40 Burst results for "Six Weeks"
The HUMAN Training
Surviving Covid and Chaos: Looking Back at the Early Days of K9 Culture
"August 1st, 2020, so right in the middle of the pandemic and that was the good old days of... Not the good old days, the days of quarantine in a lot of places, everyone's wearing a mask. Should you wear a mask? Should you wear three masks? Should you wear 72 masks? Oh my God. Six feet away from people. How many boosters should you have? I mean, it was just chaotic. Nobody knew. No, we didn't have shots then. No, there was no shots. We're not going to talk about that. But you had to be six feet away from everyone, which is really nice because the leash is six feet long, so that was awesome. So yeah, we opened up. It was just Laura and I for that first month in our facility here. We did not... God, do you remember? We didn't even turn the lights on in the back three quarters of the building because why? Why do we even need to go back there? It's just the two of us. And so that was the first year, and it was August 1st. We didn't really do boarding trains for a while. We tried to discourage them because we didn't have kennels at that point because when you order kennels, they're usually a six -week lead time, but because of COVID, it was a four to six -month lead time. I mean, everything's lead time was just ridiculous because everyone nationwide, worldwide was not working, working from home, whatever. And just general trial and error, like we did cinder block kennels first. Yeah. So we had to build some cinder block kennels. So we had some. And then once we did have a couple of boarding dogs, once those first initial dozen kennels were built, then we had the ability to board. I guess we always do. So someone's probably listening, well, why didn't you just put the dogs in the crates? We did. We But it's not what we like to do. I don't like dogs sleeping in crates all the time. I don't know. I just, because if they're not training, they're in a crate, and then if they're sleeping in a crate, I don't know. I just. But we did have crates. Yeah. Julie's office was the first kennel room. Yeah. Your office was the kennel room, air quote. Oh, God. I don't even think we had a break room. No. The first couple months. And then the break room we slept in. Yeah. Well, first we slept in Wyatt's office. That room was. A noise. Wasn't too dark. No, it didn't. No, we slept. The first time we slept in the grooming room, but there's ticking because right by the grooming room is. The fire suppression, fire alarm system constantly beeps during the day. You don't notice it that much. But when it's. At two o 'clock in the morning, when there's not a sound anywhere, like what the hell is that noise? So yeah, we made it one night in the kennel room, which is, or excuse me, the grooming room. It wasn't the grooming room at that time. It was just a room. Then we went over to Wyatt's. And then we moved to Wyatt's. Oh, I remember why we only made it one night in Wyatt's office. The way it's laid out, it was too small. You know, you try to get out of the air mattress to the left or to the right, and you're up against the desk or a wall, and I thought, no, this is crazy. we So then moved to the break room, but it wasn't the break room. It wasn't the break room. And Wyatt's office wasn't Wyatt's office either. It was just a room. When the people left this building, they left all the furniture. It was full of crap. Yeah, because they went out of business and refrigerators and they went out of business before COVID. They haven't paid their rent in like a year. Yeah. So there was like a whole bunch of crap here. It was an indoor soccer center facility before. Yeah. We sold all of it. Yeah. Facebook. That was one of my jobs. Facebook marketplace. Just getting rid of all the soccer stuff that was left. We had couches here. We had chairs. Cheers. Scoreboards, goals. Cooking. Soccer balls. Cooking because they had this little bar here. Oh, yeah. Yeah. They had that. Freezers. It was interesting. Who was our third person we hired? So the next one that came on was Wyatt. Wyatt! Wyatt came out at the end of August. Still paint the walls. And then a week later. Oh, I forgot about that. We finished. Yeah. We were still paper walls. Wyatt's little baby. Wasn't the baby's two? Make it look like a dog. Alex's like two. Maybe one. He was here riding around doing stuff while we were painting everything. My mom even came and helped paint it. She was 70 years old. It was pretty cool. Yeah. It was cool. I felt bad. We worked her to death. Yeah. We took netting down. It was a lot of work. The building's 47 ,000 square feet, so there's a lot of netting that has to come down. Scoreboards, goalies. Windows to clean. Oh my God. All glass walls. So all of our training fields, they're surrounded by eight feet tall human shatterproof glass. Well there's soccer prints, hand prints, human prints. Head print prints. I mean any print you can think of on both sides of those windows. I know for a fact I spent a whole entire eight hour day cleaning windows and it wasn't even half that. Not even. And then when we got that one with one side we went, oh shit. Now we got to go on the inside and do it. We're not dead. We're only halfway done. And you can't see the smudges until unless you're on the other side of the glass, so you could clean it but not miss parts. It took a long time. And then light bulbs, we replaced over, I can't really count, I know it was over $5 ,000 in the first two months of light bulbs. Oh my God. That's how many light bulbs they had lit. And in the middle of doing this, we're training dogs because Charles sold a few dogs the first week we opened. Right. The first week we opened and they knew they were our first. In fact, those first two dogs, Laney, she was just here boarding last week and that was three years ago and we were just all joking with the owner. I remember when he came in, it was just the two of you. And then Hank. And then Hank after her. Hank. They're both two of the most dog aggressive dogs we've trained. So right off the bat, to this day, they're still two of the most dog aggressive dogs we've had. And they both ended up liking dogs.
Bloomberg Daybreak Asia
Fresh update on "six weeks" discussed on Bloomberg Daybreak Asia
"Employment showed that the U .S. that U .S. companies added less than estimated number of jobs while we had at the Institute of supply management the ISM services survey largely in line with what was expected the new orders component a little bit weaker than in the previous month suggesting perhaps a softer U .S. economy in prospect of course we're all looking forward to that non -farm payroll data due Friday expect some of these equity markets and bond markets to remained sideways until then right let's find out what's happening with the a huge it trial taking place cities says she was with us now she's been the news Wall Street a reporter and it is of course former FTX CEO Sam Beckman -Fried and Shonali the thing is he apparently according to the prosecution lied to the world yes it was a very interesting opening set of remarks from the prosecution who laid out how they would make their over case the course of this six -week trial partially to show how Alameda had taken money from FTX that was client money in order to then allow Sam
Unchained
A highlight from SBF Trial, Day 1: Possible Witnesses Include FTX Insiders, Big Names in Crypto, and SBFs Family
"Hi everyone, Laura here. Tuesday, October 3rd was the first day of the criminal trial of the United States against Sam Bankman -Fried. Unchained will be bringing you quick recaps of each day of the trial, and you can find our coverage not just on the podcast and on video, but also in our newsletter and on our website. Before the proceedings, Bankman -Fried sat with counsel on either side, noticeably thinner than he had looked previously, and his hair recently shorn, so his curls seemed less unkempt than his signature look. He was also noticeably less jittery than normal. I did not see him shake his leg at all. He had a laptop and sometimes appeared to be scrolling via the trackpad. At one point, Judge Kaplan addressed SPF directly and said, quote, Mr. Bankman -Fried, I want to make sure this is something that you understand. You have the right to testify in your own defense in this case, and the decision as to whether or not you testify is the decision solely for you. You are entitled to have your counsel's best advice on whether they think it is wise or potentially advantageous or not advantageous for you to testify, but they can't make the decision for you. It is your call. While the defense has not yet indicated whether Bankman -Fried will testify, he has gone against most legal advice thus far and given numerous media interviews about what happened at FTX. We'll see whether he continues to be as loquacious under oath. Just after this, the government put on the record whether or not a plea offer had ever existed and said, quote, The government early on in the case, after the case was charged, raised the question of whether the parties should engage in plea discussions, and the answer was no, meaning there were no discussions about a plea and the government never made any plea offers. For those of you who listened to the Tuesday episode with Kayvon Sedeghi and Samson Enzer, this answers one of the questions that I've had ever since Caroline Ellison, Gary Wong, and Nishad Singh all pleaded guilty. Why it was that this case went to trial rather than ending in a plea deal. During this period before the jury selection process, the government mentioned that it wanted to ask whether jurors had seen one specific pre -trial news story, which they called, quote, The CBS Special, and which was later revealed to be the 60 Minutes interview with author Michael Lewis, which aired Sunday and has been seen as somewhat sympathetic to Bankman Fried. Once the proceedings got going, the theme for day one was what recent Unchained guest Samson Enzer mentioned, jury deselection. The judge posed round after round of questions to prospective jurors meant to weed out those who either had conflicts preventing them from serving or who for reasons pertaining to their professional position, personal experience, or other factors could not remain impartial. This process did create moments of hilarity, at least for the reporters in the press room. For instance, one prospective juror said that he was currently unemployed and that his lack of income plus a six -week delay in his job search would be a hardship. Judge Kaplan asked him what he did for a living and he responded, Commodities traitor. Judge Kaplan himself was both firm about the purpose of the trial and the duty of the jurors while also exhibiting both patience and a wry sense of humor. A prospective juror who said she could not participate because she was scheduled to fly to Maui before the trial's projected end ended up admitting that she was going to be in Maui for six months because she lives there half the year. Judge Kaplan asked her if she could just delay a week. Numerous jurors had already heard about or read about FTX. One potential juror works at Insight Partners, a VC firm that had invested in FTX and Alameda. Another said he had processed claims for the victims of Bernie Madoff and numerous others said that they had invested in crypto and all of those said that they had lost money in it, including a man who said his twin brother had nearly been financially ruined from those losses. The government read aloud a long list of potential witnesses for both the defense and the prosecution to prevent any jurors with conflicts or ties relating to those people or organizations. Aside from one of the predictable names, such as Caroline Ellison, Gary Wong, and Hishan Singh, some other FTX executives named included Ryan Miller, Ramnik Arora, Constance Wong, Dan Friedberg, and Sam Tribuco, while other names and organizations known in the crypto world included Anthony Scaramucci, Zach Prince, Genesis, Paradigm, Sequoia, Layer Zero, and Ribbit Capital. SPF's parents and brother were also named. The day ended with 50 remaining possible jurors. On Wednesday, Judge Kaplan will narrow it down to 12 jurors with 6 alternates, and we should see opening statements in both sides, with the government projecting its opening to be 25 -30 minutes and the defense 35 -40 minutes. More to come tomorrow.
The Aloönæ Show
Fresh update on "six weeks" discussed on The Aloönæ Show
"Yeah, well, thanks, I'm pretty proud of it, you know, it's it's I really enjoy what I do. And I think when you have passion for it, the results speak for themselves. Yeah, absolutely. If you could live anywhere in the world, where would it be? The Black Hills, South Dakota. Oh, OK, that's interesting. It's if you've ever been there, it's it's the wild. It's there's there's not there's not a lot of people out there. There's not a lot of there's just not a lot of a lot. And I like that. I like being in remote areas. I like being out in nature. I mean, I think if anyone has never been to big sky country, it's amazing because you realize why they call it big sky country, because the sky just seems like this limitless thing, whereas over on the East Coast, you don't really get that. There's always a hill. There's always something impeding on the skyline out there. It's like the horizon just goes on forever. It's it's it's almost like being out on the ocean, but with much nicer, more interesting landscape to look at. And I just I went out there a couple of years ago and the people are really nice. The people of South Dakota are wonderful people. And I had a phenomenal time traversing the state from west to east, but the Black Hills in particular really stood out. And that's that's also near where Mount Rushmore is and where Devil's Tower is, just to give you kind of an idea of the landscape. It's just really beautiful. It's it's like an untouched wilderness out there. Nice. Very good. What's your favorite season? Definitely fall, like I like spring, spring would probably be my number two, but fall is just not it's so nice. It's not it's not too cold. It's not too hot. You actually want to be outside. You throw on a jacket. It's great. I mean, the only thing that fall doesn't have going for it is the holiday, right? Like winter has all the best holidays. Thanksgiving's fantastic. Christmas is is my favorite holiday of all time. We go all out for Christmas, but fall just has the temperature, at least here in Pennsylvania. It's it's the best in spring. We get so much rain. It rains all the time in spring. So like my birthday's in the spring. And so the ongoing joke is that I have not had a dry birthday in like 20 years. It's just every single year it rains on my birthday. And so I like spring. Spring is nice, too. Flowers and all of that kind of stuff, you know. But the reality is, is that fall is just it's perfect. It's the perfect weather. It's it's nice and crisp. You want to go outside. You want to do stuff. And yeah, that's that's why it's my favorite season. OK, I could agree to that, especially the holidays, too. They're quite something. Yeah, I mean, I really like the I really like the the Thanksgiving, Christmas kind of six week period. I've always felt that was really this is a really great. Great time of the year for reflecting back on how far you've gotten, and I love all the preparation for Christmas and all that kind of stuff. You know, we watch like a Christmas movie every single day from like Thanksgiving to Christmas. So it's just it's always one of those. It's a nice, fun six week period of time that you kind of get to let your let your troubles go away. Yeah, absolutely. What is something that most people consider to be a luxury, but you don't think you could live without? Oh, that's a good question.
Crypto News Alerts | Daily Bitcoin (BTC) & Cryptocurrency News
A highlight from 1420: Bitcoin Will Surpass $1,000,000 By This Time - Max Keiser
"And here's your prescription. I know just the pharmacy to get this filled. Who are you? A pharmacy benefit manager. A middleman your insurer uses to decide which medicines you can get, what you pay, and sometimes even which pharmacy you should go to. Why can't I go to a pharmacy in my neighborhood? Because I make more money when you go to a pharmacy I own. No one should stand between you and your medicine. Visit PHRMA .org slash middleman to learn more. Paid for by pharma. In today's show I'll be breaking down the latest technical analysis as one analyst predicts a Bitcoin price crash all the way down to $20 ,000. And check it out moving forward all crypto news alerts YouTube videos will have both English and espanol subtitles available. I'm also currently working on a dedicated channel dubbed 100 % in espanol. Let me know if that excites you. Also check this out Stanley Drunkenmiller is now known as one of the most successful hedge fund managers on Wall Street and is currently worth $6 .2 billion. He says straight up frankly if the goal bet works the Bitcoin bet will probably work better per each. Also in today's show Ethereum futures ETFs garner a lukewarm reception on the first day of trading with all of the trading volume across nine products at less than $2 million. We'll also be discussing the crypto community tells Elon Musk to dump the Satoshi X account. I'm also going to be sharing with you a Satoshi Nakamoto secret email emerging from the shadows never shared before. As well as here's what's in store for Bitcoin in the S &P 500 for quarter four of 2023. According to crypto analyst Jason Pizzino I'm also going to be sharing invest answers unveiling his max upside price target for Bitcoin in 2025. And quoting Max Keiser from November of 2011 he says Bitcoin has about 100 ,000 users now. My goal is to try to get that number up to 1 million in 2012. He also shared his short -term price target of $65 ,000 back in January of 2021 and lo and behold by November we smashed that price target. He now says that BlackRock agrees with my 220 ,000 interim price target for Bitcoin which he says is still in play. He also says by the time America catches up to El Salvador and starts buying Bitcoin the price will be over a million dollars per coin. We'll also be taking a look at the overall crypto market, all this plus so much more in today's show. yo what's good crypto fam this is first and foremost a video show so if you want the full premium experience with video visit my youtube channel at cryptonewsalerts .net again that's crypto news alerts dot net welcome everyone just joining us this is a live show as you know seven days a week welcome to the number one daily Bitcoin pod this is pod episode number 1420 just blaze today is October 3rd 2023 and the markets are correcting and consolidating after the recent pump let's kick off today's show with our market watch as we do each and every day you can see Bitcoin correcting down 2 .2 % trading just above twenty seven thousand two hundred dollars also ether is down trading at 1650 along with the majority of the altcoin market and checking out coinmarketcap .com we're still sitting at 1 .08 trillion dollars with roughly 36 billion in volume in the past 24 hours we've got the Bitcoin dominance which has recently been on the climb currently at forty nine point three percent with the ether dominance barely up trading at eighteen point four percent and checking out the top 100 crypto gainers of the past 24 hours we got gala leading the pack up almost seven percent trading at one and a half cents followed by conflux up three percent trading at thirteen point six cents followed by polygon matic three percent trading just under fifty seven cents and checking out the top 100 crypto gainers of the past week we can see ultimately a sea of green with a handful in I mean a sea I should say of red with a handful in the green with our LB leading the pack of roughly seventeen percent with the biggest losers being Bitcoin cash and Ave down collectively roughly seven percent and checking out the crypto greed and fear index one of my favorite indicators hence why I shared every day in the show we're currently rated dead in the middle with a 50 which is neutral same as yesterday last week was a 46 and last month a 40 in fear so there you have it how many of you are currently bullish on the king crypto let me know and how many of you are anticipating a low as I'm going to be sharing an analyst predicting a twenty thousand dollar price crash and we'll be breaking down everything in between so let's get it shall we and again welcome to everyone just joining us make sure to say hello in that live chat as this is a live and interactive show and at the end of the show I read everyone's comments out loud so let's break down today's Bitcoin technical analysis Bitcoin just hit six week highs to start off October but some forecasts still see the Bitcoin price returning to twenty thousand in which lo and behold there's a CME futures gap if you didn't know and while up around six percent since the start of last month and now circling twenty seven five Bitcoin is not fooling many with its current price behavior the Bitcoin price strength in the recent weeks has many market participants hoping for a push and even through thirty thousand resistance send it let's go for some there remains every reason to be cautious however in an ex post analysis published October 2nd popular trader crypto bullet reiterated that twenty thousand is still very much on the radar as the Bitcoin price target the latest trip to twenty eight six he argued is now forming the right hand shoulder of a classic head and shoulders chart pattern with the downside logically due to follow if it completes quitting analysts here second half of October should be bearish in my opinion the idea was built on an August roadmap with a short term upside target of twenty eight thousand before reversing towards that twenty thousand target let me know if you agree or disagree with the analysts I disagree I think we are bullish for this October and I think we're more than likely to continue up but it's good to cover all our basis is here now not all reasons headed heeded his warning with fellow popular trader you easy in particular skeptical of the likelihood for this scenario playing out crypto bullet however is far from alone when it comes to fearing that the worst for Bitcoin is over yet and one of crypto quants quick take blog posts on September 28th we had Wetson founder and CEO of crypto trading resource dominando crypto compared bitcoins performance between 2020 and 2022 quitting the analysts here between 2020 and 2022 Bitcoin underwent a notable appreciation region historic highs and capturing global attention however this phase was followed by significant correction that caused the prices to plummet sending crypto back to the lower levels say goodbye to your credit card rewards big -box retailers led by Walmart and Target are pushing for a bill in Congress to take away your hard -earned cash back and travel points to line their pockets Senate bill 1838 would enact harmful credit card routing mandates that would end credit card rewards as we know it if you love your credit card rewards visit hands off my rewards calm and tell them to oppose credit card routing legislation paid for by the electronic payments coalition now we also suggest that should history repeat a sub 20 ,000 level could resurface and an accompanying chart offered a fractal which now has been subject to a repeat quoting him again now in 2023 we are once again witnessing Bitcoin achieving over a hundred percent gains attracting substantial interest from institutional and retail investors nonetheless the market has recently experienced significant volatility and a downward price trend the similarity to the past raises questions about whether we are witnessing a repeat of the 15 ,500 USD if this fractal holds over the next few weeks which could result in a series of FUD and negative news in the crypto space furthermore there's a possibility of a redistribution where the price threatens significant highs but institutional profit -taking forces the price down creating the atmosphere of uncertainty in the market and as reported we also had another analyst rack capital who's demanding that the bulls step up to protect this support in order to avert the long -term retracement now for news as I shared in the intro of the show moving forward all crypto news alerts YouTube videos will have both English and espanol subtitles available and I'm currently working on a dedicated channel dubbed 100 % and espanol so we can serve our Latin community for the Bitcoin daily news let me know if this excites you and if you'll be one tuning in and also as shared here breaking news Stanley drunken Miller known as one of the most successful hedge fund managers on Wall Street who has worked 6 .2 billion he says frankly if the goal bet works then the Bitcoin bet will probably work better how many of you believe that he is probably right let me know your honest thoughts fam in the comments right down below and with that being shared yesterday was a historic day for ethereum futures ETFs launching however they ultimately flopped with less than two million dollars in trading volumes across nine assets so let's break this down and discuss it shall we here we go check it check it check it the rush of excitement that accompanied the launch of nine new ethereum futures ETFs appears to have yielded little in the way of investment dollars in comparison October 2nd nine new ETF products which are designed to track futures contracts tied to the value of the ethereum native currency arrived on the market of these funds only five hold exclusively ether futures while the other four track a mixture of Bitcoin and ether futures contracts quoting Eric Balchunes right here unprecedented day today with multiple ETFs all launching at the same time no clear winner has emerged all of them were pretty average lower than I would have predicted but it's a long run and remember these hold futures ETFs investors much prefer physical to derivatives that's right we much rather prefer spot ETFs because there's nothing but manipulation and price suppression continuously occurring in the futures market all by design hence by the regulators decide not to approve anything spot related but they continue to approve the futures ETFs which blows my mind personally in total all nine ETFs witness less than two million dollars worth of trading volume which is essentially nothing as a midday Eastern Time on the first day of trading the most popular of the futures ETFs products were Valkyrie's Bitcoin strategy ETF which tracks the combo of Bitcoin and ether raking up a total of 880 2 ,000 worth the volume it's worth noting had already been trading as a Bitcoin only futures ETF since October of 2021 but then adjusted its strategy to also include ETH the first day trading volume of ether ETFs paled comparison with that of the pro shares Bitcoin strategy ETF which debuted October of 2021 one month prior to hitting that all -time high and during a roaring market for crypto assets obviously it witnessed more than 1 billion dollars in trading volume on its first day so Wow compare that 1 billion in 24 hours to less than 2 million in 24 hours crazy now Balchune has noted that compared to the regular traditional finance ETF launched the volume witness was actually quite a lot though investors tend to prefer spot ETF products over futures Balchune has explained that all the products were scheduled for launch on the same day as the SEC wanted to prevent any one fund from gaining market domination now what if the SEC decided to do the same thing with the spot ETF approved them all at the same time like whoa meanwhile a range of United States firms jostled for the pole position for the nascent ether futures market ETF firm volatility shares canceled his plans to list a similar product saying that it didn't see the opportunity at the current time well we all know this we're all seeking the spot ETFs those are the game changers and there is probably about a 95 % chance that the BlackRock Bitcoin spot ETF get approved in 2023 I mean 2024 we're in 2023 hopefully right before the having occurs scheduled to be in what is that April of next year roughly six months out as we know it's gonna trigger trillions of dollars cascading into the Bitcoin market and that alongside the Bitcoin having are the two biggest catalyst for 2024 and let's add a third bullish catalyst which is a supply shock as there's currently less than two million Bitcoin sitting on the exchanges and for these ETFs once they get approved for the spot they have to be holding the underlying asset so there's gonna be mass accumulation continuing by the whales not only in this fourth quarter of 2023 but collectively in 2024 as well so let's freaking go and with that being shared now for the Satoshi X saga going on and also I want to share with you Satoshi Nakamoto's secret letter which came from the shadows never shared before I've never read it I'm gonna be reading it in real time with you so let's break this one down shall we members of the crypto community have rallied behind a post on X calling for Elon to remove a profile claiming to be the fabled creator of Bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto and here's your prescription I know just the pharmacy to get this filled who are you a pharmacy benefit manager a middleman your insurer uses to decide which medicines you can get what you pay and sometimes even which pharmacy you should go to why can't I go to a pharmacy in my neighborhood because I make more money when you go to a pharmacy I own no one should stand between you and your medicine visit ph RMA org slash middlemen to learn more paid for by pharma October 3rd the user posted saying that both the account claiming to be Nakamoto and account with the handle Bitcoin should be removed because they breached the platform's terms of service which says doesn't allow misleading and deceptive identities as predator shared here hey Elon Bitcoin and Satoshi accounts are in breach of your terms of service for using misleading and deceptive identities please remove their checkmarks I guess it could be confusing to people thinking it is an official Bitcoin account and we know there will never be an official Bitcoin account and an official Satoshi account which we all know there will never be an official Satoshi account he says you can't misappropriate someone else's identity without disclosing you are a parody account it is no different than making a fake Tesla or Elon Musk account and I think he makes a great point what are your thoughts chat let me know the true identity of Nakamoto has been subject of discussion and the Bitcoin and crypto community as we know since the inception Satoshi X account is reportedly run by a user named Andy Rowe who was claiming to be posting from a profile back in 2018 and on July of 2018 Rowe said he curates quotes for the Satoshi account as outlined right here the account had been quiet since October 31st of 2018 however October 2nd yesterday the account made a new post saying Bitcoin is a predicate machine and went on to explain that it would explore different aspects of the Bitcoin white paper over the coming months as Satoshi Nakamoto announced here on X now what are your thoughts fam let me know another user call for the accounts to be disabled linking or likening them to how X responded to the account with the handle internet yeah interesting the Bitcoin creators true identity to this day remains a mystery what many people over the years claiming to be the true Satoshi the most prominent of which is fake Toshi Craig right now let's discuss this particular letter which recently surfaced from the shadows allegedly from Satoshi Nakamoto check this out fragments a Satoshi secret identity the genius responsible for the birth of Bitcoin has resurfaced shedding new light on the creation of the world's first crypto this revelation comes in the form of an email and bearing the date August 22nd 2008 we all know the Genesis block was I believe in January of 2009 now the email director to computer scientist way die offers a captivating window in the nascent stages of bitcoins creation a journey that would go out to profoundly alter the contours of the global financial realm this recently unveiled correspondence serves as a valuable historical artifact shedding light on the intellectual exchanges and collaborative efforts that paved the way for the development of Bitcoin by delving into this previously hitting piece of communication from Satoshi to way day we gain invaluable insights into the genesis of the revolutionary crypto a technology that would ultimately disrupt and redefine traditional financial paradigms worldwide so let's discuss it in the email Satoshi expresses profound admiration for way dies be money page indicating a strong connection to dies groundbreaking work in the field of digital currencies Satoshi goes on to reveal his intention to release a comprehensive paper expanding upon dies ideas ultimately culminating in the birth of Bitcoin now let's read the actual letter you can see it's dated here August 22nd 2008 sent at 438 p .m.
Tech Path Crypto
Fresh update on "six weeks" discussed on Tech Path Crypto
"All right. So 45 days in loom around another government shutdown. The other thing that plays into this, he's calling more of a personal situation. But I want you to think about this right now. This is basically infighting within D.C. lawmakers. But unfortunately, this is happening at a time in which really crypto has a vulnerable situation brewing. And that is the FTX trial. So let me go to this clip right here breaking down what kind of impact FTX is going to have right now. Listen in. Jury selection in the criminal trial. Sam Bankman Fried kicks off at 930 a.m. in a Manhattan federal court downtown. Now, Bankman Fried, who, remember, has been sitting in jail since August after having his bail revoked for alleged witness tampering, faces seven criminal counts related to the implosion of the crypto empire that he built. So we're looking at a six week trial with prosecutors expected to take a month to make their case. We don't yet know whether Bankman Fried will testify. His lawyers have hinted at an advice of counsel defense. That's where they would say that he was following the guidance of FTX lawyers and didn't realize that what he was doing was illegal. All right. So interesting stuff there. The point being is, again, it starts to roll up on this. I want to kind of butt this with another clip to it that kind of helps paint the picture a little bit better. Listen in. What do you think it means longer term for crypto? We were talking about price of Bitcoin has actually moved a little bit higher, not as it relates to this, as it relates to the fact that maybe the government's going to stay open and relates to this comment that Gary Gensler made that it had the government shut down. You know, there'd be no chance of a Bitcoin ETF. I don't know if you think there's any better chance that there's a Bitcoin ETF now the government's open. Crypto is a technology. Let's see that technology in our financial ecosystem in a place where we're confident it's totally safe. So I believe that stable coin, a well constructed, well regulated stable coin is one of those places. I also believe that we've decided every legal question around Bitcoin that is relevant. So it, as I've said before, that would make you think that a Bitcoin spot ETF is inevitable. All right. So that was Jay Clayton. That's the former chair of the SEC. And he he's right. I mean, these are the kind of things that most normal people would look at. Obviously, we know there is an agenda in the SEC that aligns with what is happening mostly with Senator Warren. But Jay Clayton goes on further to talk about what it would take for securing the crypto market in general. Listen to what he had to say about that. I was very concerned that the trading of Bitcoin around the globe on exchanges that we had no insight into had a large amount of fraud going on. Right. And I was not comfortable and staff. By the way, you were proven right. Yes. So, OK, so now what's changed since then? So there are a lot of people who do surveillance and the like who are who are confident that the Bitcoin spot market is what I would say is has much greater efficacy than it did three or four years ago. Well-respected financial institutions, new financial institutions or new financial providers have submitted to the SEC. They lay out the case for why trading and spot Bitcoin is more efficacious than it was the loss.
The Breakdown
A highlight from The Sam Bankman-Fried Trial Begins - Everything You Need to Know
"Welcome back to The Breakdown with me and LW. It's a daily podcast on macro, Bitcoin, and the big picture power shifts remaking our world. What's going on guys? It is Tuesday, October 3rd. The SBF trial has begun. This is all the background that you need to know. Of course, before we get into all of that. If you are enjoying The Breakdown, please go subscribe to it, give it a rating, give it a review. Or if you want to dive deeper into the conversation, come join us on The Breakers Discord. You can find a link in the show notes or go to bit .ly slash breakdown pod. Hello Breakers. As you can imagine, this is a fairly weird time for me. A year ago at this time, I was deep in the midst of planning FTX's second Super Bowl ad. And yet a month later, I had resigned, the company had declared bankruptcy, and the world had discovered a rotten core of fraud around Sam and his closest consigliaries. Now, I did a very long episode about the experience of the week of the collapse from the inside last November 14th. It was called Sam Bankman Fraud to give you a sense of how I felt about it. Since then, I've been covering the FTX bankruptcy and Sam's legal battles as I would any other crypto story. In other words, just part of the necessary cleanup of the last cycle, but ultimately something that is hopefully for the past and not for the future. When it comes to the trial, I've spent a long time deciding about how to approach it. The reality is, for the next five or six weeks or however long this takes, this is going to drown out a lot of other things that are happening in the space. I have to imagine that most products will choose not to launch during this time for fear of being outshined because everyone is just laser focused on this. The question then of course is how much time to give it. Is there a risk of over focusing on it? You bet. It's going to have lots of drama. But does it need to be covered? I think that the answer is also ultimately yes. This is something that has to get concluded for the industry to fully move on. It is in many ways an exorcism that just has to be done. And on top of that, I think that this trial and everything that surrounds it will have some impact in shaping how much the external world sees the crypto space as itself inherently fraudulent versus Sam as specifically fraudulent. So how is the breakdown going to cover this? Well, I talked to a lot of you listeners and the general request mirrored my own thoughts, which is to every few days do an update, sometimes with a guest discussion. This won't be then an everyday thing. At least there won't be some big feature every day. But you will get all the salient details as they come up. And with that in mind, I thought it would be valuable to try to create a bit of a definitive primer, something that if you haven't been paying attention at all, if you were barely watching last year, you could pick up and listen to and feel pretty well prepared to get into what you're going to see over the coming weeks. What that means is that today we're going to go over the charges, the rough timeline of events, the key witnesses, what we expect from the defense, the latest procedural news and info from the bankruptcy and the trial schedule. I don't think we'll have time to get into people's very strong feelings about Michael Lewis's book that just came out, but I imagine that that will be on the docket for later this week as well. However, where we begin is with the charges of which Sam faces seven. Those include two charges of wire fraud, two charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, as well as charges of securities fraud, commodities fraud and money laundering. More generally, Sam is accused of fraudulently dealing with customer funds in a multitude of ways. The most damning allegation, and the one prosecutors will likely focus on establishing, is that Sam knowingly diverted customer funds to FTX -affiliated hedge fund Alameda Research. Alameda, of course, served as the primary market maker on FTX. Now, FTX is widely understood not to have been able to obtain bank accounts, and so in many cases used accounts held by Alameda Research to receive funds from customers. The thing that prosecutors will seek to demonstrate is that Alameda not only held customer funds, but that it racked up billions of dollars in debt to FTX, which it could not repay. Evidence has been put forward that Alameda did not have the same risk controls as other entities when it traded on FTX, and that the lack of limits allowed Alameda to continue to operate while carrying a large negative cash balance. To put a fine point on it, the prosecution will allege that this large negative cash balance represented improperly using customer funds to trade and lose on the exchange. Now of course, Alameda had a significant balance sheet of assets held against this negative cash balance, but these assets were crypto tokens largely created by Sam and FTX. They were far too illiquid to realize it anywhere close to their full book value. The SEC summarized the allegations in their separate lawsuit by stating that Sam, Put more simply by Bloomberg's Matt Levine in an article published yesterday, It was pretty much entirely because Alameda had lost it. Now the key to proving these allegations will be establishing that Sam was aware of this financial artifice being run using Alameda. Fraud isn't fraud if it was caused by a mistake or an oversight. Prosecutors will need to show that Sam was either aware of the fraud or willfully blind to it. As the judge put it during a hearing last week, Now let's move on to the timeline of events. Much of the DOJ's case will center around the fateful final weeks as the FTX empire came crashing down. The beginning of the end came on November 2nd when Coindesk's Ian Allison published an expose on the Alameda balance sheet. There had been some rumors of trouble at Alameda prior to that, but with a partial copy of the balance sheet, this piece of reporting blew the lid off the situation. TLDR, what the balance sheet showed was that a huge portion of Alameda's holdings, the were pretty illiquid tokens and in particular, the native exchange token of FTX, FTT. Now in terms of a huge portion of their assets being in FTT, there were also a bunch of other Sam coins from DeFi projects that barely got off the ground, which in some cases had Alameda representing up to 95 % of the overall token supply. According to the Financial Times, just $900 million in assets on this balance sheet could be easily sold. The next major event was the very public sparring between Binance CEO CZ and Sam. Binance had been an early investor in FTX, but at that time had been bought out of their stake for $2 .1 billion. That repurchase, a theoretically pretty good return on an $80 million investment, had been paid out in a mix of stablecoins and FTT tokens. On the Sunday following the Coindesk article, CZ tweeted that quote, Due to recent revelations that have come to light, we have decided to liquidate any remaining FTT on our books. He said the firm would attempt to do so in a way that quote, minimizes market impact over the next few months. But of course, when you have CZ, the single biggest player in the industry, saying dump FTT and run for the hills, guess what happened next? Within the hour, Carolyn Ellison absolutely pissed gasoline all over the situation. She had taken over as sole Alameda CEO just a couple months prior and tweeted to CZ quote, If you're looking to minimize the market impact of your FTT sales, Alameda will happily buy it all from you today at $22. The market immediately plunged, with FTT's price being very visibly defended against Throughout the week before, FTT had traded around $25 and a market cap of $3 billion. By Tuesday night, with Alameda's traders and balance sheet exhausted, the token settled at $5 and FTX closed withdrawals. Now like I said, I gave my account of being on the inside. And while Tuesday when FTX closed withdrawals was clearly a final moment in the coffin for many of us inside, for me when it was clear that something very nefarious had gone on was on Monday, when I started getting hit up by other friends outside of FTX in the industry who were asking if I had heard anything about an FTX emergency fundraising round. Now of course, as an exchange that was supposed to be fully backed and given Sam's recent statements to the team that we had around $2 billion in cash and liquid assets thanks to trading revenue as well as recent fundraising, the only way in the world that we would need an emergency fundraising round was if Sam had been using FTX customer funds for purposes other than sitting on FTX's books waiting for those customers to reclaim those funds. Anyway, in the middle of that week after withdrawals were closed, there was also a weird sham sale announced to Binance, which they very quickly backed out of. And by Friday, with most FTX staffers having already fled the Bahamas, Sam finally capitulated to bankruptcy. Now to this day, Sam claims that he was forced by external lawyers to place the FTX empire into bankruptcy and appears to continue to be holding onto the idea that the exchange could have raised an emergency fundraising round to make customers whole. For most people, that might be where the event ended, but not so much for Sam. What followed was a bizarre string of press interviews, an incredibly disjointed Twitter thread, and basically an odd media tour that attempted to paint Sam as a wayward and naive CEO in over his head rather than a perpetrator of criminal fraud. This tour was capped off by a live broadcast interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times on November 30th. During that sprawling interview, Sam claimed that he, quote, didn't ever try to commit fraud on anyone. Authorities disagreed, and on December 12th, Sam was arrested in the Bahamas at the request of the US government. Although initially defiant, Sam ultimately agreed to be extradited to face charges and was released on bail. Once again, for any normal person, that might be the end of the story until we get to trial, but not for Sam. Although he was confined to his parents' house in California, Sam managed to continuously test the boundaries of his bail conditions. February, Sam was hauled before the judge on allegations that he had used encrypted messaging apps to contact the General Counsel of FTX US as well as using a VPN, which Sam claimed was just to watch NFL games. To the former General Counsel of FTX US, Sam had reached out to see if it was possible to, quote, have a constructive relationship, use each other as resources when possible, or at least vet things with each other. The DOJ characterized this communication as an attempt to taint a potential witness. At that point, the judge decided not to revoke Sam's bail, but instead expressly forbid Sam from using encrypted messaging apps and VPNs. And yet, in July, Sam stepped over the line once again by leaking the private journal of Carolyn Ellison to the New York Times. The judge agreed that providing this material to journalists was, at best, an attempt to embarrass Ellison, if not a brazen attempt to intimidate her and discredit her in the public eye. During the course of that hearing, it was uncovered that Sam had held more than 1 ,000 phone calls with journalists, including over 100 with the New York Times reporter who published the story. And thus, by early August, Sam had his bail revoked and was locked up at the Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention Center to await his trial. Since then, it's basically just been a never -ending set of appeals to try to get Sam out of jail, but alas, jail is where he remains. Next up, let's talk witnesses. What became clear quite fast was that there was a cohort of around four people, including Sam, that seemed to know about the extra special privileges that Alameda enjoyed and the fact that for all intents and purposes, customer funds on FTX were just used as a slush fund for their hedge fund traders. And it turns out that while Sam was still in the air being extradited from the Bahamas, multiple FTX executives were revealed to be collaborating witnesses. Of those, Carolyn Ellison is the one likely to get the most attention. As well as being the CEO of Alameda, Ellison was also Sam's former girlfriend. The couple split prior to the collapse of FTX and there will no doubt be extensive cross -examination which questions Ellison's motives in giving evidence against Sam. Although Ellison was only at the helm of Alameda for a little over two months, recent reporting describes her as essentially in charge of the trading firm for much longer, at least as much as anyone could be in charge of the firm relative to Sam himself. Nominally, Ellison and Sam Trabuco, another Sam in this story, had been appointed co -CEOs of the firm in October of 2021 when SPF stepped away from the role. However, Trabuco had recently been described as almost entirely checked out at that point, leaving Ellison in charge of day -to -day operations. Ellison is expected to give evidence regarding the inner workings of FTX and has acknowledged that she knew about the hole in Alameda's balance sheet prior to the collapse of the exchange. Nishad Singh and Gary Wang are the other two executives known to be cooperating with prosecutors. Singh acted as engineering director while Wang was the exchange's CTO and co -founder. These two basically built all of FTX from the ground up, so anything going on with the codebase is basically going to be mostly just their work. Nishad is expected to give a first -hand account of how the Alameda backdoor was enabled in the code. Nishad was reportedly extremely distressed and wracked with guilt during the final weeks at FTX and was confrontational with Sam during that time. Gary was one of the last employees left in the Bahamas as the exchange collapsed and famously coded almost the entire platform by himself. Some have speculated about how he will be as a witness given that he is notoriously quiet. Now, each of these three key witnesses have already pleaded guilty to criminal fraud charges and have agreed to testify in exchange for a lighter sentence. Prosecutors will need to demonstrate that each one is presenting an honest account of events rather than merely throwing Sam under the bus to save themselves. There are also complicated personal relationships between each of these executives and Sam, which could be used by the defense. All three cohabitated with Sam in a Bahamas penthouse and were some of Sam's closest friends as well as employees. To give an indication of how hostile cross -examination could become, last week a DOJ motion to prevent the defense from asking questions about recreational drug use was denied. The defense will need to provide notice to the court before asking witnesses about their drug use, but the subject was not ruled to be out of bounds. Another FTX executive who has pleaded guilty to criminal charges is Ryan Salem, who served as CEO of FTX Digital Markets. FTX Digital Markets was the operating company for the Bahamas. Now, Salem was particularly involved in the political campaign side of things for Sam and was charged with violations of campaign financing law in relation to making straw donations to politicians on Sam's direction as well as operating an unlicensed money -transmitting business. Unlike the other three, Salem is not cooperating with prosecutors as part of his plea deal, but could be called to testify as a non -cooperating witness. Alameda co -CEO Sam Trabuco has not been heard from since he stepped away from the company last August. He has not been disclosed as a witness and has not been charged at this stage. The DOJ has also flagged that they have at least two additional witnesses set to testify under a grant of immunity but have not publicly identified them at this stage. By and large, speculation about who those witnesses might be include not only Trabuco who we just mentioned, but Daniel Friedberg who served as FTX's chief compliance officer and who had formerly been implicated in a major online poker scandal, and Constance Wang who was FTX's COO and was described as Sam's right hand during fundraising efforts. Now in addition to FTX executives, the DOJ will also call multiple customers and investors to give brief testimony. Prosecutors have flagged that they will call upon retail customers who traded tens of thousands of dollars on the platform, as well as institutional clients who traded millions of dollars. The high range could imply notable industry figures will make an appearance on the witness stand. Several high profile market makers are listed as top creditors of FTX and are no doubt none too happy about their funds being locked up in the bankruptcy process. Both customers and investors are intended to present their understanding of the FTX terms of service and representations made about the use of customer funds, which could be crucial in refuting possible defenses. Which indeed brings us to that section of this primer, what are the defense strategies that Sam might try to employ? SPF's legal team have flagged a few potential arguments. In a filing on Monday, they sought clarification on a few issues they may wish to present. The filing asked whether the defense could argue that FTX International was not regulated in the US and therefore did not have to follow applicable rules. They also asked whether Sam could discuss the likelihood that creditors could see massive returns from the bankruptcy process. Still, the primary defense expected from SPF relates to instructions from legal counsel. In August, SPF's team flagged a plan to argue that he relied on advice from both in -house attorneys as well as lawyers from Fenwick and West in basically all elements of FTX's operation. Sam sought to introduce advice from lawyers on topics ranging from his use of self -deleting messages, unconventional banking relationships, and intercompany financial arrangements. The DOJ objected to this defense, claiming that not enough detail had been provided, but the judge reserved their decision on this point until later in the trial. The judge said that they would make rulings on individual advice of counsel arguments on a case -by -case basis as they come up. Outside of what indications we've gotten from Sam's team, the industry and the wider world at large have had no problem speculating about how he might defend himself as well. Bloomberg's Matt Levine paraphrased his view of a likely defense as The crypto market crashed, there was a run on the bank, and the run on the bank is what evaporated the customer's money. It was an accident, perhaps a careless accident but not theft. Certainly, in media commentary, SPF has been focused on the bank run, rather than the hole in Alameda's balance sheet as the cause of FTX's collapse. Now, of course, there are some obvious issues with that defense, particularly if witnesses establish that Alameda had effectively commandeered customer funds in contravention of the exchange's terms of service. Another plank of Sam's defense will likely be to rely on prosecutors being unable to In a New Yorker article published last month, the journalist wrote, Going back to his article, Matt Levine again sketched out a plausible way that Sam could brush off an $8 billion balance sheet hole as a careless oversight rather than willful fraud. He suggested Sam could claim he thought FTX had so much money that $8 billion was a rounding error. From Levine's back of the napkin math, at its height, FTX had somewhere approaching $100 billion in crypto assets on its books. Finally, it's also expected that Sam will seek to blame Caroline for mismanaging Alameda. The publication of excerpts from Caroline's journal was an attempt to paint her as a naive child way out of her depths, and some of Sam's leaked writings also showed a belief that Alameda had failed to hedge correctly, as if that was the main issue here. Now, one thing that's important to note is that when considering defenses, SPF does not need to prove his innocence. He only needs to introduce a shred of doubt in the minds of the jury. To convict, the 12 jurors must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Sam is guilty and reach a unanimous decision. Prosecutors often fail to get their cases over the line due to being unable to entirely convince each juror of the defendant's guilt. This can be even more of a difficulty when the case involves complicated financial crime which can be difficult to fully understand. And yet, many commentators are convinced that the case is damning. Daniel C. Silva, a former prosecutor who participated in the BitConnect case, said, Now, in terms of the latest from the bankruptcy, as the trial gets underway, the FTX bankruptcy process is entering its 10th month and has had no shortage of intrigue. The current focus has been on pursuing clawbacks from people and organizations that had been, in the estimation of the bankruptcy estate, unjustly enriched by FTX. On the very top of that list are Sam's parents, Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried. Two weeks ago, the estate sued Bankman and Fried, claiming that they had received over $26 million in gifts from FTX, including a luxury property in the Bahamas. The lawsuit alleges that Bankman was intimately involved in the operations at FTX and used his position to enrich himself. You may have seen the now -famous email where he tried to raise his salary to a million dollars by threatening to involve Sam's mother. Now, speaking of Sam's mother, Barbara Fried is alleged to have directed political donation efforts at FTX. This instructing included Sam on how to structure donations to avoid donation limits. She is also alleged to have knowledge of loans made to FTX executives, which were then used to fund election campaigns. All in all, the lawsuit alleged that the pair, quote, Now, for their part, Sam's parents immediately hit back at the lawsuit through lawyers saying, A last note on the bankruptcy, while current FTX CEO John J. Wray has no doubt been cooperating with prosecutors in providing internal documents, he is not currently expected to testify as a witness. Now, in terms of the latest trial procedural stuff and timeline, today was technically the first day of the trial with jury selection the goal. Both sides have alleged the other is attempting to bias the jury pool. The DOJ claimed that Sam's questions for the jury about effective altruism, political donations and ADHD are intended to paint him in a sympathetic light. In particular, prosecutors are concerned that asking about charitable and political donations could improperly introduce the idea that Sam's actions were justified outside of evidence. The defense, meanwhile, have complained that the DOJ are treating Sam's fraud as an established fact in their jury questioning by omitting the word allegedly. They also claim a question about being stopped or questioned by the police is intended to racially filter the jury in a manner irrelevant to the case. Last week, as I intimated before, SPF placed a last minute appeal to be released from jail for the duration of the trial. Sam's team claimed that his incarceration would be an unreasonable barrier to adequately preparing for each day's hearing. Unfortunately for him, the judge found this argument insufficiently convincing and stated that they consider Sam to be a flight risk. They said, Sam was granted some concessions to be allowed to meet with his lawyers early at the courthouse each day, as well as during jail visiting on off days. Now, while a decision is yet to be made on exactly how Sam can introduce the concept that he relied on the advice of lawyers, limits were placed on what can be said during the defense's opening arguments. Specifically, Sam's lawyers have been prohibited from mentioning any advice of counsel arguments while presenting their case. The judge ruled that this argument may confuse or prejudice a jury when presented without specifics and evidence. The trial is currently scheduled to take six weeks. Jury selection is expected to be completed by the end of today's hearing, although before I was recording this, there were some indications that it might go into tomorrow morning as well. In either case, tomorrow we will likely see the beginnings of opening arguments. After that, the prosecution will present its case and call its witnesses. The DOJ has estimated their case will take four to five weeks. The defense will then have an opportunity to present their case, which they have estimated will be much shorter, taking around a week and a half. Now, the defense is not compelled to present a case and can simply choose not to if they are confident the charges have not been proven. We don't yet have any indication of whether SPF will speak in his own defense. Traditional legal strategy suggests that defendants should never take to the witness stand to avoid giving prosecutors an opportunity to cross -examine them. However, this is no ordinary trial and SPF is no ordinary defendant. Judging from how extensively Sam has defended himself in the media, I would not be surprised if his lawyers have a tough time keeping him out of the witness box. Hearings will be held four days a week with a short break after three weeks. If the trial takes longer than six weeks, it will be extended, but the consensus seems to be that it will be all over by Thanksgiving. And won't that be something to be thankful for? Now, even if Sam escapes a guilty verdict, his legal troubles will continue well into next year. The DOJ will present additional charges related to bribery of Chinese officials, as well as political donation violations during a second criminal trial, which is scheduled for March. Sam will also face civil lawsuits from the SEC and the CFTC after the first criminal trial is concluded. Beyond that, there's still the possibilities of lawsuits from the FTX bankruptcy estate, as well as from former customers and investors. So my friends, that is the lay of the land. That is what we are going into. Like I said at the top, for me, the most interesting thing, the thing that I will be watching most closely, is actually the meta -narrative analysis around this. I want to know how much, especially mainstream media looks at this and treats this like what it is, which is Sam Bankman -Fried going on trial, versus what I fear it might become, which is the entire crypto industry being put on trial. But in any event, this truly is a scenario where the only way out is through. So get on your boots, friends, because we are getting into the muck. Until next time, be safe and take care of each other. Peace.
Bloomberg Markets
Fresh update on "six weeks" discussed on Bloomberg Markets
"A percent we check the markets for you all day long right here on bluebird i'm john tucker and that is your bluebird business flash paul and matt right john tucker thank you so much we appreciate that matt miller paul swinney live here in our bluebird interactive broker studio um you know the markets got a little dicey here in the last five six weeks here people get certain build up a little bit of a wall worries relates to that higher for longer type thing and then that's not enough then you got a government that might be on the verge of functioning on a speaker on the verge of yeah yeah right we have a dysfunctional government we have a dysfunctional let's just go there let's see how the pros are kind of putting it all together phil taves joins the CEO of taves asset management phil i mean how do you put this situation that we've got down in Washington with the house of representatives how does that kind of weave into your investment outlook here well we've already gone defensive over the last last three weeks we've moved into a fully defensive posture well you may remember that we actually can move fully
CoinDesk Podcast Network
SBF TRIAL: 10/02 Update
"Welcome to the SBF trial, a Coindesk podcast network newsletter bringing you daily insights from inside the courtroom where Sam Bankman -Fried will try to stay out of prison. Follow the Coindesk podcast network to get the audio each morning with content from the Coindesk regulation team and voiced by Wondercraft AI. It is officially trial week and as Bloomberg's Joe Wiesenthal would likely put it, this is why we get up in the morning. It's been exactly nine months and 20 days since Sam Bankman -Fried got arrested at his then home in the Bahamas. Today marks the last day before he is set to start the trial in which he will win back his freedom or be locked up for what a federal judge says could be a very long time. Thousands of pages of evidence ranging from internal documents to audio recordings will be presented and fought over in the next six weeks as US prosecutors try to prove that the former FTX founder knowingly defrauded customers and business partners. Arguably the most damning evidence or lack thereof could come from the recollections and personal opinions of Bankman -Fried's former colleagues, friends and housemates. Caroline Ellison, Nishad Singh and Gary Wang were close friends and roommates of Bankman -Fried as much as they were colleagues. Ellison was emotionally invested with the FTX founder and troubled by the former couple's on and off relationship which according to a diary entry from her slowly fizzled out in February 2022. Prosecutors also say they intend to call up FTX customers and investors including non -US customers over the course of the trial. On another note, do you remember when FTX suddenly announced it was hacked and lost some $600 million worth of crypto? This was the same day it filed for bankruptcy last November. A decent portion of those funds sat in a wallet for a few months and then started moving this weekend. Around 15 ,000 Ether worth around $26 million at Sunday night's prices moved out of a wallet through various routers and privacy tools between Friday night and Sunday morning. We never got an explanation for what exactly happened and how the exploit was carried out. I imagine federal investigators are probably closely tracking this episode. On a logistics note, Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled in favor of the DOJ's motion to prevent Bankman -Fried from getting into the weeds on what his lawyers may or may not have said about FTX's operations in his opening statement. However, Bankman -Fried's defense team can still raise the advice of counsel defense later on with notice to the court and DOJ. In court filings, the defense said the argument would be that FTX's in -house and external lawyers were part of decisions to use auto -deleting messaging platforms, set up legal entities in the US, loan funds to FTX and Alameda executives, and other aspects of the FTX -Alameda relationship. Want to follow along? Sign up for CoinDesk's new daily newsletter, The SBF Trial, bringing you insights from the courthouse and around the case. You can get the podcast each day right here by following the CoinDesk Podcast Network. Thanks for listening.
Real Estate Coaching Radio
Fresh update on "six weeks" discussed on Real Estate Coaching Radio
"I don't remember what chapter in our book where we talk about lead follow-up, it's one of the things that, it's really, there's an art and a science to it of doing, essentially getting off your duff, but a lot of agents have been spoiled with the belief that the furiously fast lead follow-up doesn't matter. That leans back into the importance of 1800homehotline.com. Guys put these thoughts together, realize that this market, I'll tell you the reason it's so beautiful and we love markets like this, is because it opens the door for new people to become superstars. Those of you who are already superstars in your marketplace, you better for sure stop being complacent and get your game on, because this next generation of real estate superstars are hungry, they're ornery. And they're getting rewarded for their efforts. They are. You know, I mean, we talked about Federico out in LA a couple weekends ago because his open house killed it. Anybody who is making an effort, plus furiously fast lead follow-up, and thinking out of the box, using many of the techniques that they get in Premier Coaching and certainly some from our podcast, is getting rewarded. Some of these listings that are sitting, and by sitting, I mean, you and I, when we sold real estate, okay, so sitting is not like six months, sitting to you guys is like six days or six weeks. They're still selling. But meanwhile, look at what you can generate in the meantime, because you have the catnip. Well, it's because you have the listing, you can do open houses, you have the for sale sign, you're using one in your home hotline. Your sign is, by the way, a reflective sign that's not just these tiny little pukey small signs. Reflectiverealestate.com. You're going to get the sign, the largest sign you're legally allowed to put in front yards. We teach you guys how to do all this in Premier Coaching. You're going to, obviously, have furiously fast lead follow up. You're going to be the agent that gets the sale, not just the listing and the sale. When that seller sees you sell that neighbor's house, guess what? The neighbor's going to put their house for sale for you, too, when it's time for them to sell. Rinse, wash, repeat, rinse, wash, repeat. Don't you like this market better for our agents who are skilled? I do. I know it's more challenging. I know it can be frustrating until you put all these pieces together. When you do, it's actually happening. It's generating faster for you in a market like this because the most motivated people are more obvious now. They're not getting covered up by all of the FOMO people. Those people really appreciate what you're doing. I guarantee you, Kristen's going to get thank you cards from the buyer and the seller. The only reason they're in contract is because of her. Guys, thank you for keeping this number one listened to daily podcast for real estate professionals in at least the United States. Now, please do the right thing and give us a five-star review on iTunes and also include comments why you listen to this podcast every single day. For all of you who are new listeners, welcome. We certainly appreciate your support. Help us get the word out that this is the best time to be in real estate provided you're willing to be of service to others and apply the skill set and the mindset necessary. Have a fantastic day. We'll talk with you on the show tomorrow. This podcast is a part of the C-suite Radio Network. For more top business podcasts, visit c-suiteradio.com.
VUX World
A highlight from Customer journey analytics with Tim Friebel
"Hello there, ladies and gentlemen. Boys and girls, welcome to Vuex World. I'm your host, Cain Sims, and today we're going to be talking about customer journey mapping, analytics rather, customer journey analytics, I should say. There is a massive gap right now in the field of conversational automation and customer experience automation in general. A huge gap when it comes to analytics, in my opinion. Every single thing we work on, always you can't work on any conversational AI initiative without analytics, both interaction analytics as in what is this conversation successful? Is it achieving the goals that the business and customer needs? But there's two other layers that I don't think many are looking at. There is the customer journey layer, which is where are people coming from? When they're in that conversation, are you actually resolving the issue? Are they calling back four days later? Are they switching channels and trying to do something else on another channel? Is this the first time they're talking to you in a period of time or have they spoke to you every week for the last three weeks? There's a whole load of stuff that goes into understanding whether your efforts of improving customer experience are actually having an impact on you, so you've got to understand the customer journey. And then the level above that is the business. Is this thing actually contributing to the business? Is it generating revenue? Is it streamlining processes? Is it saving money? Whatever your goals are, you need to be able to measure it, quantify it, and tie it back to the conversations that you're having. These are the areas where I think there's huge gaps in many organisations' understanding and also their active implementations. People are beginning to get better at understanding the interaction level, understanding your NLU confidence scores, understanding turn -based analytics, looking at that fallback report. People are starting to get there. But the other two layers of journey and business analytics couldn't be further away. And so an expert in customer journey analytics is Tim Freewell from Genesys. He's currently the global experience transformation lead. He's got a wealth of experience in this kind of stuff, and he's going to join us today to walk us through some of the key considerations, some of the benefits, and also maybe some of the challenges that you might have in trying to implement all of this stuff. So without further ado, please welcome Tim Freewell to the UX world. Tim, welcome. Thanks, Kate. Pleasure to be here. Pleasure to have you here. Thank you for joining me. I know it took us a little while to set this conversation up, so I appreciate your patience and yeah, excited to get into it today. So where abouts are you going in the world? So I'm in St. Louis, Missouri. St. Louis, Missouri. Right in the middle of the United States. Most people, or some people, especially in Europe are like, where is that, right? So yeah, middle of the United States. Nice. That sounds good. That sounds good. And so how long have you been at Genesys for? So I've been at Genesys about five years. A number of different roles. Started as a business consultant, really focused on artificial intelligence for the contact center, focused on conversational AI for a couple of years. And then we actually acquired a customer journey analytics software called Pointless about a year and a half ago. And coincidentally, prior to Genesys, I worked in the customer journey analytics space for a little over a decade with a company that was kind of at the forefront of that. Frankly, we're too early to the market. The company was called Click Clocks. It's not really around anymore. But obviously, whenever we made that acquisition, it made sense for me to kind of slide over and help that team as well. So now really focusing on helping customers understand where they start from their AI strategy, but also how do we apply customer journey analytics to understand business impacts of these things that we're implementing. Nice, nice. So when you first began, then, the whole process with what did you call it? Click Fox. What was the situation then? What were the sort of like, I suppose, best practices quite a while ago now looking at your LinkedIn profile, like what was some of the best in class sort of like technologies, I suppose, at the time? And what did journey analytics look like then as compared to what you have now with Pointless? Yeah, no, it's a good question. I'd say the problem statement is still the same. We started with a perspective of, we actually had a product called customer experience analytics, right? And then through partnering with some of the big management consulting firms out there, the journey term started to take flight. So we latched on to that. And so you had, like I said, the problem statement is still the same. You still had analytics tools out there that were focused on maybe one piece of the journey. It was like, for example, Omniture, who was ultimately purchased by Adobe, was focused on the web and mobile customer journey piece of it. They're usually focused on the sales funnel. And then you'd also have people that were kind of doing reporting in the contact center. You'd have the voice of the reset, NPS, that type of thing. And really weren't connecting those things together. Fundamentally, it's hard to do, right? Because you have data coming from many different data sources that you're trying to connect together. So the problem statement was largely the same, is that how do we really see what customers are doing across all these channels and across time? So instead of it being just looking at one piece of the journey that's occurring within a couple minutes, potentially you're looking back six weeks or even six months. What's this customer experience as they're onboarding, things like that. So the problem statement is largely the same. The approach that Pointless took to it is very similar. Obviously, technology has evolved a lot to make the data collection piece easier, running in the cloud, all those kinds of things. So the how change involved, but ultimately the business problem statement was still the same. That makes sense. Yeah. And I suppose even today, perhaps the challenge is still kind of there, isn't it? I mean, if you look at something like Google Analytics, for example, or you mentioned Adobe Analytics there, like those analytics tools today are pretty good at focusing on one channel, web analytics, mobile analytics, and they can map a journey from the perspective of, okay, a customer comes from a search engine. They then go on this page, that page, this page, click this button, scroll to this depth, fill in this form, and then that's it. So I suppose when it comes to, especially when it comes to conversational AI, tying a conversation that might happen in an IVR system over here, or a chat bot on your website here, or a WhatsApp conversation over there. And those interactions are not just the only interactions that customers have. Maybe they start on your website, then call your contact center. Maybe they call your contact center and then try WhatsApp later. So in this sort of like omni -channel world, I suppose, would you think, would you agree with that actually it gets more complex to actually track the customer journeys in its entirety? Yeah, 100%. And because of all the systems that you mentioned, they kind of have all their own unique identifier for the interaction. So if you think about what, how would we identify the connectivity between these things, right? The contact center is going to have like a call ID or whatever the term is that you want to use within contact center platform. For the interaction itself, you're going to have the same thing with maybe a cookie ID on the website, as well as an interaction ID, et cetera. When customers authenticate, you get additional pieces of information, right? You might get their account number, their phone number, their email address, whatever. So there's all these pieces that are there, but sort of the secret sauce is being able to tie those things together across channels and have a cohesive view of what the customer's doing across the channels. Yeah, absolutely. We have some customers that we actually ingest like greater than 50 different data sources. So you're thinking about connecting together, billing data, potentially, I mentioned kind of voice of the customer, CSAT data, et cetera, even declines, ATM things like that. So you're really looking at a really granular level of the events that are occurring across all these systems. And then putting the business lens on it is what's this customer in the process of doing or trying to do? Are they trying to pay a bill? Are they new? Are they onboarding or trying to add a product? And those things, again, can take over time. Those things can take maybe a couple of weeks, depending on what type of journeys you're talking about, right? So you got, so it's not only the data connectivity piece, but it's also looking at it from the lens of the business to say, customers typically have, our customers, I mean, not the end customer, but typically have 10 or 15 core journeys, like what are the core things you can do with a brand? Like I mentioned, paying bill, onboarding, et cetera, et cetera. And so it's a different mindset of thinking about how do we actually run our business by that concept? Like how good is our onboarding journey, understanding that a customer might sign up for a new product online, maybe they need to go and create an online profile, then they've called the contact center, et cetera, over the course of those six weeks, right? So it's really kind of a different perspective to think about how are we looking at this customer experience. Yeah. And so do you tend to look more at analytics for exploratory purposes or or diagnostics analytics for measuring impact? Because suppose you could do this, you could do both, couldn't you? And that picture you were painting there of you've got 50 different data sources all plugged into one place. That seems to me a little bit more kind of exploratory and diagnostic based, like let's just ingest it all. Let's try and find the patterns. Let's try and find the issues. Then we can resolve something versus we've implemented something. Let's measure the impact of it. Like I'm wondering if you can give us a bit of a flavor for based on the customers you work with, where is most of the activity that you find that you're working on? Yeah, it's a really good question. And the perspective is it depends on where you're starting. And we always see, say the enterprise customers that have kind of grown to think about it as like enterprise journey management, they usually started with a specific problem and then added data sources over time because the questions they want to ask changes, right? So maybe where you start is probably the most common thing is let's look at what web pages or mobile pages are most likely to drive a customer and make a phone call at the end of the contact center or chat with the phone because then you're looking at upstream to say, are there areas to optimize that experience in the web and mobile channel that are actually going to reduce those interactions to the contact center because the customer was probably trying to self -serve anyway. But then over time, so to start that, you're starting with web and mobile data, maybe some contact center data. But then the next thing you might do is say, well, how was that experience on the web and mobile channel actually impacting CSAT? So let's pull in the voice of the customer data so that now we can start to look backward. And then from a, to use your word, a diagnostic standpoint, if we think about bots in the VUX context, I am a regular listener, by the way. If you think about conversational AI and bots, like that's one step in the experience. So inside of those tools, you have tuning and training tools. How do we actually make the bot? How do we optimize the bot? Did it do what it was supposed to do? But then taking a step back and seeing what impact to our business did that bot experience have? Like if we put a new intent in and we built out the fulfillment capabilities for that bot, did it actually reduce cost to the contact center? Did it positively impact our customer satisfaction, et cetera? So it's, you do have the diagnostic sort of in -channel focus from an analytics standpoint, but then you also want to take a step back and see, did it actually have the impact on our business that we expected it to have? Right. Absolutely. Yeah. What are kind of some of the challenges that, are the challenges the same today as you were alluding to earlier on in terms of kind of setting some of this stuff up? Cause you mentioned there, for example, you might start with website data and then you might try and put an intervention in on the website that then tries to reduce contact on the, in the contact center, but then you might pull in voice of the customer data. The challenge that I can sort of see there is these, I suppose, what's the word I'm looking for? These kinds of like numbers that you see on the website data, cause you might not necessarily be able to tie it to a specific individual. You've just got data, but then you've got voice of the customer data. And so it's tied that together, isn't it? To say, okay, this group of people on the website here had this impact on the CSAT. And it's the challenge for me seems to be like tying it all together. Cause you need to tie it to a customer level, something record in order to aggregate it, you know, to understand it at high levels. Are those challenges still challenges that you see? Yeah, absolutely. You know, so, and that is kind of the, you know, secret sauce. So whenever, you know, I talked about how the problem statement is the same that we've been looking at for, you know, nearly two decades to date myself a little bit, is the same, but you know, method that you're doing, you're doing that connectivity across the channels has changed and gotten a little bit easier. One of the kind of the proprietary things inside of the Pointless platform that was different, you know, is really what we refer to as dynamic identity resolution. So you're essentially building a living profile of the customer. So any ID that we might connect, collect from any channel we're adding to that customer profile. So that when we go do analytics in real time, like whatever we know of the customer at this time, we can use that and almost think about it as like, you know, not to geek out and talk about, you know, writing SQL queries, but you know, if you think about it as a join condition, right, depending on the analytics that you're doing, you might want to look at it from a different lens. So if I have, if the customer is authenticated in the, you know, in the mobile channel, in the IVR, et cetera, we're also probably going to be able to tie the account ID together with the voice of the customer data. And that's one lens is to say, let's use the account ID as the join here. But we also might want to look at it a little differently. You know, I could also maybe look at it by phone number, because that could be different people potentially.
The Bill Simmons Podcast
A highlight from Part 2: Zach Wilsons Alive, Belichicks in Trouble, Buffalos Cruising, and Week 5 Lines With Cousin Sal
"All right. So we're taping part one here. It is a little past 4 o 'clock Pacific time. Just watch the Pats completely shit the bed. We're not going to talk about that. That'll be part two. Part one. Ryan Russilla was here. We're talking Drew Holiday. The big trade. How is the NBA different for you right now, and are we done? Do we finally have the 30 rosters? Is this what we're looking at? Do we know who's going to be on everybody's team, or are we somehow not done? I never think we're done anymore in the NBA, and I know you're being a gracious host here, but you and I talked for five minutes today. I think you have the headline take on this, okay? I think you have the headline take on what the top of the league looks like. Are you ready to share it this early? I think Boston has the best top six. I did not feel that way 24 hours ago. I did not feel like there was a clear best. I trust this team in crunch time, and if Porzingis stays healthy, which is a huge if, I think they have the best six, and they can fill around, and they have the most ways that they can play whoever in the series. So from that vantage point, you had to do the trade. And they gave up a center who has been hurt every single year, and I don't fully trust that he's ever going to be out there when it matters. Brogdon, who was hurt, who was mad at the team, and two picks. And you get Drew Holliday, who was a 2021 Finals hero, who's one of the best defensive guards in the league, who's still really good, and just raises their ceiling. Now you can go white Holliday, Tatum Brown, and a center at crunch time, and you're good. You can switch on almost everything, especially if you get anything from Horford. So were you similarly enthused? Yeah, I love Drew. There's some stuff with his shooting in the playoffs where it's been pretty bad, or you're like, is that just because you can't make shots at the playoffs, or is it just what happened statistically? I mean, it does happen. I mean, if I'm getting the negative parts out of the way, like, yeah, sure, he's a little bit older. The big situation is a huge question mark. I can't believe what they got from Horford last year. So I don't know if you can just pencil that in, because he was way beyond expectations, at least for me, or for what I had for him. But when you can add Drew for those pieces, and I'm with you, when Rob Williams is right, it's really, really nice. But you can even tell when he's out there, you're like, is something wrong with him again? The number of times that I've watched Rob Williams in Celtics games, I'm like, I know he's out there, but wait, something. And every time, I thought Marcus Smart was trying to end his career with some of those Valley U passes, depending on how he lands, like, wait, is this going to be the last one we ever see from him? So to me, it makes a lot of sense. By the way, on that Rob point, my dad texted me after the trade, he's like, oh, I hate giving up Rob. I'm like, you complained about Rob more than anybody I know in my life. You would text me from the games going, oh, Rob's just off in the, Rob just walked in the tunnel again. I don't know what happened. I like just Brian Barrett had a tweet, 32 games, 29 games, 52 games, 61 games, 35 games. Those are Rob Williams' last five years. It just wasn't reliable enough for a team that's trying to win a title. I interrupted you. No, you didn't, because it's a it's a really good point, because what's going to happen? I mean, you know, it's just there's there's definitely like if Prozingis is hurt, it feels like the whole thing is screwed up and there's a really good chance that that could happen. But if you're talking about like the allocation of minutes and the talent that's getting those minutes, well, the talent that's getting those minutes just went up with Drew Holiday. And that's, I think, the simplest way to look at it. So they they turn Marcus Smart and Grant Williams and Brogdon and Rob Williams into Drew Holiday and Prozingis, more Derek White minutes, more Peyton Pritchard minutes. And then there's a little bit of an X factor with who's going to be like that ninth man, tenth man, kind of big four slash five person, maybe, or somebody you trade like that. I feel like that's the easiest position to pick up in January and February. The big thing for me is I think White was ready for a bigger role. I think White and Holiday together is magnificent as a as a backcourt. And I read some stuff today. They think White's going to come off the bench. I don't know if I see that. I think I would come out of the gates with White and Holiday and Tatum and Brown in the center and maybe bring to your Horford point, like maybe bring Horford off the bench and try to really try to rest his minutes during the season and be careful with him and make him a bench player. And then the playoffs reassess. But I think that having those four guys all together, they complement each other so well. You can play basically any kind of defense against any perimeter guy in the league. Those four guys and they're just better. I mean, there's there's just no way around it. They're better. He's a much better player than Marcus Smart was last year. And you know, you made that point about the shooting. He'd have those games. He'd go 5 for 22 in a playoff game. You know, he'd eat. But I do feel like he was asked to do a little bit more than maybe what he's supposed to be doing. I don't feel like he's a pure point guard. Right. Now you have White who can handle most of the ball handling. He could play off the ball and they're going to get the best version of him. Awesome locker room guy, too, by all accounts. I mean, really like a beloved teammate wherever he went. And I think they wanted to change the chemistry a little bit. I think this was an unhappier team than maybe they led on to the outside world last year. Yeah. Look, I definitely like him more than Smart. And you know, to be totally fair, when I'm looking at like the Lillard side of this trade last week before we knew the second piece of Drew and upgrading from Drew to Lillard, I'm going, OK, well, now you're top two in Milwaukee's like in the argument for the best two in the NBA. OK, that's that's really what this league has been about now post the teens decade where it was the arms race for your top three. It's you look around the league, you go, OK, who's got the two best? Like, let's come up with the five teams who have the two best. And with Lillard and Giannis, that's like a whole nother level. So when I was looking at it, it's like Lillard compared to Drew, you know, Drew is not somebody you're expecting to break down a defense off the dribble. Right. Oh, we're stuck into the shot clock, like make something happen where Lillard can literally do anything right in the final second of the shot clock and still you feel like it's still a decent look. So that part of it's a huge upgrade. But he's number three to four as far as an offensive option. He also and I don't know, this is just me talking out loud as I thought about the trade. It's pretty clear that when Boston's offense gets into trouble in the playoffs, like Tatum and Brown haven't figured out a way to kind of unlock it other than just like I can already picture my head like I know what the Tatum move is going to be. I already know what the Jaylen Brown move is going to be. And I don't know if Smart was able to make their life easier with the playmaking. And then sometimes I even think Smart would go like, well, if you guys are going to screw around, like I might just I might just be green light on this possession. I don't think Drew necessarily plays that way. So, you know, it's probably silly for me to think that like Drew is going to be the Steve Nash type who comes in and sets up all these great late playoff possessions. But there may be something in lessening the burden of those guys feeling that they have to do or defaulting to just forcing the issue as much as they do in the playoffs. I like how much ball handling they have, to your point, because they were talking about experimenting a little bit more with Tatum as a point forward this year, which makes me nervous a little bit just because, you know, he's six foot nine. I'm not sure that's the best use of him, but they seem pretty adamant. Like we feel like he could be a little bit more of a creator. And then you think White can do that. To me, White is the key to this season now, because if, you know, other than the Porzingis health thing, which I almost I'm going to knock on wood, but part of the reason they made all this movement and they got rid of Brogdon and Smart was I think they really wanted to push White to be the lead ball handler for them and a creator. And there's some unbelievable pick and roll stats with him. And just if certain people set him a pick in the way, even in the Miami series, he was one of the only guys who could create offense. So I think they have that plus they have Drew. And the reality is for Drew, this is this might be the deepest offensive team he's been on. Right. When you think back to like it was on some pretty weird Philly teams and some pretty weird New Orleans teams, and even when Milwaukee was at its best, it was really just Giannis, Middleton and Drew. And that was it. This is there's more shooting and playmaking around him than I think we've seen. Maybe it'll be a slight upgrade on the flip side. He doesn't have Giannis, who was the second best player of the century, probably, but I like the spot for him. It seemed like he really wanted to go to a contending team and I don't really know who they were competing against because for reading through some of the reports, it just seemed like Philly. I don't even know what the trade was for them. Portland wanted at least one piece back, probably two that they could do their keeper package. They wanted picks back. Golden State wasn't even in it. And it didn't seem like OKC ever threw their hat in the ring, which I was shocked by because I felt like OKC was the sleeping giant of this whole thing with Dort and some picks and just say, fuck it, let's let's see if we can be really good this year. So it seemed like it was down to Boston. The Clippers, they just had more assets. I don't know if Portland keeps Rob. He's on a good contract. They already have Ayton. My guess is that they're probably spinning him. Does it make sense that both of those guys? My sense is they're going to try it out, you know, but, you know, the thing with Rob is like, if you think he's an awesome defensive player that's just out there, like he's awesome when he's used a certain way. And once Boston unlocked that two years ago, where they stuck him on a non shooting big and then you could see other teams adapt to it, it's like, well, let's stop giving them an out where Rob can just roam off of this dude that's not a shooting threat, because I think that, you know, this is just going to turn into like now that he's not here. But I mean, have you listened to us talk about Rob Williams at all last couple of years? He you know, I don't I don't think he's I know what the defensive metrics are. I know the on off stuff. It's a big reason why I think the analytics models always love Boston. Like sometimes you look at him and be like, hey, I think this team's good, but like these numbers are overwhelming. This is like, yeah, it's it's so far like as if there's this huge gap between Boston and everybody else, which I never really felt going back these last two years. But you're if Chauncey Billups and you think like, OK, Rob Williams is going to go out there and like wreak havoc, it's like, well, he has to be used a certain way. So maybe they feel like that's in defensive support to Aiten. And with Aiten, you know, I have I'm not quite sure what to expect. Well, this is the one thing he's probably going to put up huge numbers because he's not going to have older dudes that have a higher status in the league that go, I'm sick of passing it to you. So he's probably going to get more touches. We'll probably see like early Aiten numbers and like twenty to ten for the first six weeks of the season. Yeah, I'm with you. Yeah. Like he'll he'll he'll put up some big numbers there. But, you know, defensively, it's really about his competitiveness because there were times I think going back two years ago when we were thinking about him with that run of the Suns, the finals, you're like, look at this guy. Like he can switch out on the smaller players. You can rotate. But it's all about the way he's wired. And I think long term, unfortunately, like we already kind of know the answer there. Like I don't think all of a sudden now you start playing with some fierceness after being in the league this long. So he was the fifth option on that team and there seemed to be real resentment toward him in that whole Phoenix culture of like, why doesn't he just realize we don't need his offense? We need him to basically rebound and block shots and crash the offensive boards. I think his attitude was probably twenty five years old. I want to be the best player I can be. I already went to a finals. I don't that's not I think I could do more than that. So I don't I don't think anyone was necessarily wrong. As I said, on my Thursday pot, I just hated the trade for Phoenix. I just thought they got the poopoo platter back. You know, they got some some some spare ribs back and a couple of egg rolls and and that's it. But they did not get an entree back. And I think he's an entree on the right team, whether he's a guy that made sense for them. I don't know. But I know that they didn't get a good haul for him. I think Rob, for his contract, for what his talents are, is a really intriguing piece for them or for another team, because you could trade for him. And it's not like a daunting salary. Right. I think he's in what is what is it, like 15 a year or something like that? No, it's a really good. Yeah. I mean, it was a really low cost extension and he's still a pretty young guy. Yes, so.
Game of Crimes
A highlight from 118: Part 1: Marc Cameron - From Deputy US Marshal to Arliss Cutter to Tom Clancy
"Well, again, here we are. Episode 118. Murph, we have 118. This is like surviving 118 attempts on our life. We have dodged all the bullets. Our listeners are loyal and they protect us. You guys protect us. So welcome back again. Episode 118, Game of Crimes. Thank you, thank you, thank you guys for joining. I am your host with the most hair. Just got it cut, Morgan Wright, here literally with my partner in crime. Murph, who's almost bald and your hair looks like crap. My hair doesn't look like crap. It looks like crap. No, it doesn't. It looks marvelous. I've got so much. She says, the person who cut my hair said, when you come in after six weeks, it's like most people's eight weeks or 10 weeks. So I get a lot of hair. Hey, when I go in and get a haircut, it takes like three minutes. I'm in and out. There you go. You sure that's a haircut? Be nice now. I'm just starting this. Please, please don't pay attention to him, ladies and gentlemen. I'm sorry, okay. We're trying to gain some professional help. Yeah, whatever. All right, how's that working out for you? Okay, let's just do some quick housekeeping before we get started. Hey guys, head on over to that Apple Spotify. Hit those five stars. It helps us out a lot. Remember, the other thing we learned that too, guess what guys? Not only did Stitcher go away, Google Podcasts is going away. So you're gonna have to, if you're on Google, make sure you pick a new service to keep listening to us. Make sure you hit that subscribe button too so that you do not miss. Deliver to your digital inbox every week on a Monday and Tuesday, these episodes like this one's coming out. Also head on over to our website, gameofcrimespodcast .com. In fact, when we talk about our guest today, Mark Cameron, we'll talk about his book. That'll be listed on there. And we've got a lot of great stuff on there. So make sure you head on over there. Gameofcrimespodcast .com. Also follow us on that thing they call social media at Game of Crimes on Twitter, Game of Crimes podcast on Facebook and the Instagram. But Murph, I'm telling you, we're gonna have some fun on Patreon. Patreon .com slash Game of Crimes. I have a 911 call coming up for you. Of all the 911 calls, I guarantee you nobody, nobody has taken a call like this before that I'm aware of ever, anywhere. Looking forward to hearing this one. Holy cow. There's gonna be a couple. This one, I don't know if I can make an entire case out of it, but I've listened to it. And just the sheer confusion on the call taker, they've never been presented with this before. So we'll have to talk about that. But guys, we just did our warden of the throne. It's a unique little thing we're doing now. Rather than just taking one topic, Murph brings two topics. I bring two topics. We're allowed to get into things that are catching our interest for the previous month or some stories. So we just did one talking about Philadelphia and the looting, Iran, and what they call the Iranian experts initiative. People have had their security clearance suspended. You talk about some tragic cases up in New York, the Bronx, baby dying at daycare center, and the recent death of that CEO by a sexual predator who should have still been in prison, but wasn't. Right, in Baltimore. So those are a lot of good things. We've got Q &A coming up, 911, what's your emergency case of the month? So guys, all good stuff. You don't hear this anywhere else, but on patreon .com slash Game of Crimes. But the other place you gotta be though too, Murph, our favorite mafia queen with the iron fist with the velvet glove. You gotta head on over there, watch what Sandy Salvato is doing with our Game of Crimes fans page. Just go to Facebook, type in Game of Crimes fans, answer a couple easy questions, get admitted to the Inner Sanctum in YouTube. You will see what goes on behind the scenes, behind the curtains. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain because that's one of our favorite people happening over on Game of Crimes fans. It's a lot of fun. There's a lot of humor there. A lot of dark humor too. If you saw some of the stuff people have posted, I hope you guys, I hope your healthcare plan supports you with an employee assistance program. I'm telling you. I don't know what you're talking about. Here's what I'm talking about. You know what I'm talking about now because you know what time it is. Guess what? I'm gonna ask you, do you know what time it is? Guess what time it is? Come on, give me a clue. It's time for Small Town Police Blotter. Hey, this because in honor of our guest that's coming up, Mark Cameron, the author, we'll talk about him in a second, but he went from Texas, lives in Alaska. So I thought we should have an Alaska theme. There you go. For our Small Town Police Blotter. So Murph, gotta ask you. Yes. This comes out of the Alaska Dispatch News. You know, a lot of fishery stuff, a lot of crabbing, a lot of lobster stuff, a lot of that goes on in Alaska, doesn't it? Mm -hmm, mm -hmm. So you have an idea. You go, hey, we're gonna take a crabbing boat and we're gonna convert it into a floating bar and strip club. What could go wrong, right? Oh my gosh. So 54 -year -old Darren Byler of Kodiak and his 46 -year -old wife, Kimberly, own the Wild Alaskan, a former crabbing boat that's been converted into a floating bar and strip club. Apparently it's doing pretty well. They've been running the business since June, but now they're in serious legal trouble and Murph, it's not for stripping. Uh -oh, what is it? This gives new meaning to, you know, why this is on a crabbing boat. So if you're out there floating, you have to provide facilities for people to use, right? So if they use the facilities, number one and number two, you should probably find a way to take care of that other than dumping it into the ocean. Oh, come on, come on. So they were just indicted by a federal grand jury for improper disposal of human waste after they were caught dumping feces from their bathroom into the harbor, as they say in Maine, into the harbor. Instead of taking the waste tanks to the proper places on shore, they both could be facing up to one year in jail and $25 ,000 in fine, but that's not the worst part. The worst part is the Coast Guard said they lied about dumping the tanks, and if they're convicted of that, making false statements to the Coast Guard investigators, that could get them five years in prison and $250 ,000 in fines. Cha -ching. I tell you what, you gotta do a lot of stripping to make that kind of money. It's a shitty situation they got themselves in. It's terrible. This whole thing just stinks. It stinks, man, stinks to high heaven. Tell you what, you know, you had a turd in one hand and wishes in the other. Anyway, we could go lots of places with that, so. These people didn't move to Alaska from Florida, did they? I don't believe so. Thank goodness. Hey, but I went back into the archives too, so I pulled some articles out of the Alaska News Archives, the Fairbanks Daily News Minor. This comes to us January 21st, 1955, and I'm telling you, the stories are hilarious. These are quick hits. And not always, but this is what's in Alaska. This is what's important in Alaska, January of 1955. The Tokyo police hire pretty hostesses. Tokyo police, grieved by complaints that their headquarters is unattractive, have assigned four pretty girls to meet people at the building's two entrances. Officials have also ordered the women to take charm courses. That is what's important in the Alaska, you know, the Fairbanks Daily News Minor. The other thing you gotta do here, be prepared. And this comes to us, it's out of Tucson, Arizona, but in the Fairbanks Daily News Minor. This is 1955, a 15 -year -old boy with a loaded .38 caliber pistol in his waistband was removed from high school class here by police. His explanation for carrying a gun, a couple of those teachers were giving me a hard time. Well, geez, okay. Okay, but this one though, this one has gotta be, this is it. This is St. Monaface. I believe this is Alaska, no, Manitoba. This is St. Monaface, Manitoba. All right. Police were certain the worst of the winter is upon them. Pete Nikoluk has started his annual jail term for vagrancy. Nikoluk has spent the past 21 winters in jail on vagrancy charges. Police says he always manages to get arrested just before the coldest part of the winter sets in. Who says this guy's not smart? Three hots and a cot, and I get through the toughest part of winter. Oh my goodness. That's, well, you know, that's prior planning, I guess. Prior planning prevents piss -poor performance, the 6Ps. There you go. Yep. You ask my children, they'll tell you what the 6Ps are. That's right. Murph, now, we'll finish up with this. I went and looked at what are some of the strangest laws in Alaska, and these are definitely Alaskan. It is illegal to whisper in someone's ear why they are moose hunting. Okay. It's legal to shoot bears. However, it is illegal to wake a sleeping bear for the purpose of taking a photograph. Why would you wake a sleeping bear? Isn't that the truth? Here's another thing, and I don't get it. It is considered an offense. It's illegal to feed alcoholic beverages to a moose. What? Why? Huh. Apparently, it's also illegal to sell stun guns to children. That one, I kind of get that makes sense. Well, if you're in Fairbanks, Alaska, if you love a vuvuzula, remember what they did during the World Cup. You know, you blow those things that make a lot of noise. Those annoying things? Yeah, it's illegal to blow a horn in a manner that disrupts the peace. Good. Yep. So, it's illegal to fatten up a sheep, cow, or pig within the city limits of Fairbanks. Are we talking about people or animals? Well, maybe it's meatball, and you'll have to listen to her. You'll have to listen to our warden of the throne. All right, it is also a crime to speak so loud that you offend a sensitive person enough to make him, her, or her leave if you're in Fairbanks. What? Okay, well, hey, be nice. That's just be nice. And you can only carry a concealed slingshot if you have received the appropriate license. The license. Do you have a license for that slingshot? All right. Oh, okay. I didn't know you had to have that. But Murph, this is the craziest one. This reminds me of an episode of you and JP on Narcos where you were accused of doing this, not a moose, but it is an offense to push a live moose out of a moving airplane. Well, you know, I gotta agree with that, but have you seen how big a moose is? How do you push it anywhere? Well, how do you get it into the damn airplane to begin with is what I wanna know. And who wants a moose, a pissed off moose, in their airplane? Uniquely Alaskan. So Mark Cameron, as we get into this, and again, we wanna thank our buddy, Patrick O 'Donnell, Cops and Writers. Go listen to his podcast. Hooked us up with him, but Mark Cameron is an interesting dude, moved from Weatherford, Texas to Alaska. And we're gonna talk about his book that was just released. It's an Arliss Kutter novel, Breakneck, by Mark Cameron. But the interesting thing too, Murph, was he wrote the last seven Tom Clancy novels. And this is a guy that used to be a marshal, which most of the reports were saw bad guy, put him in jail, you know? Not extensive reports in the marshal service. Saw a fugitive, arrested, same.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"A time of Lectio Divina for the discerning heart. Monday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments surrender all the cares and concerns of this day to the Lord. Say slowly from your heart, Jesus, I trust in you. You take over. Become aware that he is with you, looking upon you with love, wanting to be heard deep within your heart. A reading from the Holy Gospel according to Matthew chapter 18 verses 1 through 5, 10 and 12 through 14. The disciples came to Jesus and said, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? So he called a little child to him and set the child in front of them. And he said, I tell you solemnly, unless you change and become like little children, you'll never enter the kingdom of heaven. And so, the one who makes himself as little as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who welcomes a little child like this in my name, welcomes me. See that you never despise any of these little ones, for I tell you that their angels in heaven are continually in the presence of my Father in heaven. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more, give the Lord an opportunity to speak to you. The disciples came to Jesus and said, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? So he called a little child to him and set the child in front of them. Then he said, I tell you solemnly, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. And so, the one who makes himself as little as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who welcomes a little child like this in my name, welcomes me. See that you never despise any of these little ones, for I tell you that their angels in my name are continually in the presence of my Father in heaven. What did your heart feel as you listened? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more, through him, with him, and in him, listen to the word. The disciples came to Jesus and said, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? So he called a little child to him and set the child in front of them. Then he said, I tell you solemnly, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. And so, the one who makes himself as little as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who welcomes a little child like this in my name, welcomes me. See that you never despise any of these little ones, for I tell you that their angels in the kingdom of heaven are continually in the presence of my Father in heaven. What do you hope to carry with you from this time with the Lord? Let us now close with a prayer to the Father that Jesus gave us. Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who love us, but deliver us from evil. Amen.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
A highlight from Monday of the Twenty-Sixth Week in Ordinary Time A Time of Lectio Divina for the Discerning Heart Podcast
"A time of Lectio Divina for the discerning heart. Monday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments surrender all the cares and concerns of this day to the Lord. Say slowly from your heart, Jesus, I trust in you. You take over. Become aware that he is with you, looking upon you with love, wanting to be heard deep within your heart. A reading from the Holy Gospel according to Matthew chapter 18 verses 1 through 5, 10 and 12 through 14. The disciples came to Jesus and said, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? So he called a little child to him and set the child in front of them. And he said, I tell you solemnly, unless you change and become like little children, you'll never enter the kingdom of heaven. And so, the one who makes himself as little as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who welcomes a little child like this in my name, welcomes me. See that you never despise any of these little ones, for I tell you that their angels in heaven are continually in the presence of my Father in heaven. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more, give the Lord an opportunity to speak to you. The disciples came to Jesus and said, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? So he called a little child to him and set the child in front of them. Then he said, I tell you solemnly, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. And so, the one who makes himself as little as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who welcomes a little child like this in my name, welcomes me. See that you never despise any of these little ones, for I tell you that their angels in my name are continually in the presence of my Father in heaven. What did your heart feel as you listened? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more, through him, with him, and in him, listen to the word. The disciples came to Jesus and said, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? So he called a little child to him and set the child in front of them. Then he said, I tell you solemnly, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. And so, the one who makes himself as little as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Anyone who welcomes a little child like this in my name, welcomes me. See that you never despise any of these little ones, for I tell you that their angels in the kingdom of heaven are continually in the presence of my Father in heaven. What do you hope to carry with you from this time with the Lord? Let us now close with a prayer to the Father that Jesus gave us. Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who love us, but deliver us from evil. Amen.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"A time of Lectio Divina for the discerning heart. Sunday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of this day to the Lord. Say slowly from your heart, Jesus, I trust in you. You take over. Become aware that he is with you, looking upon you with love, wanting to be heard deep within your heart. A reading from the Holy Gospel according to Matthew chapter 21 verses 28 through 32. Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people, what is your opinion? A man had two sons. He went and said to the first, my boy, you go and work in the vineyard today. He answered, I will not go, but afterwards thought better of it and went. The man then went and said the same thing to the second who answered, certainly, sir, but did not go. Which of the two did the father's will? The first, they said. Jesus said to them, I tell you solemnly, tax collectors and prostitutes are making their way into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you a pattern of true righteousness, but you did not believe him, and yet the tax collectors and prostitutes did. Even after seeing that, you refused to think better of it and believe in him. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more, give the Lord an opportunity to speak to you. Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people, what is your opinion? A man has two sons. He went and said to the first, my boy, you go and work in the vineyard today. He answered, I will not go, but afterwards thought better of it and went. The man then went and said the same thing to the second who answered, certainly, sir, but did not go. Which of the two did the father's will? The first, they said, Jesus said to them, I tell you solemnly, tax collectors and prostitutes are making their way into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you, a pattern of true righteousness, but you did not believe him. And yet the tax collectors and prostitutes did. Even after seeing that you refuse to think better of it and believe in him. What did your heart feel as you listened? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more through him, with him, and in him, listen to the word. Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people, what is your opinion? A man had two sons. He went and said to the first, my boy, you go and work in the vineyard today. He answered, I will not go, but afterwards thought better of it and went. The man then went and said the same thing to the second who answered, certainly, sir, but did not go. Which of the two did the father's will? The first, they said, Jesus said to them, I tell you solemnly, tax collectors and prostitutes are making their way into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you, a pattern of true righteousness, but you did not believe him. And yet the tax collectors and prostitutes did. Even after seeing that you refuse to think better of it and believe in him. What touched your heart in this time of prayer? What did your heart feel as you prayed? What do you hope to carry with you from this time with the Lord? Let us now close with a prayer to the father that Jesus gave us. Our father who art in heaven hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day, our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us and from evil. Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
A highlight from Sunday of the Twenty-Sixth Week in Ordinary Time A Time of Lectio Divina for the Discerning Heart Podcast
"A time of Lectio Divina for the discerning heart. Sunday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of this day to the Lord. Say slowly from your heart, Jesus, I trust in you. You take over. Become aware that he is with you, looking upon you with love, wanting to be heard deep within your heart. A reading from the Holy Gospel according to Matthew chapter 21 verses 28 through 32. Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people, what is your opinion? A man had two sons. He went and said to the first, my boy, you go and work in the vineyard today. He answered, I will not go, but afterwards thought better of it and went. The man then went and said the same thing to the second who answered, certainly, sir, but did not go. Which of the two did the father's will? The first, they said. Jesus said to them, I tell you solemnly, tax collectors and prostitutes are making their way into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you a pattern of true righteousness, but you did not believe him, and yet the tax collectors and prostitutes did. Even after seeing that, you refused to think better of it and believe in him. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more, give the Lord an opportunity to speak to you. Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people, what is your opinion? A man has two sons. He went and said to the first, my boy, you go and work in the vineyard today. He answered, I will not go, but afterwards thought better of it and went. The man then went and said the same thing to the second who answered, certainly, sir, but did not go. Which of the two did the father's will? The first, they said, Jesus said to them, I tell you solemnly, tax collectors and prostitutes are making their way into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you, a pattern of true righteousness, but you did not believe him. And yet the tax collectors and prostitutes did. Even after seeing that you refuse to think better of it and believe in him. What did your heart feel as you listened? What did you sense the Lord saying to you? Once more through him, with him, and in him, listen to the word. Jesus said to the chief priests and elders of the people, what is your opinion? A man had two sons. He went and said to the first, my boy, you go and work in the vineyard today. He answered, I will not go, but afterwards thought better of it and went. The man then went and said the same thing to the second who answered, certainly, sir, but did not go. Which of the two did the father's will? The first, they said, Jesus said to them, I tell you solemnly, tax collectors and prostitutes are making their way into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you, a pattern of true righteousness, but you did not believe him. And yet the tax collectors and prostitutes did. Even after seeing that you refuse to think better of it and believe in him. What touched your heart in this time of prayer? What did your heart feel as you prayed? What do you hope to carry with you from this time with the Lord? Let us now close with a prayer to the father that Jesus gave us. Our father who art in heaven hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day, our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us and from evil. Amen. Amen. Amen. Amen.
Crypto News Alerts | Daily Bitcoin (BTC) & Cryptocurrency News
A highlight from 1416: Bitcoin Will Reach $148,000 Soon - Pantera Capital
"Welcome everyone to the number one daily Bitcoin pod. Let's go. In today's show, I'm going to be breaking down the latest technical analysis as Bitcoin shorts keep burning as Bitcoin price seeks to hold 27 ,000 and quoting the high priest of Bitcoin, Max Kaiser, you can only create absolute scarce perfect money, irreproductability once everything after Bitcoin is a failed attempt to reproduce it. And additionally, everything after Bitcoin, it can be argued is an unregistered security. This is the position taken in El Salvador and the economy is booming. Homicides are virtually non -existent. Tourism is skyrocketing and Santander Bank attributes this to Bitcoin maximalism. Also breaking news, Sam Bankman -Fried's trial dates have officially been revealed. FTX founder to stand trial for over six weeks. We're also going to be discussing that FTX fortune of 3 .4 billion coming soon in crypto liquidations and what it means likely for the crypto market. We'll also be discussing VanEck releasing two Ethereum ETF ads ahead of the possible Monday launch. I'll be breaking this down for you as well as the SEC delays the spot Bitcoin ETF decision for BlackRock, Invesco and Bitwise. Bummer. Also in today's show, I'm going to be sharing with you Bitcoin price predictions for next year, the year of the Bitcoin halving in 2024. I'll be sharing insights from major banks to hedge funds, including Pentera Capital who predicts we're going to reach $148 ,000 Bitcoin price in 2024, which is around the corner. We'll also be taking a look at the overall crypto market, all this plus so much more in today's show.
Unchained
A highlight from Heres How Sam Bankman-Frieds High-Stakes Trial Could Play Out - Ep 549
"Even though each of these charges, if you look at the DOJ press release says, oh, it contains a maximum sentence of 20 years or five years, whatever, it's not going to be consecutive. It'll be concurrent. So the estimate I'm getting from various attorneys that I've spoken to over the past few weeks is it'll probably be somewhere in the, you know, 10 to 20 year range. Hi everyone. Welcome to Unchained, your no hype resource for all things crypto. I'm your host, Laura Shin, author of The Cryptopians. I started covering crypto eight years ago, and as a senior editor at Forbes was the first mainstream media reporter to cover cryptocurrency full time. This is the September 29th, 2023 episode of Unchained. Thinking of launching your own stable coin? Start with the open source stable coin studio toolkit on Hedera. Start your journey at Hedera .com slash Unchained. Shape tomorrow today. With the crypto .com app, you can buy, trade and spend crypto in one place. Download and get $25 with the code Laura. Link in the description. Arbitrum's leading layer two scaling solution offers you ultra cheap and lightning fast transactions, all with security rooted on Ethereum. Visit arbitrum .io today. Toku makes implementing global token compensation and incentive awards simple. With Toku, you get unmatched legal and tax tech support to grant and administer your global team's tokens. Make it simple today with Toku. Today's guest is Nick Day, Coindesk's managing editor for global policy and regulation. Welcome, Nick. Thanks for having me. The trial for former FTX CEO Sam Bankman -Fried starts next Tuesday, October 3rd. There's been a lot happening pre -trial. For instance, Sam has requested release from jail multiple times and repeatedly been denied, including as recently as Thursday morning. My personal thought was that it seemed like all these requests that the defense was putting in at this critical juncture right before the trial was supposed to begin was maybe not the best use of their time, but that's just my personal opinion. I'm not a lawyer. Why do you think they made this such a point of focus in the last few days? Yeah, so I'm actually coming, you know, I was in the courthouse just a few hours ago where this very issue was brought up and the defense's arguments were, well, the first time we asked, it was for pre -trial release. You know, this was right after Bankman -Fried was remanded into custody in mid -August. The second time was, you know, they were asking the appeals court to overrule the judge's decision to remand him. And they lost that as well. In court today, the defense said, well, you know, now we want to ask for during trial, which is why we waited until this week to make that request. And they say that they want to, you know, the circumstances are different. They're not asking for Bankman -Fried to be released from jail in the weeks leading up to trial. Now they're saying, well, you know, during the trial, we're going to have to talk to him and check with him about defense witness testimony and cross -examination and things like that. So that's why we're making this request. And the judge didn't really find that compelling. And why do you think the judge has stuck to this position of keeping Bankman -Fried in jail? So in the judge's words, there's a couple of different reasons. One being that Bankman -Fried has had ample time to look at the defense materials. You know, one of the arguments was there are something like 1300 exhibits expected over the course of the trial. And the judge asked today, you know, were these all prepared and shared with you before, I think he said September 8th, so earlier this month. And the defense, they said, yes, we've seen all of this. We've had access to all of this. Bankman -Fried was out on bail for about seven and a half months. And so the judge's argument is, well, he's had time to look at this. You know, there's no surprises here. And he said that the defense has the chance to talk with Bankman -Fried in the Metropolitan Detention Center, where he's currently being housed weekends during days that there are no trials. So, you know, the trial is not every weekday. It's going to be most weekdays. And he said, you know, you have the time, you have the opportunity, you are able to talk to your client. You're not really losing a whole lot. But he added kind of a, you know, made this ruling where Bankman -Fried will even be presented to the courthouse early on trial days where there's certain witness testimony that has to be discussed and let the attorneys just talk to him before the trial begins on those days. So he's saying basically, you know, you have opportunities to talk to your client and I'm going to give you, you know, more time to do so, but I'm not going to let Bankman -Fried out of jail. So the main focus next week as the trial begins will be jury selection. Tell us what you think that process will be like. It definitely will be interesting. I think it's probably going to be very boring from just kind of an observer perspective because it's a long process and we're going to be just sitting there watching this judge ask each individual, you know, have you heard of FTX? Have you heard of Bankman -Fried? What do you think about cryptocurrencies? But it's going to be very interesting because this is the part where we're 12 or so people who are going to determine whether or not Bankman -Fried spends the next, you know, 10 to 20 years of his life behind bars. And so I'm expecting to see maybe as mixed selection. I think if you pluck a random group of New Yorkers off the streets, some of them may have heard of cryptocurrency, most of them probably will not have, and they're going to be tasked with deciding whether or not one of the biggest figures in crypto committed fraud on the way up and on the way down. Something that was interesting to me was the prosecution said that they expected jury selection to take the better part of a day. I've seen some legal opinions that it will take longer than that. What do you think could potentially happen there and why do you think some analysts are saying that it would take longer? Yeah, no, I've spoken to a number of lawyers as well ahead of the trial, you know, where at Coindes we're trying to do a lot of kind of preview coverage, basically saying here's how it might go down. Everyone I spoke to said it will probably take a couple of days. Part of that is because this is a fairly notorious case. A lot of people will have heard about Bankman Fried and presumably formed some kind of opinion that would, you know, disqualify them from being a juror on the trial. I'm not sure where the DOJ is getting their estimate from. It's very possible that, you know, through the questionnaires that the jury pool is sent through the, you know, the kind of the mass selection process or deselection process that the judge engages in, maybe that streamlines a big part of it by kind of, you know, reducing or like immediately filtering out the people who are most blatantly, you know, either knowledgeable or biased or otherwise have their own preformed viewpoints about the case. And so the jury selection might just be focused on, you know, those individuals who have made it through those initial filtering processes. But that's speculation on my part. I honestly am not sure if it is a better part of the day that we could see opening statements as soon as, you know, next Wednesday, October 4th, which would be a pretty rapid start to the trial. And Coindesk did some work to try to suss out what it is that lower Manhattan New Yorkers might say if they were randomly picked for a jury. What did you discover there? Yeah, no, so Coindesk's Dylan and Victor went to Manhattan, downtown Manhattan to the financial district, and literally just went up to people and said, hey, we're with Coindesk. Have you heard of FTX? Have you heard of Sam Bankman -Fried? And a fairly large part of this group just hadn't heard about it. You know, they weren't familiar with it. They weren't comfortable talking about crypto. They weren't familiar with crypto. And of those who were, you know, I think they found a fairly even mix. There were some individuals who had heard about Bankman -Fried, some individuals who had only heard about crypto, some individuals who were very knowledgeable. They actually found a, you know, a Yahoo anchor who was the most knowledgeable about it naturally as, you know, order covering the financial space. But they also found people who were looking for jobs in crypto, people who were investors in the space. By and large, it seems to, you know, a lot of the people they spoke to just weren't interested or talking, interested in talking about crypto or in, you know, being part of this, being part of crypto. So if that is a representative sample of who we'll see next week at the jury pool, it'll be interesting because we'll see a large, potentially large, jury pool of people who aren't familiar with crypto. Again, on one of the biggest, you know, bang in on one of the biggest figures in the space. Recently, the defense proposed certain questions that it would ask the jurors and the government said that they felt these were quote unquote intrusive. What were some of the questions that were proposed and what was the government's response? Yeah. So, you know, the background here is both the DOJ and the defense team filed their proposed jury questions to help filter potential jurors. The defense team in particular had a number of questions about, you know, how these potential jurors felt about things like effective altruism, about political donations, about ADHD and people who have ADHD. And the DOJ response was really, you know, they felt that some of these questions, for example, about effective altruism and about political donations seemed kind of primed to, or designed to prime the potential jurors to think, oh, well, Bankman Fried was trying to do all of this in service of this effective altruism philosophy. Therefore, he was trying to raise money to donate to better the world or designed to try and prime the jury to think, okay, well, you know, political donations is fine. So these allegations about breaking the law in the way he tried to donate funds maybe is, you know, overreach or whatever. And in the intrusive part, you know, treating just kind of this question of ADHD and whether or not people were, you know, involved with individuals who had it or the DOJ just felt that these questions were really designed to try and shape how the jury would see Bankman Fried as opposed to just kind of gauge their existing biases. And so the DOJ opposed these questions and I think we're still waiting to see for sure if there's any public response on the judge prior to jury selection on Tuesday. All right. So in a moment, we're going to talk about different legal strategies that the defense might pursue. But first, a quick word from the sponsors who make this show possible. Arbitrum stands at the forefront of innovation as the premier suite of Layer 2 scaling solutions, bringing you lightning fast transactions at a fraction of the cost, all with security rooted on Ethereum. From DeFi to gaming, Arbitrum 1 plus Nova is home to over 500 projects. And with the recent launch of Orbit, Arbitrum welcomes you to build your very own tailor -made Layer 3 or an Orbit chain. Propel your project and community forward by visiting arbitrum .io today. Toku makes managing global token compensation and incentive awards simple. Are you designing your token compensation plan and grant templates with multiple law firms? Are you managing cliffs, vesting and taxable events in a spreadsheet? Are you distributing tokens to your team manually? With Toku, you get unmatched legal and tax tech support to grant and administer your global team's easy -to -use token grant award templates, vesting tracking via online dashboard, tax withholding integration with payroll, automated distributions, great employee experience. Make it simple with Toku. Learn more at toku .com. Looking to venture into the world of stablecoins? Explore the open -source stablecoin studio toolkit on Hedera. Whether you're building the next big thing in Web3 or an enterprise banking and payment provider, Stablecoin Studio simplifies stablecoin issuance and management, keeping you at the forefront of on -chain finance. With seamless integration into commercial custody providers and KYC services and built -in proof of reserve functionality, Stablecoin Studio streamlines development and time to market. Harness the power of stablecoins by visiting hedera .com slash unchained. Back to my conversation with Nick. Recently, the defense did propose a number of witnesses, but the judge denied most of them. Who were these proposed witnesses and why were they denied? Yeah, so the DOJ and defense both had a number of proposed expert witnesses. The defense in particular had a number of individuals that they said could speak to everything from the terms of service that FTX operated under to the FTX software to just rebutting certain DOJ witnesses. The judge basically said he agreed with the DOJ in rejecting all of these proposed witnesses. There were seven. He did allow the defense to call for four of them later on, but they have to meet certain requirements and fill out certain disclosure forms first. A big part of the judge's reasoning was the witnesses had just not adequately explained what they wanted to testify about or what they would say, and so they didn't have or he didn't have enough information to allow them to testify, which was functionally the DOJ's argument as well. That being said, some of these proposed witnesses are intended to act as rebuttal witnesses to DOJ's witnesses. I know we're saying the word witnesses a lot, but that's what it comes down to is four of these witnesses could come back and respond to, you know, either FTX intercircle members who are testifying on behalf of the DOJ. One of the potential witnesses that the defense can call forward is someone who can speak to the actual technical software underlying the, you know, FTX program, again, in response to DOJ witnesses. The judge did completely ban, for example, a British barrister who was supposed to explain the FTX terms of service as well as someone who was supposed to speak to kind of the crypto industry at large, saying that, you know, those witnesses and that proposed testimony seemed a bit too far afield from what the case would be about and could probably do more to confuse the jury than to clarify anything. And SPF's team also wanted to block a proposed government witness that was also denied. Who was that and why did the judge deny that motion? The DOJ proposed a University of Notre Dame professor to testify about some forensic analysis he did on FTX financials. The defense objected. They said that this witness would basically just reiterate the DOJ's claims, the allegations, but the DOJ argued that he was doing his own analysis of the data he had access to. And so it wouldn't just be stating the DOJ's claim. He would be providing his own expert insight based on his own work, you know, examining the databases that he had access to. And the judge agreed with that and said that based on what he'd saw and based on what the witness disclosure had provided, the witness was likely just speaking to his own expertise and looking at actual data as a third -party expert witness might do. And so those witnesses are allowed right now. We're still waiting on the full and final witness list, but we now know that there are probably at least a dozen witnesses that we're going to hear from over the next six weeks. And who are the ones that stick out to you on that list? I think the cooperating witnesses, so the FTX inner circle, that's former Alameda Research CEO Carolyn Ellison, former FTX director for engineering Nishat Singh and Gary Wang. I forget which one of them was the director of engineering. The other one was a fellow executive, but you know, these are the three individuals I think we're going to hear from probably first, maybe. Might hear from them as soon as next week, not certainly the week after. They're the ones who were in it, right? They were involved in this. They were part of FTX. They were part of the highs. I think we're going to probably hear from them, you know, how FTX might've fallen apart. I know from court filings, we know that DOJ wants to ask Carolyn Ellison about the FTT token and allegations that Sandbank and Freed was directly involved in trying to argue for Alameda to take a large sum of it and to potentially allegedly manipulate the price. So I think that testimony is going to be really interesting just because, again, it's the firsthand account of what happened. We're also probably going to see the defense try and discredit these witnesses to the extent possible, right? Straight out of the gate saying, well, you know, you weren't threatened with jail if you didn't testify in turn against your former boss. So I imagine we're just going to hear arguments like that from the defense during cross -examination, but either way, I think this is going to, you know, those are the three witnesses I think we're looking forward to most right now. And then once we're past that kind of initial surge of FTX insiders, that's when we'll get to kind of more, I don't because I don't think that is the right word for it, but, you know, people who are looking at it from kind of the, you know, again, forensic analysis perspective, people who are going to be able to kind of dig through and say, all right, well, you know, we've looked through the smoking remains and here's what we found. And I think that will also be interesting because it'll be really a third -party perspective on, you know, here's how this thing was set up and here's where things may have gone wrong or here's where things may have fallen apart. And getting a third -party perspective on that I think is going to be really fascinating because there'll be, I assume, a bit more objective about it than, you know, people who built it and worked on it maybe could be. One other kind of motion that happened this week that was pretty interesting or development, I should say, is that the judge did allow SPF's team to ask some of the witnesses about their drug use. What do you think will be the significance of that line of questioning? I think that goes back to, you know, a witness, cooperating FTX inner circle member saying, while we were at FTX, Sam directed us to manipulate FTT, whatever, you know, just speculating what someone could say. And the defense comes back and says, well, you know, are you sure that's what he said? Were you high at the time of these conversations or were you engaged in recreational drug use during the time you were running this company? You know, if I'm a member of the jury and I hear, okay, well, everyone was partying and on drugs and doing weird stuff or, you know, potentially, you know, in an altered state of mind, that might shape how I view the, you know, the defendant, the verdict, the whole case. So the judge did say that prior to making those, you know, kind of questions, the defense has to notify the prosecution and the judge about it. So it's not going to be a case of like they'll blindside the witnesses about this, but I imagine that's going to kind of go back to this effort to try and say like, okay, you know, Bankman Fried wasn't doing something wrong on his own or intentionally, it's just that things fell apart, but they were well -intentioned. The defense is going to attempt to, I think, pin some of the blame on legal advice that Bankman Fried received. How effective do you think that argument will be at trial? That's a really hard question to answer. I think the problem that the defense has is there's really no denying that FTX fell apart and it fell apart in like a very dramatic fashion, right? The day it filed for bankruptcy that evening, what, a couple hundred million dollars or tens of millions of dollars worth of crypto was stolen, I think. I forgot the exact amount, but you know, it was a pretty dramatic way to cap off what was already a chaotic week. So the problem the defense has is they can't say, well, FTX is fine. And so they're leaning on this advice of counsel defense. Their argument is going to be, you know, Bankman Fried was well -intentioned. He told his lawyers everything he wanted to do, and he did everything they told him to do. And so because it all fell apart, you can't really pin that on Bankman Fried. You have to look at the advice he was given and the information he was acting on. And so I guess part of the problem that the defense might have here is did they share or did Bankman Fried share everything he wanted to do with his attorneys? Did the attorneys have all the information and did he do exactly everything the way his attorneys told him to? And I don't know, you know, I'm sure we'll see answers to those questions over the next, you know, six weeks or so, but that seems to be kind of how that might play out. And it's going to be an interesting argument for sure. But again, I think it goes down to the central problem of FTX for sure collapsed and how you respond to that. One other issue is that the judge did rule that the prosecution could mention SPF's political donations. And there are charges specifically related to that that will be tried in a separate trial next year. So why were those allowed in this case? So this is where we get into what has become one of the new fun parts of being a court reporter in this case is Bahamas extradition treaties. So the original indictment that Bankman Fried was charged with back in December of 2022 did include campaign finance violations as one of the charges. But because it did not appear in the charging document that the Bahamas Police Department had, there's a Bahamas National Police, something like that, Bankman Fried's defense team successfully argued that they could not bring that charge right now because he had agreed to be extradited on the first seven charges, which were wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit securities and bodies fraud, et cetera. So what it seems like is going to happen is the prosecution is going to try and fold all of that into all the political donation stuff into the other charges, into the wire fraud charges, and say, well, you know, we have the evidence, we have the allegations, and here's what you have to look at what that means for the next trial. And, you know, you're absolutely correct. There is another trial currently tentatively scheduled for either March or April 2024, next spring, either way, where we will be going through all of this again. But a lot of that is dependent on the Bahamas. And yeah, we could probably talk about that for another hour if you wanted to. All right. Well, we'll leave that for another episode. But one thing I did want to ask about is earlier in this interview, you said that his sentence was likely to be in the range of 10 to 20 years. And obviously, you know, there's many charges and we don't know which ones he'll be found guilty of and which ones he won't. But how are you coming up with that estimate? So yeah, I should definitely be more precise there. So I personally am not a lawyer or an expert in this. I have spoken to a number of lawyers about this. And what they said is, if you have a defendant who is found guilty, so these assumption here is that he is convicted on at least one of these charges. But if he's found guilty on even several of the charges, because all of the conduct is similar, because it's all kind of identical conduct at the core, a judge, when making a sentencing determination, will basically fold all the charges into each other, right? All the conduct. And so even though each of these charges, if you look at the DOJ, press release says, oh, it contains a maximum sentence of 20 years or five years, whatever. It's not going to be consecutive. It'll be concurrent. So the estimate I'm getting from various attorneys that I've spoken to over the past few weeks is probably be somewhere in the, you know, 10 to 20 year range. Some estimates came down as low as five years, some as many as 36 years. But they all seem to base that on just kind of the allegations, the charges themselves combined with the amount of money allegedly lost, which is more than 50 million, combined with the severity and all of that. Yeah. And so 50 million is sort of like some thresholds because I think it goes in levels of severity. Yeah. And the higher the number goes, the longer the sentence. However, that's the largest threshold, obviously. Yeah. I literally looked up the federal sentencing guidelines, which by the way, is a very confusing document. I did not understand it. So I asked someone else to explain it to me, but yeah, it's the different thresholds that you mentioned. And it starts with the, I think the thousands range and then just kind of escalates up and 50 million seems to have been the uppermost that they had. So it's 50 million plus. I think the allegation is something like 10 billion loss from FTX. So 10 billions, a hair more than 50 million. Just as many multiples. So that will probably be kind of the way they calculate it, probably. And again, this is dependent on if he's convicted on one or more charges and all sorts of stuff. Yeah. Okay. Well, we will have to see how all that plays out. Thank you so much for explaining all of this on Unchained. Thanks for having me again. Always great to talk to you. Yes. Same here. Don't forget next up is the weekly news recap today presented by veteran crypto reporter and Columbia University night budget fellow, Michael Del Castillo. Stick around for this week in crypto after this short break. Join over 80 million people using crypto .com. One of the easiest places to buy, trade and spend over 250 cryptocurrencies.
The Podcast On Podcasting
A highlight from Ep383: Best Morning Habits Podcasters Should Practice - Ahna Fulmer
"Podcasting would be a good option. And interestingly, it combined a skill that I didn't realize I'd been honing, which was interviewing an interesting element of interviewing as well as podcasting. This goes into the next question, but what makes a successful one? And it is learning the art of asking better questions. Most hosts never achieved the results they hoped for. They're falling short on listenership and monetization, meaning their message isn't to help you grow your listenership and make money while you're at it. Get ready to take notes. Here's your host, Adam Adams. Hey, podcaster. It's your host, Adam Adams. And we're with Ana Fomer today, who is a client and a friend and somebody that inspires me. And I think you'll also find yourself a little bit inspired at the end of the podcast. She's got a show, obviously, or else how could we help her? And it is called, I said it wrong earlier. I said, I don't know what I said, but it was not right. It's imperfectly empowered, imperfectly empowered. I love it. And you also are doing something new in your business. It's kind of recent and it's about waking up early and having a morning routine. I think I would like to hear a little bit about, and maybe the listener would, what's important about a morning routine and why did you pick those two things? Yeah, I think one of the first things that's important to clarify is that waking up early is not natural for about 50 % of the population. And I happen to be one of those 50%. And I was, it was about four or five years ago in 2018, I was a busy working mom. I had three kids. My youngest was one and I was a dual certified nurse practitioner working in emergency medicine at the time. I was also the assistant medical director for two stroke programs that I helped create from the ground up. On top of that, we were renovating houses. We were in our second fixer upper at that time. That was like a side hustle for my husband and I. And on top of that, I had just started a home DIY decor blog just for fun because I didn't have enough going on. But it was at that point that a lot of us reach as moms where I desperately needed time for me. I was sick of waking up every morning, rushed and feeling like I was starting stressed and behind before I even got going for the day. And so I decided I was going to start an early morning routine because it was the only time I could find quiet. So I hustled to make this happen. And I fought this news button for about two years and really reprogrammed my biology to fall in love with the early morning quiet. And I fell in love with it so much and realized how many other women desperately want the same thing. But when it's not natural, it's incredibly difficult. And there's no program out there teaching you how to become an early morning person ultimately. So as a health and fitness coach, I ended up leaving bedside medicine and my online presence as a blogger actually turned into a virtual health and fitness professional, which is really neat. Now I help people prevent disease instead of treat disease, which is exciting. But what happened is I realized there was this gap for many of us as women in the health and fitness space because we go hard for six weeks and we transform our life for six weeks. But it's sort of like a bandaid on a gaping wound because we haven't created a habit of life change. And not that that six weeks wasn't important, but what we need is we need another program to partner with those fitness and nutrition programs who are able to also teach people how to create a habit to help sustain and offload some of the stress during our day so that we can really focus on nutritional changes, which is a full -time job for any of you. Adam, you've certainly undergone a lot of health transformation. You know, I mean, tracking macros in and of itself is like a full -time job. So the bottom line is we are in the process of creating this premier virtual program for busy women to learn how to become an early morning riser, establish a routine they can sustain that starts with being not doing. We don't get up earlier to hustle harder and do more. We're trying to press pause and actually be still and renew our hearts and minds in the calm of the quiet. And then we get a time efficient, effective workout done before our kids wake up. So that is early morning habit. If that's not cool enough, we are also an adoption fundraising program. My passion is to help women really manifest the sense that you are worth investing in because you have the power to impact the world because you've been made in the image of God and that alone makes you enough finding your value, not in what you say or do, but in the God that created you and really tapping into that to manifest this idea that you have the power to change the world. The small choices that you make for yourself have a massive impact. So when women successfully complete the program on the app, my company gives them back a significant portion of the money they paid for the program to give forward to an enrolled and adopting mom. Who's raising funds through life song for orphans. We are also adopting. So this is another heartbeat of mine. So anyways, there's a lot going on behind the scenes over here, but early morning habit, we're ready to change women's lives and bring more children home to their forever families. I like it. I have a question on the 50%. You mentioned that there's about half of us who it's not natural for us to wake up early. It's not normal. It shouldn't be normal maybe for us to wake up early. It's not our in our body, but that we can fix it. Is that part's true, right? And you fixed it. I'm living proof of that. Yes. What I'm curious about is who is your 50 % that it's not natural for or is it anybody? It's absolutely anybody. And to be clear in early morning routine is beneficial, whether you are a man or a woman, it's just my avatar specifically for this program. We are really honing in on busy women. And what I have found is it tends to be moms who recognize the need for an early morning routine. And this would have been true of me as well. It wasn't until I had kids. I mean, we think we're busy before kids. And then you have kids and suddenly you realize your time is no longer your own. And so you have to create time. And as there's only 24 hours in a day for most of us women as moms that tends to be before our kids wake up, if we want to maintain our sanity, not to mention our health. So my perfect avatar for early morning habit is really busy women. And a familiar business adage is you are best positioned to serve the person you once were. And so for me, that is I think I'm quoting Rory Vaden. He might have been quoting somebody else I don't even know. But for me, that was the busy Christian mom who wanted to start her day grounded in the truth of God's word, and then wanted to pound out a workout. But I knew I needed to start being still because I was constantly surrounded by chaos and noise of society, my own family, the own expectations I put on myself. So busy Christian moms is the very hyper -targeted audience, but it's really, it's just busy women. Any busy woman benefits from this, whether you're an early morning riser by nature or not, to answer that part. Okay, perfect. I was going to ask again, but no, perfect. So in the two big parts are reading the scripture and getting a workout in. So I've got this friend, he wrote a book about early morning, Hal Elrod. He's got this thing called Savers, and I think that must be like six things to do in the morning. Why do you pick those two? And is there anything else that you might think of adding on to it? It's a great question. And it's an interesting dynamic that a man would create six things to do, and a woman is going to create two. And I'll tell you why I think that's an important thing to highlight is one of the issues we frequently face as women is simply that it's the to -do list. We are constantly exhausted by our to -do lists, and we also feel the pressure in our society, as well as from ourselves, to do more, to hustle harder, and ultimately to be more. We think that we need to prove ourselves and our home or outside of our homes in order to reach a standard of success, however we're defining that. Our family is well put together and our kids are thriving. Maybe that's our definition. Maybe it's financial. Maybe it's the professional goals. But the problem is we are constantly moving, and the reality is, scientifically speaking, socially speaking, all five elements of our health, there are ways to prove that one of the best things we can do ourselves is to actually be still, practice the art of being still. So when we teach our community how to start their day being, not doing, we are specifically honing in on three things. Truth, or God's word, prayer, some people might practice meditation, and then gratitude. And there is a scientifically proven concept called emotionally intelligent gratitude practice, and that is what we teach our community how to implement. Whether you are somebody who prays or doesn't, emotionally intelligent gratitude can change every single aspect of your health and ultimately your life. So between that and a workout, I want women to be able to create a habit they can sustain, and if you go much beyond two things in the morning, I'm already peaced out because I'm looking at my to -do list, and I need it simple and sustainable. I love the simply part. I have a question, emotionally intelligent gratitude. In 2018, it was December of 18, I was overstressed, overworked, trying to do too much, and wasn't making all the best choices, wasn't working out enough, and that's where the health journey that you mentioned earlier came, but it was more like a life journey. There was a lot that changed, not snapping at the kids as much. But it started with something called gratitude. Now I didn't have you in my corner at that time, so I didn't know what emotionally intelligent gratitude was. What I would do is, when I'd wake up, I would try to express some gratitude before I got out of bed. When I went to bed, I tried to close my eyes and express some gratitude before I slept, and almost any time that I got overstressed, things were just compounding on me, and I wasn't sure what to do, and I was thinking about how stressful it was. I was thinking about how bad it was. Then I would have to re -hone during the day a few times and just, I guess, talk about my many blessings, because all of us have so many blessings. We just got to think about them, like the relationship with our kids, the relationship with our sweetheart, the air that we have to breathe, the roof over our heads, etc. So I would, when it was hardest to feel gratitude in my busiest of times, I would also just take a moment to try to close my eyes or even open them and think about what I'm grateful for. It ended up making a humongous impact on who I am as a person, and I still try to do it. Not as much, to be honest. I wish I did. I should. I should definitely get back to doing it more often every morning, every night, and any time I'm stressed. But I don't know what emotionally intelligent gratitude would mean if I was even close to it or not. What would you say to a listener who heard that and doesn't know what it means? Yeah, so I should also clarify emotionally intelligent gratitude practice is a concept that I have created, so this is proprietary to my program, but why I have clarified something, and I've taken gratitude practice and, one, infused a lot more science into the actual practice, so there's more intention to it, but one of the concerns with gratitude practice that I see for a lot of us is that it starts to border on good vibes only, and anyone who's listened to my podcast knows I am not a fan of that concept. The good vibes only concept is detrimental because what it is subconsciously telling us to do is to keep hustling harder and ignoring the stress, ignoring the fact that we're an absolute mess, ignoring the fact that our family is not perfect, that we actually feel terrible, we're anxious, we're stressed, so good vibes only is almost this concept of just ignore the bad, we're only going to focus on the good, and that's not true for everyone practicing gratitude, but it is very, very easy to start to lean to that corner of gratitude as though it is simply only focusing on the good in our life because, if we're honest, we are terrified of acknowledging the fact that we're actually a hot mess. Clearly not the corner I stand in as my podcast is quite literally titled Imperfectly Empowered, I'm all about the concept of embracing the mess, so where we incorporate emotionally intelligent gratitude practice is that in the actual practice of gratitude, before we are even diving into the very specific things that we are grateful for, we are first improving our emotional intelligence. Intellectual intelligence, we're familiar with IQs. It is something that, for the most part, cannot be developed. You have a naturally given IQ. Obviously, circumstances can depress somebody's ability to fully live out or up to that IQ potential, but typically speaking, it does not change. Emotional intelligence is something that can be grown, developed, and worked on, and it has three components. It is number one, being able to identify emotions, and this is where something as simple as an emotions wheel comes in. If you have a kid who struggles with behavioral issues or emotions, I have one of those kids, these emotion wheels come into play because you see like the little happy, do you feel happy, do you feel sad, or there's like these wheels that I like that have all kinds of emotions described on them, which is really helpful because half the time we don't even know how to put the words to what we feel. You're like, I don't know, sad, or it might be more specific than that. So number one, emotional intelligence includes being able to identify what you're feeling, but number two is being able to communicate what you're feeling, which is an entirely different concept. So number one, being able to identify, number two, being able to then communicate that, which is called emotional literacy, and then number three, this is truly where gratitude comes into play, being able to convert uncomfortable emotions, the emotions that we try to suppress and ignore and push down, being able to embrace them, and then convert them into a positive or more comfortable experience. That is the most difficult part of emotional intelligence. But it is also where gratitude comes in. Because what it's saying is basically it's me sitting at the restaurant and feeling really frustrated because my kids have effectively turned the table into a playground.
CoinDesk Podcast Network
A highlight from SBF TRIAL: 09/26 UPDATE
"Welcome to The SBF Trial, a Coindesk Podcast Network newsletter bringing you daily insights from inside the courtroom where Sam Bankman -Fried will try to stay out of prison. Follow the Coindesk Podcast Network to get the audio each morning with content from the Coindesk regulation team and voiced by Wondercraft AI. Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman -Fried has traded his palatial Bahamas bunker for a bunk bed as he transitions from lux to lockup. Bankman -Fried is staying at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, one of the nation's most notorious correctional facilities. Conditions at the jailhouse where Bankman -Fried has resided for six weeks since losing his bail are a far cry from the former billionaire's old Caribbean stomping grounds. The internet is slow, the living quarters dirty and the cafeteria offering slim, his lawyers have argued. He is subsisting on bread and water, sometimes peanut butter, the defense told a federal judge last month. Former residents of the famous facility and their lawyers, however, have said there's much more to tell about the notorious lockup. They've likened conditions at the jailhouse to those faced by prisoners of war and Hannibal Lecter in the horror movie The Silence of the Lambs. But what's MDC really like on the inside? Here's what we know about the infamous detention center. MDC Brooklyn is a large prison complex encompassing two buildings and housing more than 1 ,600 male and female prisoners, many of whom still await trial. As a mixed security facility, the MDC houses inmates with a variety of criminal histories, including terrorism, organized crime and drug smuggling. A report from the Bureau of Prisons shows current inmates include Juan Orlando Hernandez, a former president of Honduras, who has pleaded not guilty to drug trafficking charges, and Guo Wengui, a Chinese businessman who has pleaded not guilty to fraud charges. Others who have previously served short stints at the jailhouse include Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell and pharma bro Martin Shkreli. Bankman -Fried likely has a rigid schedule at MDC. Inmates wake up at 6 a .m. and must make their beds, mop the floor and tend to their trash. An orientation handbook from the facility shows. From there, inmates like Bankman -Fried might go to work around the facility, serving as prep cooks in the jail's kitchen, providing janitorial services throughout the complex, or assisting at the facility's maintenance shop. At 11 a .m., they eat lunch. Dinner is served at 4 p .m. Meals are supposed to consist of a meat such as turkey, a starch like rice and a vegetable or fruit, but prisoners are actually served cold cuts, sandwich bread, moldy pound cakes and other unidentifiable foods from the kitchen, according to a petition on Change .org. If Bankman -Fried, a vegan, doesn't like what's offered at the cafeteria, he can use his $150 weekly commissary allowance to buy peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, worth $3 .65 each. He can buy up to two of those per day, according to the complex's rules. In between meals and work, inmates are allowed breaks. However, there's no prison yard for recreational activities at MDC. Instead, Bankman -Fried will have to hang out with his fellow inmates in indoor community rooms, where they can play cards, talk and watch television. Bankman -Fried can also take showers during his downtime in one of five separate individual shower stalls, according to former inmates. However, lines to use the showers are often long. At the end of each day, Bankman -Fried may retire to a communal dorm with rows of bunk beds, according to former prisoners' accounts. However, it's also possible he has been put in protective custody and has his own cell. Either way, getting some shut eye may not be easy. Fluorescent lights keep the dorm and other rooms across the jailhouse semi -lit 24 hours a day. Inmates' writings show. In addition, inmates can often be heard shouting across cell blocks at all hours of the night, former prisoners have said. Uncomfortable heat and cold is another potential issue Bankman -Fried may encounter during his stay at MDC Bankman -Fried in Brooklyn. According to several local news reports, many parts of the MDC lack heating and air conditioning units are sparse throughout much of the facility. Want to follow along? Sign up for Coindesk's new daily newsletter, The SBF Trial, bringing you insights from the courthouse and around the case. You can get the podcast each day right here by following the Coindesk Podcast Network. Thanks for listening.
Mike Gallagher Podcast
A highlight from Week in Review - Episode 24
"Cycling isn't just cycling. It can be cycling or cycling or even cycling. Peloton isn't just one thing. We have classes that will ease you in and classes that will make you sweat and a range of instructors so you can find your match. Whatever you're in the mood for, we can get you in the zone. See for yourself with a worry free 30 day home trial. Visit one Peloton dot com slash home dash trial terms apply. Welcome to the Mike Gallagher Show Week in Review podcast. It's just about everything that's happened this week. I'm Eric Hanson, and we begin with President Trump, who made some controversial statements about abortion this week and called Ron DeSantis's six week abortion ban a terrible mistake. We might as well get this out of the way. We got President Trump with an answer to Kristen Welker on NBC's Meet the Press and her debut as the new host, which gave a lot of ammunition to Trump haters who want to hurt him and try to wreck his chances of becoming the nominee in 2024. This is an interesting dilemma that Republicans have. Here's the dilemma. Pro -life fighting for the sanctity of those unborn babies, the sanctity of their lives, the sacredness of the innocent. That's a centerpiece that's foundational for the Republican Party. And whether we like it or not, this particular debate that we're having in America over abortion is crushing us at the ballot box. And Donald Trump, I believe, was trying to address that with Kristen Welker on Meet the Press. Let's get it out of the way. I've been dreading this all weekend. Well, it wasn't all weekend. I mean, this first broke, I think, Saturday. They gave a little preview of his answer. I don't love his answer, but I also don't love the way Trump critics are pouncing on him, claiming he's not pro -life. I got into a big knockdown drag out, as I expected I would with my friend Mark Davis in Dallas, because Mark is now hell bent on proclaiming that Donald Trump is not pro -life. And he's saying that because of this exchange with Kristen Welker yesterday on Meet the Press. If a federal ban landed on your desk, if you were re -elected, would you sign it at 15 weeks? Are you talking about a complete ban? A ban at 15 weeks? Well, people are starting to think of 15 weeks. That seems to be a number that people are talking about right now. Would you sign that? I would I would sit down with both sides and I negotiate something and we'll end up with peace on that issue for the first time in 52 years. I'm not going to say I would or I wouldn't. I mean, the sanctus would really design a five week and six week ban. Would you support that? I think what he did is a terrible thing and a terrible mistake. But we'll come up with a number. But at the same time, Democrats won't be able to go out in six months, seven months, eight months and allow an abortion. Now, there are people who took that answer and proclaimed that Donald Trump is not pro -life, like it's important to proclaim or make some kind of declaration that he is not pro -life. I believe it's ridiculous to claim that a guy who's the only president to ever attend the March for Life, the guy who promised to get Roe v. Wade overturned because that was terrible federal. That was a terrible federal ruling and appointed Supreme Court justices who did just that to claim that Donald Trump is not pro -life is preposterous. It's absurd. It's virtue signaling. And perhaps it's just. The opportunistic way you chalk up some points for Ron DeSantis, because clearly Team DeSantis is pouncing on Donald Trump over this remark. I believe two things can be true at the same time. You can be pro -life and you can acknowledge that this issue is killing us at the ballot box. And we're losing elections. So President Trump has some campaign trouble to manage. Meanwhile, our current president can barely navigate a simple speech. If you miss Joe Biden at the U .N. this week, well, buckle up. Remember when Trump went to the United Nations and gave a really good speech and the media freaked out and said how goofy and wild and unpresidential and unprecedented it was, they had a complete meltdown and he gave a really decent speech. Compare that to the appearance of Joe Biden yesterday at the U .N. Now, even as we have all our institutions and drive creative new partnerships. Let me be clear. Certain principles of our international system are sacrosanct. Both Biden and Kamala Harris do the same thing when they say, let me be clear, run for the hills, because when they say, let me be clear, you're going to see nothing but mud and gibberish. I mean, babbling incoherently in front of the United Nations. And if that wasn't wild enough, you've got the Ukrainian President Zelensky. He marches in with his entourage. You know, I used to say I was torn about Ukraine. People that I respect insist that we have got to continue to fund the Ukrainian battle with Russia, that the American people have to help Ukraine with its border. We dare not have a wall for our own border, but we better, by God, help Ukraine with theirs. We better fund them. We better give them the missiles they want. We got to give them the ammunition they need. We need to. We got to stop Vladimir Putin. And if you push back against that, you're a stooge for Vladimir Putin. You're a Putin puppet. Just ask Tucker Carlson. When Tucker dared to express the belief that the American people have bigger fish to fry than funding Ukraine, he was thoroughly denounced and renounced as a stooge of Vladimir Putin. So there goes Zelensky marching into the UN yesterday with his bodyguards and his entourage, and he gets up to that podium. And what he said was pretty stunning. I expected he would stand at that giant podium in front of that ugly green background at the UN and talk about the need to fund his military. Talk about Russia's aggression against the Ukrainian people. Talk about Ukraine's place in the whole worldview of things instead. We got this. Even though humanity is failing on its climate policy objectives, this means that extreme weather will still impact the normal global life and some evil state will also weaponize its outcomes. And then people in the streets of New York and other cities of the world went out on climate protest. We all have seen them and when people in Morocco and Libya and other countries die as a result of natural disasters and when islands and countries disappear underwater and when tornadoes and deserts are spreading into into new territories and when all of this is happening, one unnatural disaster in Moscow decided to launch a big war and killed the tens of thousands of people. No wonder loony leftists have the Ukrainian flag in their front yard. You would think the Ukrainian president had bigger problems than climate change. Meanwhile, the United Auto Workers hit the picket lines this week. They made a few modest demands like a 40 % pay raise in a four day work week. Speaking of the UAW strike, I watched Sean Fain, the president of the United Auto Workers Union on the Sunday morning news shows. And you know, I admit I'm not a real big fan of unions. In fact, quite the opposite. I kind of think that unions have helped destroy many aspects of our economic system. In fact, it's a commonly held view that pension plans that used to be in place contributed to the decline of the U S automakers. Well, now the UAW is demanding pensions come back. They want the old fashioned defined benefit plan. And as Bloomberg points out, pensions are not worth striking over. You know what I find interesting about the UAW dispute? I heard all the talking points about how the corporate executives at the big three automakers make too much money. That's a Bernie Sanders mantra. That's an Elizabeth Warren trope. The executives make too much. You know, a company can be producing billions of dollars of revenue, but the Bernie Sanders of the world want to cap what an executive at one of those companies earns, which I always find so fascinating. It's as if they want to equate the guy or gal on the assembly line with the big automakers. Well, they're not the same. I mean it'd be nice if everybody made the same amount of money in life hate to break it to your life doesn't work that way. Some people make more than others and admittedly a lot of it is luck. I don't deserve the living that I make, but I'm very blessed to make a good living. There are people make a lot more than I do and I don't begrudge them anything, but simply because somebody that might have a show on television might make 10 times what I make. I don't think I should make what they make simply because we do the same essentially same thing. I mean, and Democrats always have such hypocrisy on this issue. Like somebody just texted me, how many homes does Bernie Sanders have again? It's more than one. But here's something that I noticed when I heard Sean Fain, the president of the UAW talk about executives compensation and how we're not making enough and we're taking steps backwards. I mean, the fact of the matter is the union gave up the defined benefit pension plan in a previous negotiation. Now they want it back. When you give up a benefit like that, you're not going to get it back. That's not realistic. And here's what I'm interested in. You know what was missing from all the coverage of the UAW strike? They never talk about what auto make auto workers make. Now I kept hearing how somebody on the assembly line can't feed their family. Really? What do they make? I kept hearing that Sean Fain kept saying the auto workers have taken three steps backwards. Really? How much do they earn? I know what they want to make. They want a 40 % pay increase and they want to only work four days a week. Now that's a pretty good deal.
The Financial Guys
A highlight from Growing Unease: Current Administrations Approach to Security and Travel with David Bellavia
"What do you think they're doing with cash, right? What deal do you make where someone says, I'll bring a box of money to you? Yeah. What do you, it's, this is a state sponsor of terrorism. Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests and my fellow citizens. America's comeback now. starts right Welcome back Financial Guys podcast. Mike Speraza in studio live today with a guest in the studio. I haven't had this in a long time. Staff Sergeant medal of honor recipient David Bellavia joining me for about a half hour today. David, thank you for joining us. Thank you for having me. I appreciate it. Absolutely. So I'm going to stick based on your background. I'm going to stick with a lot of military stuff today and I want to start, we'll go all the way back to the beginning of the Joe Biden presidency. The Afghanistan withdrawal, in my opinion, did not go very smoothly. I'm sure many people listening agree. What were your overall thoughts of that withdrawal and how it actually ended up happening? I know we lost, you know, sadly lost 13 soldiers in that, in that withdrawal. People say we went off the wrong air base. People say that we shouldn't have gone out in the middle of the summer. There was a lot of different things there. What were your overall thoughts on that? I think it's like the worst day in American history since Market Garden. Just absolutely. And the reason why it was so difficult was it was totally unnecessary. So let's rewind to the Obama trade, Bull Bergdahl and the three first round draft picks. They get Marshall, they get MacArthur and they get Patton that end up the resurgence of the Taliban. These men not just go back to the enemy, they go back to the battlefield. They're in power when the government falls. You have misinformation coming from the White House that the president of Afghanistan is leaving with billions of dollars on his plane, which wasn't true. And then you leave the equipment, the cash. There's no recovery. We're getting reports of sales of American equipment left in Afghanistan in Southeast Asia. We're moving material across the globe. Our children will fight and pay and have to atone for these miscalculations. Let's talk about that. You being in the military and you knowing that area too, why did they just find it the easiest way out to just say, you know, just leave that billion dollar billions of dollars of equipment there and not think, again, if it was me and I'm speaking that someone that's never been in the military, but if it's me and I'm the president, I'm thinking, OK, I don't want to leave all our weaponry there. I don't want to lose any of my men. Number two. And number three, I want to make sure that everybody knows when and how we're getting out of there. And it just felt like poof. One day they said we're getting out of here. Well, it's because the military didn't make any of those decisions. I mean, look, Millie, it can criticize him. You can criticize Secretary of Defense worthy of criticism. However, none of these individuals are making decisions. This is about NGOs on the ground. This is about the State Department. So you've got Bagram Air Base, the equivalent of JFK. You've got Karzai International Airport, the equivalent of Teterboro. Right. Why would you ever do an exfil out of Karzai International Airport? It makes absolutely no sense. It's tactically unsound. But and then you've got all the ISIS -K. We retaliate from the murder of 13 of our bravest and we drop a bomb on a guy delivering water. He's on our payroll and we kill children on that. Then we take out Borat on a tuk tuk driving around like that wasn't even really what was happening. It's just a den of lies. And Tony Blinken and Jake Sullivan, all the heroes that brought us, you know, the Bergdahl deal, the Iran nuke deal. This is these. They the State Department is running all foreign policy, including what the DOD used to run. Well, that's I was going to say. I mean, I know Biden's the president, but do you blame him at all or is it everybody underneath him that, you know, maybe was giving him bad information? And again, some of these decisions, David, is Biden even involved in some of these decisions? Like, I don't even know anymore. Is he around? Is he paying attention to anything going on? Well, I mean, just from the press conferences, it was apparent he didn't know what was going on. And the great irony is that they actually were predicting that Ukraine was going to be invaded and, you know, no one believed them. So it's like you can't influence your friends. The allies don't trust you. The enemy doesn't respect you. You know, I mean, you've got Ben Rhodes is really proud of this State Department. Susan Rice loves what they're doing. But, you know, again, Americans died. And, you know, and what is the perfect culmination of the adventure in Afghanistan? Looking at your watch at Dover Air Base when bodies are coming home. I mean, nothing could you couldn't ask for a just it's it's a debacle. Yeah. And it's sad that that's that's the leader of our country there. Let's move in. You brought up the Ukraine there. So the Russia Ukraine conflict will get to Zelensky in a minute. He is as we speak in New York City right now. But so Trump's in office. We don't see many of these conflicts or any conflicts actually started under his watch. And then we have the Biden administration come in. And a year later, we have Russia invading Ukraine. Why did this happen and why? Why the timing of February of 2022? So let's go back to when we were fighting ISIS. Trump engaged and destroyed estimated some say 300 members of Wagner forces. But those were Russian nationals. We engaged. We destroyed them. What was the response from Putin? Nothing at all. So what do people in that section of the world, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, what do they respect? They respect power. They respect authority. You're not going to get any respect if you don't engage the enemy when they present themselves. I don't understand the calculus of again, I'm trying hard to figure it out. I don't get it. I don't. You know, Romania and Hungary and Poland, you're letting them unilaterally decide whether or not they want to send reinforcements into Ukraine. That's an act of war. If NATO members engage the enemy, all of NATO is engaged against the enemy. Poland doesn't unilaterally make that decision. Hungary and Romania don't unilaterally make that decision. We can't even articulate what the mission is. And if you look, go to the Institute for the Study of War, there's a plug for them. Check out their overlay from when the battle started, when the war started with Russia. And tell me what success this offensive in Ukraine has produced. I mean, let me ask this question, because I get confused. The answer is nothing. I asked this on Twitter, X, whatever it's called, all the time. What is the end game and how do we get there? Because all I see the answer is, hey, just blank checks. Hey, just write a check. Hey, here's a billion. Hey, here's 20 billion. Hey, here's another 10 billion. I don't actually see a look. I mean, like anything, right? If I write a business plan of what I want to do in 2024, my goal is X. I write down my steps to get X. I don't just write down X and say it's going to happen. I don't really know. And then the answer always is, well, we have to fight. We have to back Ukraine. Okay. But when does that end? Because the Afghanistan war and the war in Iraq lasted 20 years plus, right? And was there a real end to it? I don't know. That's where it gets frustrating for me, Dave, where I'm like, how do we know what the end game is? Do you win or lose? When does that happen? I don't know. I don't know. At least you're thinking about it. And I have fear that our leaders aren't, and that's the problem. So here's what this comes out. You're going to get a negotiated settlement out of Ukraine, right? But you talked about the billions of dollars that we're spending and giving to Ukraine as a blank check. First of all, Zelensky visited Ukrainian soldiers in the United States. Did you know that there were wounded Ukrainian soldiers in the United States? I did not know that. Well, today he visited them. So what's happening there? So that's a cost that no one is putting on the ledger. So now let's look at the blank check that Ukraine is getting. And by the way, I'm pro Ukraine. I want to fight communists all day and night. So let's punch Putin hard in the face. However, you're giving them a blank check and you're giving them munitions. Now here's the problem. We have to replace those munitions. Those munitions were purchased for 20 year global war and terror. And let's be honest, inflation is involved. So what you purchased for $10 is now $17. So you're not just giving them the money. You're giving them the equipment and the munitions that you have to replace yourself at the value of what is valued today. We haven't scratched the surface for the amount of money. CBO absent at the wheel. No one is tracking this. 2024 can't get here fast enough. How does this work, though, when you talk about some of these NATO nations coming together and making decisions, but us not just giving weaponry, giving everything money, whatever we're giving there? Is that not an act of war, too, though, David, at some point? We're continuing to fund Ukraine continuing the war in Ukraine. I mean, that to me seems like we're backing a war. Well, I mean, by the letter of the law and NATO charter, it's not. But here's the problem. It's schizophrenic because we were told that what was an offensive weapon was going to mitigate, you know, that wasn't going to help peace at all. So we went from, I don't know if they should get tracked vehicles to I'm not sure an artillery piece is what they need to high Mars rockets being launched. And let's be honest. I mean, the Ukrainians are I mean, the payload that they're going through, what you would have to have cataclysmic casualty numbers to be able to to the spandex that they're doing on the ground that they need to replace Patriot. If you're going through thirty five Patriot to, you know, missiles, I would expect to at least the C 20 makes that are shot down. They're using them for air artillery. They're using there for indirect fire. I don't know what they're doing, but this is going to end with Don Boss going to Russia. This is going to end with that land chain that Putin wanted through Crimea. And again, our friends in NATO, what are they even doing for Ukraine? What? Look, if you they said that Trump wanted to kill NATO, Biden did it. Right. Biden did it. And now Germany. And so Putin was selling oil at thirty dollars a barrel. What's it at ninety six? Yeah. He's making more money than he did before. And he's financing a war and killing innocent people. You mentioned before, too, and I think this is a good point. Everybody on the left and I'll say the media, the establishment, whoever you want to say, says that if you don't agree with the war in Ukraine, you're like pro Putin. Right. And that's just the most outrageous thing in the world, because I agree with you. I feel for the people of Ukraine. I don't want this for them. I don't want this for innocent people. However, at some point, the world's every every one of the world's problems can't be America's problem when we have a border crisis. And then I think they said yesterday ten thousand people came across. They got, I think, eight thousand of the ten thousand. But you see the numbers day over day. It's a problem. We have crime that's rampant. We have overdoses that are at record numbers. We have we have suicides at record numbers. At some point, we have to maybe just think about ourselves and not everybody else, because if we fall, sadly, I think the world falls at that point. Amen. The thing that I would add is I love the way the Ukraine refugee has been crowbarred into the migrant crisis in the United States. New York leaders from the city to all over Kathy Hochul, the governor of the state of New York, mentioning that, you know, like the Ukrainians in Poland, the the Polish have no intention to keep Ukrainians forever. That's a temporary you know, they're leaving a conflict to return to their country after the conflict is over. Again, this is just we're we're putting a round peg into a square hole and just hammering it away. But but there's no the media. There's you're our destroying military. I go to parents all the time around this country and ask them to give us their sons and daughters to join the military. And the one thing they bring up is Afghanistan. It's not about anything. It's Afghanistan. How are you going to assure us that you're going to maintain your commitment to our son and daughter when you betrayed us in Afghanistan that has lasting effects? And there's not a I'm trying to find a segment of our of our of our nation that's functioning. I don't know what it is. I saw in Chicago, they're going to have municipally owned grocery stores. Maybe that will figure it out there. Yeah, yeah, it's good. Real quick, do you think and we'll finish up on this topic, but do you think that they will we will ever have boots in the ground on Ukraine? I mean, I hope not, because I just don't know what the I mean, look at I'm I'm we're getting ready for China. We're trying to revolutionize everything. I don't know what the what the plan is. I mean, again, if you want to put a base in Ukraine, and you want to make that a sustainment operation going forward, that I here's the point. I don't understand what the inactive ready reserve call up was for. Why are you bringing those troops in the non combat support? Why are they going to Ukraine? What are you building infrastructure there? Here's what I do know. We're talking a minimum of $11 trillion to build Ukraine back. That is cataclysmic amounts of money. There isn't water, electricity, internet, you know, you want to help Ukraine. You're going to Russia is not paying for that if you negotiate a settlement. So I don't know what the plan is. But I hope we never see boots on the ground. I could guess what the plan is. I won't I won't say for sure. But I could guess that we'll be paying a chunk of that. And I do have one last one. So I did interview Colonel Douglas McGregor a few months back. And he talked about he's a real optimist. But he is really very, very bullish on Ukraine. Yes, very, very optimistic. I'm dropping some all over the place. But he brought up some staggering numbers, though. And even if they're half true, it's a problem. The amount of casualties and wounded soldiers on the Ukrainian side that we're not hearing about the media. I don't know if you agree with some of those numbers or not. But he's saying, I mean, it's people are acting as if this is an even war right now. And it's not even close. First of all, McGregor's a stud. I mean, he's an absolute, you know, that we're glad he's on our side. He's a military mind. I don't know if those numbers are accurate. I could tell you they're juxtaposed to almost everything we're hearing from every institution that we have, including a lot of our intel from Germany and England. But again, I don't know what to believe. So when you don't have when you don't have transparency, when you're not holding regular press conferences, when your Pentagon spokesman is now working in the White House and now you're getting a triple spin. I mean, the U .S. Open double backspin. You've gotten so many spins on the narrative. I don't know what to believe. But if he is even close to what is a segment of truth, you know, then look, Ukraine needs an investigation. There's a lot of investigations. We've got to start on Afghanistan. We were promised that by Speaker McCarthy. We need a hot wash on Afghanistan. And then we need to go to what who is oversighting the money that's going to Ukraine. And what have we got for our return on investment? Yeah, I'm not asking for much. Really, all I'm asking for in this conflict is can we just talk about what the end game is? And to your point, can we get an accounting of where the money's going and what's being spent in a real accounting of it? The Iran deal that just happened last week. First off, the fact that that was negotiated and completed on 11th September to me is just the ultimate slap in the face. But you again, you know more about this than I do. We do a five for five trade. OK, I'm going to use sports analogies. We trade five for five. And then we also approved of six billion dollars that apparently wasn't ours, but it was in a fund that now they can release to Iran. How are we winning on that one? Well, first of all, I was hoping that at least it was a digital transfer. The fact that it went as euros in cash through Qatar. And OK, so what happens the 24 hours after that deal is made? We're now getting issues in the West Bank. We're now hearing about issues in Yemen. We've now got Hezbollah that's reinforced. I mean, look, what do you think they're doing with cash? Right. What deal do you make where someone says, I'll bring a box of money to you? What do you it's this is a state sponsor of terrorism. They haven't changed. By the way, their president is now in New York City addressing the United Nations. This guy's killed 6500 of his own people. He admits to it. He killed the students that revolted and wanted democracy when we did nothing. He killed 5000 of his citizens in 1988. He's killed over 300 Americans. There's no accountability whatsoever. I don't understand what it is about Jake Sullivan and Tony Blinken that believe that Iran is a partner. All you've done 10 years ago, they were refining 10 percent of their oil. And now they're a force. Now they're working with Maduro in Venezuela, and they're a huge part of their members of of the international community. They're in good standing there. I don't get it. Does anyone believe that the Iran nuke deal? Look, we got hit with cruise missiles under Trump in Iraq. How did they have those cruise missiles? Those cruise missiles were illegal under the Obama nuke deal. So how are you refurbishing missiles in two years? Do we believe that their centrifuges have stopped? That they won't have a program if they don't have one already? No, I mean, I guess my question, David, is how I mean, I know that you pay a lot of attention to this stuff, but how do people like in the media not ask these questions? Right. I mean, these are legitimate. I mean, we just traded to I put this on my notes here. This is on the heels of trading a WNBA basketball player for the Merchant of Death like six months ago. Right. I mean, and again, I'm glad Americans are coming back to America. I don't want to sound pessimistic on that. That's great news. But we also I mean, this this stuff just seems like I don't care what side of the aisle you're on. It warrants questions, but nobody seems to care. I'm in the world that if you take hostages, we take hostages. You want to exchange people? We'll exchange people. You know, we definitely have the partners in the area to do that. For whatever reason, this administration, they're they're they're contrarians. They're contrarians to you know, they claim Bush and Cheney are their best friends, yet they just go 180 degrees from that doctrine. I don't know what the Biden doctrine is. I don't know what Bidenonomics is either, but I could tell you that they believe that Iran is a partner. Now, here's another thing. Our envoy to Iran not only is no longer the envoy, he doesn't have a security clearance. Does anyone curious at The New York Times as to what happened to the lead negotiator in Iran that is escorted off a bus, taken into American custody, given a job at Yale or Princeton or wherever he's working now? I've never heard of a person going from top secret classified negotiations to no clearance whatsoever and in the custody of American intelligence community. No one cares. No one cares at all. It's fascinating. And again, for me, I mean, these are big decisions that we're making. And correct me if I'm wrong, but it used to be, you know, maybe we did a two for five deal and then we made the six billion. Now we're like, we're giving stuff away and we're on the losing end. Correct me if I'm wrong, but America was never, you know, America losing. It was always America winning, right? America getting the best of deals. At least McDonald's has a five for five. We didn't even get that. You know what this does though? Honest to God, if you're thinking about traveling overseas, things go sideways, cartel, South America, Mexico, wherever you're going, you have a price in your head now. No one in their right mind is going to bring you back whether it's Haiti or wherever you are, you're worth $1 .25 billion. And thugs and scumbags are going to take advantage of that. I mean, that's a great point too. Do you think about leaving the country? I don't know anymore. That's a little bit concerning. I don't care where you're going, right? That's concerning. This one I just had to bring up because it happened two days ago or yesterday. How do we lose a plane? And I heard that's like a third one in the last six weeks that something like this has happened. How are we losing $80 million planes? Well, they're not $80 million anymore because they've got a new engine and all this other stuff. Look, the F -35 program is a complete disaster. You want to talk about why our allies think we're crazy. We sold them a plane. This program has been around since the early 90s and we've got nothing on return for it. So basically two planes are flying in a buddy team. They're doing training and a guy punches out. We don't even know why he punched out, but that plane could have easily hit a building. It didn't, thank God. But the wingman didn't follow where his buddy went. So what is he doing? He just kind of went on and did his own thing. And now the Marine Corps put a Facebook post like a dog is missing. We're expecting the Ukrainian farmers to carry the F -35 out with their tractors. I don't know what the point of it's wild. Look, stop embarrassing us. Just stop humiliating us. That's all I'm asking. Just be the army and the Marine Corps that we know our men and women are capable of being. Get out of their way. This gender garbage, this social experiment nonsense, stop humiliating our military. That's all I ask. Why can we not get the... I mean, I know why we can't get the answer, but I'm asking this to you. But why can't we, at a press conference at the White House, why can't we say, I want to talk to the guy that was in the other plane, or you can tell us the transcript of what happened when that happened. Talk to the guy who jumped out of the plane. Why did you do that? And again, I'm not trying to put our military on the spot, but these are kind of big questions to ask, right? I mean, if I do something in my business, I have to go face the music on that. Why doesn't everybody have to face music for their decisions or why things are happening? I think it's kind of important. Well, you don't want to talk to generals because they're going to tell you the truth and they won't be generals anymore. True. And you don't want to talk to enlisted people. Because look, I mean, let's be honest. How many people are... Is this a merit -based military anymore? Do we have a meritocracy? Are we promoting people based on pronouns? Go figure. When we're putting politics above military strength, accidents happen. We don't know the facts, but the fact that nobody cares about getting to the bottom of it, the day of the Pentagon paper reporters are gone. Yep. Yep. Let's just talk about the 2024 race quick, and then we will wrap up for today. So your thoughts on the Republican primary so far, I'll stay away from the Democratic side till the very end, but your thoughts on, you know, there's obviously Trump who is now in a, has a huge lead. Ron DeSantis seems to be crumbling underneath himself. Vivek Ramaswamy has jumped up in the polls. Nikki Haley's there. Tim Scott's there. A few others that probably aren't going to get a lot of votes. Chris Christie's the anti -Trump candidate. Mike Pence is, I don't know what Mike Pence is. I'm not really sure. Your thoughts about the whole field so far? I mean, look, it's impressive. They've got a deep bench. There's a lot of diversity. I, you know, none of it matters. Trump is the guy. The more you indict him, the more you empower him. You know, I'd like him to work on his communications a little bit better. You know, but if Trump is Trump, Trump is a Frankenstein monster of Barack Obama. As long as you have that faction, you're going to get, you know, Trump is going to be empowered. I just don't want to see Governor Noem anywhere near the White House. And I, if he's going to pick a running mate, you know, it's hard to find an ally here, you know. But it would be nice to find a governor. I don't want to take anyone from the Senate. I don't want to take anyone from the House with the margins that tight. But I mean, the idea that Governor Noem is being floated right now. I mean, I'd rather take North Dakota. Yeah. A little sled there. You know, it's funny you mentioned that because I saw a lot of that this weekend. I mean, can we just, for lack of a better term, keep it in our pants for about a year and then do what you got to do? It really is. I mean, every time you turn, somebody's doing something idiotic, whether it's Boebert. And again, I say this, David, a lot of people know who you are. A lot more know who you are than they'll ever know who I am. But when you go out in public into a movie theater like that, and I'm going to Boebert, not Noem for a second, you're, you're extremely well known. I don't care if it's dark or if it's as light as it is in the studio right now. What are you thinking? I, you know, she's, she's, she's an embarrassment. She is. She's bad, too. Who would have thought that Marjorie Taylor Greene would have been the, the oasis of the Maryland? I mean, seriously, I, again, you're, you're in Congress every day. You're out in public, you're on the job. You know, at least she wasn't wearing a hoodie, you know, that's all in shorts. She was at least dressed for the occasion, but I, it was, it's wildly embarrassing. Vaping, singing, whatever you're doing. Getting groped. Yes. Who is your VP candidate then? Because I think, you know, you have names thrown around. There's, there's, the vague has been thrown around in there. You know, Byron Donald's has been thrown around in there. Carrie Lake has. I don't know. I love Carrie Lake. I just don't know that Trump needs to go with somebody so divisive there. I think he's got to go with somebody that's, that's firm in their beliefs, but also not maybe going to turn off half the country. Well, you know, it's, it's impossible. One of the, one of the problems with making Trump, you know, the, the enemy of the state that the left has done is that you've really made it difficult for him to even put a cabinet together. You know, I mean, what are you going to do with it? You've got a lot of loyalists out there. You know, the vague is, is I think maybe the most intelligent dynamic candidate we've ever seen run for president, but experience does matter. But you know, I love the way he thinks. I love the movement. I don't know if he would even take the job to be honest with it. I don't think he needs it. But you look at a Tim Scott, I think Tim Scott is, you know, there's a whole lot to his message and I think he's, he's got the experience in the Senate, but honestly, you could literally take the Clint Eastwood chair and, and throw it in there as vice president. I'm going with that because this, this from top to bottom, we have to have seismic change in 24. Do you think he would ever choose Kristi Noem at this point with all that now? Yeah, no one knew Mike Pence was a, was a 24 hour story and then he was the vice president candidate. So who knows? I mean, a lot can happen between now and then, but I just, I don't need, you know, let's just pick people on their merit. Let's pick people that are ready to be the president. Imagine this, imagine picking a vice president that can lead the country. If something happens to a 75 year old president, you know, like Kamala Harris. Yeah. Someone like that.
CoinDesk Podcast Network
SPECIAL REPORT: SBF TRIAL 09/21 Update
"Welcome to the SBF trial, a Coindesk podcast network newsletter bringing you daily insights from inside the courtroom where Sam Bankman -Fried will try to stay out of prison. Follow the Coindesk podcast network to get the audio each morning with content from the Coindesk will stand trial in just under two weeks to defend himself against allegations he deliberately committed fraud and conspired to defraud crypto investors and customers in FTX and Alameda research. The estimated six -week trial itself is scheduled to kick off on October 3, 2023, a mere 10 months after Bankman -Fried was first arrested and not even 11 months after FTX collapsed. To better understand the trial process, Coindesk spoke to several legal experts, some of whom asked for anonymity to discuss a high -profile case. Though the trial is scheduled to begin next month, there's still some time before the actual arguments are made. The first step, which may occur as soon as next week, is a final pre -trial conference where Southern District of New York Judge Lewis Kaplan will lay out what a final witness schedule may look like, how long the trial date may be, and rule on any final outstanding motions. Judge Kaplan may also entertain a few motions after the jury is selected, said Martin Auerbach, an attorney at law firm Withers Worldwide. The second step is voir dire, which is what will actually begin on October 3. The jury selection process will see the judge ask potential jurors a number of questions. He will likely start broad, asking if any potential jurors have travel planned within the next few weeks or might otherwise be unable to disappear from their jobs for weeks. One of the legal experts, an attorney with experience in white -collar litigation, told Coindesk the DOJ must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, given that this is a criminal trial. By contrast, in a civil case, there is a lower preponderance of evidence standard. Beyond a reasonable doubt, there's no specific percentage, but you can think of that as 90 -plus percent, one of the legal experts told Coindesk. You have a deep and abiding conviction in the guilt of the defendant. The assistant U .S. attorneys trying the case will likely demonstrate each element of each of the charges and illustrate what evidence they have that would support a conviction for each charge, they said. They're tracking each piece of testimony, each document to make sure that they've got enough in the record to withstand. Bankman -Fried will inevitably argue because every defendant argues after trial that they fell short on this element or another, they said. Once the prosecution rests, the defense will have its own opportunity to present additional witnesses. One outstanding question is whether or not Bankman -Fried himself will testify in his own defense. Want to follow along? Sign up for Coindesk's new daily newsletter, The SBF Trial, bringing you insights from the courthouse and around the case. You can get the podcast each day right here by following the Coindesk Podcast Network. Thanks for listening.
The Hugh Hewitt Show: Highly Concentrated
A highlight from Duane Patterson fills in for Hugh
"Welcome to today's podcast, sponsored by Hillsdale College. All things Hillsdale, at Hillsdale .edu. I encourage you to take advantage of the many free online courses there, and of course, to listen to the Hillsdale Dialogues, all of them at Q for Hillsdale .com, or just Google Apple, iTunes, and Hillsdale. Welcome back, America. That music means we are joined by David Drucker, the beltway insider of The Dispatch. You can read everything that David writes and link through it at on Twitter, or X, at David M. Drucker. Good morning, David. I want to start with Pennsylvania Senate, because we got some news in there. There's kind of twin stories this week. You've got a piece in The Dispatch. Our mutual friend Selena Zito's got a piece at RAN, I think yesterday, or maybe it was today in The Examiner. Dave McCormick is getting in, and to me, the newsworthy part of that story isn't so much that McCormick's getting in. I really kind of hoped he would. But the newsworthy part is that Doug Mastriano, the failed MAGA gubernatorial candidate from this last cycle, has already come out and endorsed McCormick. So it looks like there's some party unifying going on in Pennsylvania. What do you make of this, David? Yeah, look, it's a really big deal for Republicans not to have to fight through a nasty primary, especially one that pits the populist wing versus the more traditional conservative wing. Dave McCormick is the candidate that Republicans in Washington wanted, but he's also the candidate Republicans many in Pennsylvania wanted. He's also run before. That makes him more formidable, because he's been through the process, and it gives Republicans to field a seasoned candidate against a rather seasoned incumbent. Bob Casey, you know, he might not make the most headlines, he might not be the most interesting guy in the world, but he's won a lot of tough races. And he's got a last name in Pennsylvania. Say that again, Dwayne? I said he's got a last name in Pennsylvania that he's been trading on. He does, but you know, he has now been in office since 2006, and so I think he has established himself in his own right. And he is very adept at knowing where he needs to pull votes from, where Republicans need to be undercut the most. And so what's really good about this is McCormick is now going to be doing this for the second time. Now, in a general election, it'll be his first, but he's the kind of Republican that can win general elections in Pennsylvania, at least if you look at his profile and the way he's positioned himself. So Republicans have to be happy about this, and they should be. Oh, he's the best candidate the Republicans could field. In an environment where you've got a chance of picking up a bunch of seats because of just how many Democrats are playing defense this cycle, this is as good of an opportunity as the Republicans could possibly hope for in the Keystone State. Let's go to the president's interview with Kristen Welker on Meet the Press, where he talked about, I'm going to negotiate the abortion federal legislation because the heartbeat stuff I'm not all for. I think the heartbeat laws were terrible. There should be some negotiation of where that limit is. How is that playing in Iowa amongst GOP primary voters? Well, look, I think we'll find out. I mean, I think for now, the president's fine. I don't think it's impacted polling numbers much, but as his Republican competitors chip away at him on this issue, it could ultimately have an effect. I mean, one of the things we really don't know yet, Dwayne, because we haven't seen it yet, is for years, the issue with abortion in Republican primaries has been who's going to be, who's reliable and dependable when it comes to appointing conservative judges that if a challenge to Roe versus Wade were to get before them, would vote to overturn it. Well, Roe's gone, and we're now in an era where it's about what kind of legislation would you vote for or sign at the federal level to curtail abortion rights. And so we don't yet have something to go on yet in terms of how Republican primary voters look at this and react to this kind of debate. And we're going to find out. Of course, the former president's doing what he always does. He tells everybody he's going to make them happy. How? You know, I just will. Don't worry. Trust me. Well, we'll see how that works out. He's running against one governor who signed a six week heartbeat bill. He's running against other Republicans who have promised a 15 week federal ban on abortion. And we'll see if the president's bobbing and weaving on what kind of legislation he would push for or accept as president. Again, we'll see if that has an impact on how Republicans in Iowa vote. We don't know that it'll have any impact, but it might. Couple minutes left with David Drucker of the Dispatch. I want to shift over to the House GOP circus that is dealing with are we going to have a shutdown or are we not going to have a shutdown? It looks like it's looming again. And David Drucker, I read a piece back when he was with the examiner from 10 years ago. It's a really bad deja vu, David Drucker. Yeah, you know, I went and found that last night and I posted it and, you know, there they go again. The thing about shutdowns, Dwayne, is the party that instigates them almost, almost, almost never wins them. And we saw Republicans do this 10 years ago. They instigated a shutdown to try and force President Obama to defund his signature health care law. Of course, he was never going to do it. Of course, a majority Democratic Senate was never going to go along with it, but they did it anyway. They ended up failing and they ended up missing an opportunity to push incremental conservative reforms through a majority Democratic government. When I say Democratic, Democratic Party run government and Republicans seem on intent on reprising that mistake. There's no end game here. There's no unity. One of the reasons Kevin McCarthy was able to win a debt ceiling fight is there was unity among 218 Republicans. They don't have that here and they don't really know what they're doing at this point. That doesn't bode well. David Drucker, read everything he writes over at the Dispatch or you can catch him on Twitter, the site formerly known as Twitter X, at David M. Drucker, Dwayne Patterson in for Hugh Hewitt. We'll be back with the political roundup after the top of the hour break. Come right back next.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"Our father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done. On earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day, our daily bread. And forgive us, our trespasses. As we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"About judgment, proved by the prince of this world being already condemned. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, give the lord an opportunity to speak to you. Jesus said to his disciples. Now, I am going to the one who sent me. Not one of you has asked, where are you going? Yeah, you are sad at heart because I have told you
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"Way. But man's. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, give the lord an opportunity to speak to you.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"A time of alexio divina for the discerning heart. Wednesday of the 6th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of the stay to the lord. Say slowly, from your heart, Jesus. I trust in you. You. Take over. Become aware that he is with you. Looking upon you with love. Wanting to be heard, deep within your heart. A reading from the holy gospel according to Mark. Chapter 8 versus 22 through 26. Jesus and his disciples came to bethsaida. And some people brought to him a blind man, whom they begged him to touch. He took the blind man by the hand, and let him outside the village. Then, putting spittle on his eyes and laying his hands on him. He asked, can you see anything? The man who is beginning to see replied, I can see people. They look like trees to me, but they are walking about. Then he laid his hands on the man's eyes again, and he saw clearly. He was cured. And he could see everything plainly and distinctly. And Jesus sent him home saying, do not even go into the village. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, give the lord an opportunity to speak to you.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of the stay to the lord. Say slowly, from your heart, Jesus. I trust in you. You. Take over. Become aware that he is with you. Looking upon you with love. Wanting to be heard, deep within your heart. A reading from the holy gospel according to Mark. Chapter 8 versus 22 through 26. Jesus and his disciples came to bethsaida. And some people brought to him a blind man, whom they begged him to touch. He took the blind man by the hand, and let him outside the village. Then, putting spittle on his eyes and laying his hands on him. He asked, can you see anything? The man who is beginning to see replied, I can see people. They look like trees to me, but they are walking about. Then he laid his hands on the man's eyes again, and he saw clearly. He was cured. And he could see everything plainly and distinctly. And Jesus sent him home saying, do not even go into the village. What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the lord saying to you?
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"Are your minds closed? Have your eyes that do not see, here's the do not hear. Or do you not remember? When I broke the 5 loaves among the 5000, how many baskets full of scraps did you collect? They answered 12. And when I broke the 7 loaves for the 4000, how many baskets full of scraps did you collect? They answered 7. Then he said to them, are you still without perception? What touched your heart in this time of prayer? What did your heart feel as you prayed? What do you hope to carry with you from this time with the lord? Let us now close with the prayer to the father that Jesus gave us. Our father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done. On earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day. Our daily bread. And forgive us, our trespasses. As we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"What word made this passage come alive for you. What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, give the lord an opportunity to speak to you. The 72 came back rejoicing. Lord, they said,
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"A time of alexio divina for the discerning heart. Saturday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of the stay to the lord. Say slowly, from your heart, Jesus. I trust in you. You. Take over. Become aware that he is with you. Looking upon you with love. Wanting to be heard, deep within your heart. A reading from the holy gospel according to Luke, chapter ten 17 through 24. The 72 came back rejoicing, lord, they said, even the Devils submit to us when we use your name. He said to them, I watched Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Yes, I have given you power to tread underfoot serpents and scorpions,
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, give the lord an opportunity to speak to you. Jesus said to his disciples, alas for you, corazon, alas for you, beda. Four of the miracles done in you had been done entire in
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"A time of alexio divina for the discerning heart. Friday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of the stay to the lord. Say slowly, from your heart, Jesus. I trust in you. You. Take over. Become aware that he is with you. Looking upon you with love. Wanting to be heard, deep within your heart. A reading from the holy gospel, according to Luke, chapter ten
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"A time of alexio divina for the discerning heart. Wednesday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of the stay to the lord. Say slowly, from your heart, Jesus. I trust in you. You. Take over. Become aware that he is with you. Looking upon you with love. Wanting to be heard, deep within your heart. A reading from the holy gospel, according to Luke, chapter 57 through 62.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"Did your heart feel as you listened? What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, through him, with him and in him. Listen to the word.
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"What word made this passage come alive for you? What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, give the lord an opportunity to speak to you. An argument started between the disciples about which of them was the greatest. Jesus knew what thoughts were going through their minds. And he took a little child and set him by his side. And then said to them, anyone who welcomes this little child in my name, welcomes me. And
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"A time of alexio divina for the discerning heart. Monday of the 26th week in ordinary time. As you begin, take a deep breath and exhale slowly. For the next few moments, surrender all the cares and concerns of the stay to the lord. Say slowly, from your heart, Jesus. I trust in you. You. Take over. Become aware that he is with you. Looking upon you with love. Wanting to be heard, deep within your heart. A reading from the holy gospel, according to Luke, chapter 9 versus 46 through 50. An
Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"six weeks" Discussed on Discerning Hearts - Catholic Podcasts
"If someone should rise from the dead. What did your heart feel as you listened? What did you sense the lord saying to you? Once more, through him, with him and in him.