getting married and having children to remember. Don't leave it up to someone else to teach your child values. This must be part of your daily life. Not only must you teach it at the dinner table but you should talk about it Discussions when you're doing homework you can't cheat you gotta be bad. Teach these values and then when you're teaching your children boundaries in lead them even if they go off the wrong track they come back but the most because they know whether they've been taught westmin- still the and then you building up the belief in sap you building accommodates. You're building up the kind of feeling of security of that. You know that you is just as important as anybody else and you have influenced and you have a same and if you understand that you are as implying as anybody else and you have a right to your opinions and you you will express it. Then that's what's going to move you and your community and our people saw it always don't shy away and don't be intimidated. That's the most thing. Don't be intimidated. Because intimidation is used as a tool to cry. You down to shut you up and many black people. We have had to live with intimidation through slavery. If you don't do this don't get west. You go get killed if you don't do this. You know you gotta be denied. Food intimidation is something that was not a determined your life and you must feel the confidence and so i would say to. You know young people. I have been blessed with the mother who had nothing but she was stone wheel in strong minded and she was a mother with all these children but she never to go to the schools to talk with the teachers and to find out what our children were doing. These parents who too busy to get to the school to find out what's bothering the child and to not know what the curriculum is. And that no of what's going on. You gotta get unvisited because if you don't get unvisited you gotta miss out on the opportunity to instill these values and to really know and understand. Your child is a new one. Grow of children with competence was stand up will speak up and who will do what needs to be done not only to be individuals successful but by the whole community. By our people i nation councilman maxine. Waters thank you thank you thank you for your life for your service you so much because you are blind the talking drum and the talking drum is what gets the message out there with you today. Some other people young people again here. What we're talking about it may energize them if they're not already interject in may instilled in them the confidence that they just needed to move into organiz. Let me wrap it up. By saying of of millennials in my district decided they weren't gonna go ask permission created a june teeth for rage and had several hundred young people out there who organiz in their own way and took over the streets and they best made. We've been their brand marshall and so we out on the street with. They didn't say they won't give us a licensed downtown of about which to do this. I think we can't get enough cars than the rage at mike is not good enough. They just came out. Put it together at me did it. That's what i like. And that's our guest today. She is maxine waters. And i am ravioli. Your host of the coolest stuff thank you. God bless you heard on this episode pass on your favorite podcast follow us. One hundred climate and hip hop on twitter and facebook. Visit the coolest show dot com where you can take action justice right in that you can also learn more about this podcast and donate to think one hundred percent. Say thank you for listening and all new to you know..
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"Who are the the last people that i wrote about in china man and i want to take larry heinemann. Who is coming here soon. I think to speak and He he wrote palko story. And i think he's coming out soon with another book about war. And just maybe about six veterans. Including a maybe. A family of chinese-american warriors. That i know that they served in the last three wars and the father actually was Was a tactician who had sent his own son into a battle in vietnam in which the entire platoon was killed except for his son. And this family. These just scare me. You know i was having dinner with them. And the and the sons were all going on with their battle stories and the and the mother of this family the wife of one of them said oh i knew you would all come back only the good die young and so i. These are some of the people that i want to take on this on this charge journey to meet with the With vietnamese buddhists and to meditate with them. And i want to write what happens and how what happens when these people meet then in case they do not enjoy meditating and eating vegetarian food. I want to also take them for a week in paris so i need enough money to do that. Okay take about a dozen people including their wives and girlfriends. Because i think it's important to bring the all the people that have supported these men and got them from. We're with them from the time. They were warriors to the time that they are living as peaceful productive citizens.
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"This holocaust is the size of the anger that had been his task as a human being to socialize. Now he is dead. This heat is loose yes. It is the same hot feeling as anger but it surrounds and is outside the body. I have always wanted the life you have. My father started saying that to me. When i became a published paid writer. I thought he was wishing to have poems. Come to him as they do to me and to have readers. My mother tried scolding him into poetry. You used to be a poet. Where are the poems poet he wondered. Why is it that. I can like to read poems so much. But i can't write them at the ritual. When each of us his children spread of fabric of colors and over his body blanketing him like in a fairy tale atop the fountain pen that my son had given me into his breast pocket. One evening in two days. We sent him paper gold. Silver and orange paper folded like boats and strong like lays big enough to go around the necks of horses and elephants. More paper than anybody else gets. I had begun this day morning. Seems a very long time ago by burning paper to him. We fed the paper symbols of everything into the brick fireplace in the chinese cemetery. On i five. The chimney standing out there in the open seems to be hard for the ancestors all the skies and land of the san joaquin valley at the last their home. But from the timing and directions of the rituals. you can almost see the dimensions of another further away home. Its distance from the earth is about a month walkaway. We helped our father on the climb up the mountain which is steep and dark. He is lonely missing his body and everybody us. We escorted him with our thoughts and imaginations persuading him on on our every wish against his leaving made it hard on him today. Upon the one month ceremonies he enters that place where all of us will disappear when we die our cousin in law from china she is very beautiful very chinese hunkered by his grave next to his head i think and invited him to eat and drink tilting up and down the cups of whiskey the whole chicken and the bowl of rice pick adored with to smoking incense sticks. She interlaced her fingers and naturally informally bow their head three times and hand many times and said instructing us say bye bye to bala. It was almost unbearable to watch my younger brothers and sisters one by one hands together like angels bowing to our father and all the awful conditions of life if you especially if you are a veteran of war..
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"School. kids bein. Candy now realize it was sunday so they weren't after school kids. Well well that'll be the next draft. This is just the first draft. I kept staying the last person in a shrinking growing shrinking growing line. A went outside too many cars to jaywalk to a security patrol office and went back inside the store. The kids were thinking over the candies to the sides of the cash register to the clerk that i was lost because i couldn't get off at my exit because of the fire which way to berkeley. I care that he'd think i didn't belong to and didn't know that neighborhood though. He was a foreigner and the woman sitting almost hidden behind the counter. Also a foreigner. She wore a white scarf that covered her hair and a long skirt with an apron as if she were cooking she was not an old woman nor from olden days but from an old country i couldn't tell their country not mexico or south america or the field opinions from the man's accent. The woman didn't try to help me out. Didn't say anything or give me a kind. Look i get scared. Whenever ideally want to learn something that i'm not going to be given the knowledge that i'm not going to get it that i'll forget it. I did not tell exactly where i was heading. In case he wanted to cooperate with the roadblocks he put me back on the freeway. I got off onto broadway and kept going. And what seemed to me the continuing direction until i saw waterfront and the bay broadway then goes all the way across oakland from the bay to my house in the middle of my you. Turn the radio. Said that broadway and broadway. Terrace were on fire. And that there was looting on austria andor street a pictured those two parallel streets broadway for the cars broadway terrace for walking eucalyptus pine trees and apple trees between them and along them a tree high wall to st thick of flame. Making the u-turn. I said out loud. No no no also spender is was a small street very nearby on a hill curving down to my house. Families of quayle's would come walking out of running into the bushes. Once i stood amazed the and once i had stood amazed at the center of a storm of birds robbins blue jays chickens. What's wonderful about oakland. You'll see a white crane extending itself flying over the city. It must live at lake merritt or lake anza or timothy. Scalp and frank saw cranes out the sky window. It can't be too late. All i want is a minute inside the house. Run to the far end of the living room where my manuscript isn't a wind box in the alcove and with one more breath.
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"I have lost my book. One hundred and fifty six good pages in a firestorm that blew out of the oakland berkeley hills and took my house things neighborhood and other neighborhoods and forest. I almost reached my manuscript in time. I was driving back home from the funeral rituals for my father. I have lost my father. He's gone less than a month. We were having one month rituals early sunday day off. It was the first time in my life. I've driven alone by myself away from stockton and my parents house. I turned on public radio for the intelligent voices and heard that the heels were burning quite a long way off. Forty five houses destroyed toward moraga toward walnut creek. I could not understand directions. Which way was east west of the caldecott tunnel. North south of the warren freeway pictured the fire. Far up in the hills impossible that it crossed the freeway behind me. My sister-in-law cindy was chasing me at ninety miles per hour. The family not my mother from homework trying to hide dangers center to get me to turn back. She ran out of gas at tracy. By the time. I was going over the ultimate pass. The windmills on the acres of wind farms were turning as usual. The claremont hotel was not on fire but one hundred and fifty houses burning and the fire not contained. The fire had blown to our side of the ten lane freeway over and through highway. Twenty four and highway thirteen. The newscaster said no cars have been trapped in the caldecott tunnel as originally feared a police car and flares blocked the exit to my street. I drove fast to the next exit which was also blocked. I had a sense that the police were setting up. Roadblocks moments ahead of me. If i had driven faster. I might have saved the manuscript and my mother's jewelry and my father's watch his eyeglasses which fit my eyes and his draft card which i had found in his wallet. This card is to be carried on your person at all times. He carried it for I guess fifty years no sixty years. I got off onto west macarthur boulevard and drove to slowly through complicated traffic. It was the middle of the afternoon about two thirty. The sky was black. The sun was read. This was a forest fire and ashes. Were falling in downtown. Oakland sheets of black paper flu among the tall buildings. I stopped at a store to ask whether i was going the right direction after driving. Along while without coming to landmark a parked could find no coins to put in. The meter stood in line behind many many. After.
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"Pages and the computer with this light and water that i had found in in this psychic journey and was a flask of light and water. Now i'm sure this is this is the same flask that psyche found in her woman's journey that afrodita center on his quest and she found this flask of water that the eagle helped her find. It's that for me. I found a spotted owl. This my my guiding bird is a spotted. How and then. I had this this water and i and and i covered the room and my manuscript. That's computer with with it. And it made this. Golden light and the spotted owl is sitting in the redwood tree and And then all. My characters came the people that i had invented. All these peaceful good people came and And and the hip posted narcotics suggestion. Is that anytime. i needed them or that. I needed my pages. I could hypnotize myself and go back and find a page and retrieve what i needed for this next aversion and And also my characters could talk to me and tell me how to right okay. So that's one New method that has come to me as i Try to find a this book again. another thing that happened i lost everything all all my material possessions and and and for moment i did enjoy owning nothing but suddenly almost right away you see in this material society. You can't have nothing for very long because everyone insists on giving you gifts and clothes and underwear and everything and and the people started calling me with the most wonderful word gifts There oh a friend of mine told me a story about josephine miles. The the last time that berkeley burned. I guess it was in the seventies. Josephine miles said that Everybody in town said that they had lost a manuscript in the fire.
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"I i would get rid of all those metaphors about how we you know. Shoot for goals and And how you know you know all those metaphors so actually when this book burned in the fire you i felt very make way because then my book became one of the books that burned and it's also book of peace. I mean it's just so strange. It made me feel as if there are forces of destruction and forces of creation out there and the forces of destruction Burned one piece book after another and and it got mine too The well during these last two months. As i i'll try to figure out what to do next and how to riot again and what to What methods i could use to To write another book of peace it would be. I guess if you count the three that were lost in china and you count the one that i just lost in oakland i would be starting the fifth book of peace. Now how how. What methods can i use One of the things i did. was I had a a student who who who was an english major and then became a hypnotherapist in the last few years. And so i asked him to come over and hypnotize me and maybe i could recall the book the original plan. He said okay. I'll hypnotize you. And you can envision the screen of the television set of of the terminal and then as your words come up you read them and And then we'll take you onto the tape recorder. And i you know i i really thought i mean this plan scared me because i was thinking what what but it seems so static or or rigid. The process was just recalling i. It's just memorization trick And what if what if All i could do was remember. And and then i would be frozen into that version and not be able to Re riots and change things Because it scared me also because a memorization is not interesting to me. as as i ride liked to be constantly discovering Going into the unknown territories. Making the map as i go along and every word that comes next is a discovery and this would be boring to just try to remember what came before but then he so i talked to him about that. And then we came up with another method which was that That i would set off on this journey. And and i would arrive at my house after finding many i'd like guides and companions and helpers and Then i would get to my house. envision it whole and go inside the the alcove where i was working and there would be My.
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"Piece was a possibility and so as it was my idea that i would See whether i could reconstitute one of these books of peace by envisioning what what might have been in them and then writing one for our times As i was experimenting with a with What kind of A form a piece book might take and and i i See that The the plots the The way that books and plays and movies and television They they seem to all have won the same kind of pattern which must be a pattern. That's in the human mind and psyche. Which is that. there is A rising action and then a violent confrontation climax and then a and through. That is a realization in revelation. And so is it possible to give a different shape to the novel and And and so that when when this new shape of story if if if it could be ridden and if there were readers It could change the patterns in our minds so that we Work for Toward a non violent re resolutions and and climaxes is it possible to have drama without violence so i was working trying for a new kind of plot and then This this story would be populated by a new kinds of characters. I was Inventing characters that Who had Peaceful soles so that when they came across Our human problems they could They could deal with them In a peaceful ways. And and i i was writing about a marriage in which the people It wasn't just a young marriage but they could go into middle age and and treat one another in in a loving ways And while writing this story and don't and these characters of course i would I i was working on inventing a A nonviolent language and so the language itself becomes Peaceful and the metaphors would be a peaceful..
"maxine" Discussed on The Archive Project
"The daughter of chinese immigrants was born in stockton california her debut book the woman warrior memoirs of a girlhood among the ghosts won the national book critics circle award in nineteen seventy six and gained her worldwide attention. Her follow up book chinaman. On the nineteen eighty-one national book award and king said she considers these two books to half of a hole in all she has published over a dozen books of nonfiction poetry and fiction and won many additional awards including the national humanities medal. In two thousand fourteen kingston delivered this lecture in january nineteen ninety-two just two months. After her home had completely burned down in the oakland firestorm and three months after her father had died. She had been working for months on a new novel which was entirely lost in that fire. She accounts this harrowing day and in doing so talks about the role of destruction in creativity and of rediscovering the book she would ultimately complete and.
"maxine" Discussed on The Bible and Coffee
"Turn it around a little bit without breaking and so you made all this stuff made a lot of it started doing this when james was alive and he couldn't listen by the except for the last six or seven years old and he couldn't breathe and as we think that much and she would help me off that much with you for courtesy infant so a pretty much was taking care of shares. And so i didn't go into a a cited home went. I went to the store and went to church. And that was it for all those years said years. Six or seven year period. I can't about eleven times that i went to advance gathering of some sober but otherwise i was at home and so it was about three years before he had started doing the bible towns series. But what we do. When we moved back here from st louis charge and i was gonna teach class your hand. That was not may not just knew what i was going to do. So i got to go to church south west and he could. I'm seth that much. So the kids were both teenagers. And madonna learned to drive and so she would take their bike with go to church on sunday morning and then on sunday and then we'd stay with him sunday night and i would go to church so switch about my and we had a group of kids that would talk. We hit class for fifteen or twenty minutes and then we went to puppet show so i took that class and a lot more bless his heart he was especially hard to achieve county not reload mongoloid. But something like that and other teachers couldn't really manage because that turn weiss let's get over on top of his head scratch blood out of his arm and kids and stuff like that you know somehow or other not got along okay. So i wound up stan. He would sit on the ladder and other show. And i wound up in that group of kids for three years and only the third year is a bible with benefit. Locked up work for kids. Go to class. And you'd have to babble versus there. Maybe about mary or something like that. And you gotta do the whole lesson on it. And then the rest of its you cutler objects or something and i think this mama downs debatable. I am not babysitting these kids. If i have time with them up teaching them. And so i would work on lessons. And i always worked with mich- lights so they get what we were talking about. And so we work through lessons on on moses and plagues and all of that type of thing and now the third year i started. Well i don't have a superviso-supervisor before and i told her i said i. I'm not teaching of the books. I said i just don't like them not doing it on lessons. And i said. I want permission to teach. Just won't take and she said well you'll have to have your all written and you'll have to present it to the elders and so i prayed and prayed about it and my thoughts were a series of lessons on the life of jesus are a series of lessons on the people when jesus was sleeping on this earth and so that's i wound up doing. This is the ladder. And i'm glad idea because well i could probably talk the life of jesus every year but it south west we have. We have classes where we have like fifteen twenty kids in class and every year you get fifteen or twenty kids so now go into large congregation like this. Put me wherever here. I've got a group of kids only push this. I go around. Talk sent clash for three years because we got along we could do it. But i was teaching and the house was teaching the bible times. Thanks for the first time. And i had the house that hearing was teaching them. How dare and this one. White maxine maxine going on. I said what is it and he says. Are you going to teach our class again next year you. Why don't you take mixture these kids and our sow bonded to each other. That it will be cruel to them to keep teaching. Because then we can't separate and so i didn't teach after that and my supervisor instead of england back teaching maltese and all that she wanted to teach the bible tons thing to the next group of kids and the next group in the next rape wish we had. I guess i had. I had worked up enough lessons. Probably a quarter or so the first round l. One it finish it up. We would was second graders then that i was teaching and we'll finish it having a balanced meal for invited. Everybody and their parents and grandparents whoever will keep their positions and the spread these mets on the floor when we cook all the vegetables and stuff was leaving. I didn't have you know. Regular meals idea down the bottom stew and would use the flat unleavened bread we tortillas for eleven they would they all ate out common part the type that would set on that you know brown outside and and deal into this one pot system back them so how did they do that reclining okay. That was a very carefully russian later during the this or sometime during that time it was roman era and so they were up in a lot of woman customs. An older earlier years. That said just like cross-legged brown a rapper. And aiding the nope women and kids have probably gave for.
"maxine" Discussed on The Bible and Coffee
"Uh i think one of the most powerful things that we can do as christians is sit at the feet of our elders and learn biblical knowledge. And i'm not talking theologians. i am not talking those that have gone through bobble seminary. I'm not talking about that. What i'm talking about is sitting at the feet of people who have been led by the holy spirit and one of those people is is my aunt maxine wallace. He has been teaching a bobble customs. imbaba tom's class. For over thirty years it has become a rite of passage for the kids that go to southwest arch of crossed to be able to go through my aunt's class and it's not just sitting there in class. it's not just being regurgitated. What comes out of the curriculum but it is actually to to learn to put hands on to touch to feel to build to be a part of this time in which we we have no clue right. We're learning from all of our series an in the past on this Misreading scriptures through western is that we don't have a clue sometimes as to what the scriptures are talking about. Because we don't live in those times and we don't even understand 'em or grasp them so it is my honor in amy's honor to bring my aunt into this interview as we're closing out our book. I hope you enjoy it. There is a lot of information. Did i tell you my aunt's eighty. Did i tell you. My aunt teaches nine months out of the year. Next time when you're asked to teach for three months ask yourself this question. Can i give up more than three months. Can my class become a right of passage for the kids. I'm teaching to. What can i bestow on my children and the children that god is handing me so that they can take on to future generations. That's what we're trying to do with this podcast. Like i said it has a lot of information. I want you to listen to it. Go back and listen to it again. even listening through the editing. I've learned again some things that i had already forgotten. So sit back. Get your coffee. throw your headphones on. Don't let anybody interrupt you. Pray that the holy spirit opens up your eyes and your ears to this wonderful woman in the information that she has to share with us. Thank you for listening. You.
"maxine" Discussed on Ron Paul Liberty Report
"Republican report that there are impaired the capital of the united states. All along damper anything. She said republicans and conservatives have shown us they're willing to invade capital of the united states. And kill all of us. Meaning congress members well on january six. There were no guns among the so-called insurrectionist. It was a weird insurrection The only people that died one of them was an unarmed protesters shot by the capitol hill police and the others died of natural causes heart attack and stroke. While they were there there was no killing..
"maxine" Discussed on AM 1590 WCGO
"We get So he gets pretty bad things being said all the time, Terry. Well, Jacob. I went into the question and I really I'm not. I'm not saying that these air equal comments. But when you heard Maxine Waters say what she said to her crowd in California, suggested that they go up and they and they get in the face. Of Trump related people with other with the administration to Trump's supporters get in their face, whether they're going to the grocery store of the restaurant or church or whatever. What did you think of that tactic being a being Some of this run for office? Um, What did you think of that tactic Should that have been denounced? I'm not defending Maxine Waters. Good. But I will say I will say that you know, I was I was part of and I've told you this on previous shows part of in our participated In the demonstrations, the damage they were very, very peaceful Demonstrations back in June, there was some violence and in the aftermath, there were people who went out looted. But the core of those demonstrations or people who are heartfelt believers. There's injustice that needs to be taken care of. And did some people go too far? Yes, but on the right we were being accused of. You know, there was this craziness of that There's this end tifa out there like some kind of organization. And it became this dialogue of you know, I'm an antifascist. Bruce, I think you're an anti fascist. And you know that doesn't that doesn't make it some kind of an organization and tifa anti fascism and but it became. It's the fake news from the right like they created this and then they and then they tried to dis. Then they tried to disown the fact that there was tremendous amount of violence coming out of the Trump. Out of the trump folks. And you know Yes. So Maxine Waters. Some of the you know, I'm not defending what she said. I'm not defending the fact that there was that there was a limited amount of violence. Um, but for the most part on the West, they were peaceful demonstrations. But I don't You know, I haven't heard anybody come out and say what happened that January, 6 can never ever happen again. It's not true Minds our democracy tomorrow, Republicans have come out. They came out immediately denouncing those.
"maxine" Discussed on KSFO-AM
"Sean, If you wanna be a part of the program, all right, so a lot happening you got now the Democrats will get into this a little more detail The bottom of the hour. Steve Moore will tell us the danger of all of these economic changes that are happening in the country. We've got the latest shift showed and unconstitutional. Post presidency impeachment trial. It's only a question of how long this thing is going to go on. It's a predetermined outcome. And, of course, the one A couple of things really bother me in this whole process. It's sort of like, you know, I don't agree with Marjorie Taylor Greens comments, but apparently the people in North Georgia made that decision every year. I guess every election year Maxine Waters gets re elected and we have her on tape. What I'm saying things that I believe are insurrectionist like language. And I don't see any efforts to ever move her from any committee or Congresswoman Omar or congresswoman to leave or Congresswoman the Casio Cortez or or Chuck Schumer, for example, in his insurrectionist message on the steps of the U. S. Supreme Court. Kamila Harris or Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi? Because we've been playing all of them. You know when you look at the impeachment Articles. Okay, They talk about incitement to insurrection, and they stayed refer. Often, the president said that day to go fight like hell. We also said many of you will patriotic Lee and peacefully marched to the Capitol, so your voices will be heard. They failed to put that in their complaint or in their incitement charge. Between that and the incendiary language of the left. We don't have anything that resembles fundamental fairness, equal application of standards on any of these issues. And I don't care if it's Marjorie Taylor Greene versus the squad members, even anti Semitic statements and even calls to violence and threatening language, etcetera, etcetera Because this this they reek of hypocrisy and a double standard. Example. You can't say fight. Okay, let's listen to the Democrats.
"maxine" Discussed on KLIF 570 AM
"Show. So Maxine Waters was fraud and forth by the Democrats to talk about the dangers of incitement, which is weird, since that's pretty much what she spent large swaths of her career doing inciting violence. Imagine if Democrats said, Listen, we know that Trump voters do not approve of what just happened at the riot. We we know that you don't approve of that. And we know that Even the people who went to the rally did not approve in the vast majority of cases. I mean, we're talking like Probably a couple 100,000 people who went to that rally and like a couple of 100 people who broke into the capital. The vast majority of the people who are actually at the rally may believe something that's not true, but they certainly didn't approve of people invading the Capitol building and attempting to do violence to legislators. Right. This is solely and completely about Trump's behavior in the lead up to the election is not about you. We understand that you guys disagree with us. We understand you voted for Trump because you may disagree with some of our priorities. But this is really about we, as the Legislature have to stand up for our for our own domain. If they had said that it would have removed a lot of the club from the hands of Republicans who didn't wanna vote for impeachment. What did not made it very difficult for Democrats, but that wouldn't serve their political purposes. You see, because for many Democrats, not all but for many Democrats, the goal is to lump everybody in together for political gain. Because this this impeachment effort is part and parcel of something larger, which is the attempt to silence people on the right notice. People on the left are dismissing it because they don't want to don't want to pay attention to it because again for many on the left. This is the goal. Here's Maxine Waters again. If you're gonna try that people to talk about the evils of incitement, you cannot try that Maxine Waters. Maxine Waters spent the L. A riots explaining they were in l. A uprising. Okay, well, people were getting killed in south central L. A. She's claiming was an uprising against the system. Yeah, Here is Maxine Waters talking about how the Republican Party is the Trump Party. And Trump is gonna start a civil war and he has to be stopped right now. The Republican Party is now the Trump Party. And I want you to know that this is a trump power grab that will not stop. It will not stop with attacking the capital and I state legislatures. This president intends to exercise power long after he is out of office. We should be concerned that the Republicans will not defend him, and he Is capable of studying a civil war. He must be impeached. He must be stopped now. Okay on that is the same Maxine Waters, who just a couple of years ago was suggesting that every Republican in America who supported Trump needed to be confronted physically here is Maxine Waters talking to supporters just a few years ago. Did you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant in a department store at a gasoline station? You get out and you create a crowd on your back.
"maxine" Discussed on WDRC
"As far as I'm concerned, I think we should take the gloves off his conservatives and say every and you know the Democrats Maxine Waters, and that whole crowd have decided to say, really, truly outrageous and provocative things where they have invited violence where they have supported violence. Then, every time one of them opens their mouth. I realized we don't have the votes in the house. But we can certainly say a member of Congress had introduced articles of impeachment for every single person who crosses that line from this point forward, And if people say Well, let's not behave the way they do. As far as I'm concerned, Rick we should use every single tool. The other side uses legitimate tools. If you've decided that free speech, followed by something bad happening can be blamed on the free speech. Than every member of Congress is subject to that new standard. What do you think? Absolutely in house rules have now made it, um, that if you engage in speech that is getting to be false and pass around the mean that they seem to be by somebody in the house to be false. You can actually be censored in the house. So they've created. This is house rules. So we would be irresponsible if we didn't hold them accountable to those standards, and the fact of the matter is, if any trump supporters ever gets attacked. Maxine Waters should be, in fact food for libel, reliable and for and for being responsible because next in waters has been singularly. Outrages in terms were called for attacks on Trump supporters and every one of those people who do that should do. You should get ready for civil liability suits against them for any attack against Trump supporters that are just based on their wearing of make America great again Hat. Rick. Thanks for what you do it. Americans are limited government and thanks for taking the time tonight. Glad to be with you on a Thursday night. Always glad to take your phone calls and emails to at 866. Hey, Lars. That's 8664395277 on Twitter. Mike wrote to me Wait, So white Supremist stormed the capital overthrow the white supremacist government, but they were stopped by the white supremacy. Police force an hour being tracked down by the white supremacist FBI. Very confused, Mike..