Bankless - Capitol Hill War Stories from a DC Lobbyist Who’s Seen It All (SBF, Gensler, Elizabeth Warren)

Episode Date: June 4, 2026

Crypto policy in Washington has gone from punchline to power center. David sits down with Ron Hammond, Head of Policy and Advocacy at Wintermute, for a rare inside look at how crypto actually moves through DC: the SBF era, Elizabeth Warren’s anti-crypto army, Gary Gensler’s SEC, bank lobby pressure, Trump’s crypto conflicts, the Clarity Act fight, and why privacy and self-custody may be the next major battleground. --- 📣SPOTIFY PREMIUM RSS FEED | USE CODE: SPOTIFY24 https://bankless.cc/spotify-premium --- BANKLESS SPONSOR TOOLS: 🔮POLYMARKET | #1 PREDICTION MARKET https://bankless.cc/polymarket-podcast 🧭OKX | TRADE, EARN, PAY to OKX | 120M+ USERS WORLDWIDE https://app.okx.com/join/USBANKLESS 🦊 METAMASK | DOWNLOAD NOW https://go.metamask.io/BL-Pod-Download 🌐BRIX | EMERGING MARKET YIELD https://bankless.cc/brix 🎯THE DEFI REPORT | ONCHAIN INSIGHTS https://thedefireport.io/bankless --- TIMESTAMPS 0:00 Becoming “Captain Crypto” in DC 4:03 From Joke to Serious Political Force 6:19 Why Crypto Punches Above Its Weight 10:28 How SBF Captured Washington 13:26 The FTX Fallout in Capitol Hill 16:25 Elizabeth Warren and Crypto’s Proxy Wars 19:04 How DC Letters Actually Get Written 25:33 How Powerful Is the Crypto Lobby? 27:28 Who Is Playing on Crypto’s Side? 31:01 Democrats, Gensler, and the 2024 Lesson 35:07 The Gensler Era and Prometheum 41:21 Will Warren Ever Pivot? 43:20 Trump, the Crypto Ball, and World Liberty 49:30 Will the Clarity Act Pass? 53:30 Privacy, Self-Custody, and the Next Front 56:23 The Social Side of Crypto in DC --- RESOURCES Ron Hammond https://x.com/RonwHammond --- Not financial or tax advice. See our investment disclosures here: https://www.bankless.com/disclosures

I'm here with Ron Hammond. He is the head of policy and advocacy over at Wintermute. Ron, welcome to the show. David, it's been a while. I hope everything's going well and looking forward to getting to all of it, man. There's a lot to talk about right now. Yeah, there has been a growing history of crypto in D.C. Maybe just for back context,

95% of our time together has been in just signal chat asking you about like, what does this mean, what's going on, what's the truth here? when it comes to like me and Ryan trying to figure out what the hell is going on in Capitol Hill because there's the version of Capitol Hill, crypto in Capitol Hill, that they want you to see. And then there's the version that's like kind of going on under the hood.

And those two things don't really line up. Maybe to set the table, just how long have you been in D.C.? So it's been 10 years. And actually for this new job, I feel like all of them. Yeah, pretty much. I mean, like since crypto policy was a thing,

like it's been like me and like three other people who have been on the staff side involving the stuff. And like for example, he's on Capitol Hill when I worked there. So I started working there in 2015, left in 2019 to go, we're going to ripple and cover that later on. But I worked for Warren Davidson from Ohio. And he was a freshman member. And everyone's kind of like high school. Everyone's trying to find their own certain lane and policy.

And he was trying to be more venture capital issues. But then he had a whole conversation with the leadership a couple hours. And I'm like 24 at the time. But apparently like it's a. hey, you're a freshman, you're kind of getting the bomb rung in the issues. Just do crypto or something. And he really took that to heart. He went over to me and said, hey, Ron, like, do you know anything about crypto?

And I'm like, well, you know, I may have not bought an epic ID on the Silk Road in college, but like that's pretty much all I know about crypto and goes, congratulations. You're the guy that is now in charge of crypto policy. So, like, that's like how it happened. Me at 24, like, dumped that on my desk. But the same time, it's kind of cool because it's like the most brand new territory. Like, there's no, like, left versus right. There's no, like, policy lines there's no, like, policy in general.

So, so, like, that's kind of how I got in this space. I worked with a couple Democrats and Republicans on the Token Taxonomy Act, which is, like, the first crypto regulatory market structure bill. You know, back then it was like, what, about 20 pages or so. And the Clarity Act is, like, 309 pages or whatever. But, like, the kind of the early stage of Clarity Act that we're going to talk about probably pretty soon. That was the Token Taxiomiyam Act and several other bills down the road.

But, like, that's what I worked on. It was the first bipartisan bill on market structure, which is I was really adamant about. making sure we had key to this bipartisan because of the first of its kind. And then after that, decided to go over to in-house. So I can give it more in-depth kind of like, you know, everything we're going to end up at, including the blockchain association, now at Wairdbute. But it's been a fun right, man.

I've been kind of seen it from all angles here. It's been exciting. Trading is changing. Not gradually right now. OKX just launched trading buzz directly inside the OKX app. Grid trading, DCA, arbitrage. You set your strategy once and it executes around the clock. No staring at charts all day.

No manual entries. No missing moves while you're. asleep. And for the first time, automated trading actually feels simple. But OKX is thinking bigger than just trading. They also launched the agent payments protocol, an open standard that lets AI agents execute full commercial transactions on chain. The Ethereum Foundation, Uniswap, and AWS are already building on it. And now it's live inside the United States. And new users who deposit in trade can get up to $500 in Bitcoin through the bankless link. The link is in the show notes to learn more, not investment advice, not available in New York or Texas. $100,000 is up for graph.

Metamask and Ando are giving it away in the Ando trading competition. Five weeks, three tiers. Whoever earns the best percentage return in each tier wins the biggest cut. Pick from 260 Ando tokenized stocks, funds, and commodities to swap inside Metamask and let your portfolio do the talking. If you think you can outtrade everyone else, this is your chance to prove it. From now until June 18th. Click the link in the description below and opt in on Metamask Mobile.

Trade RWAs on mobile or desktop to compete. Not investment advice. Yeah, I suppose it parallels the growth of crypto as a whole. Like if you are early crypto in Capitol Hill, you're kind of like doing the rebel thing. You're the counterculture young participant. You're just in D.C. And somebody needs a crypto guy and you're the crypto guy. And now here we are in 26.

I'm sure it's just wildly different. What's it like now? My favorite story is my friends on Capitol Hill. They call me Captain Crypto because we're to Congress in Crypto. And all we do is crypto. So when Janet Yellen would come in, you know, talk about, you know, what's happening with the markets. Like, we're going to be asking about crypto and everyone just kind of eye roll at us at a time. But then there's that famous time where these two kids, and I remember being on the side of the hearing room when it happened.

These two kids brought up the buy Bitcoin sign in front of Janet Yellen. Oh, yeah. What's his name? Christian is his name? I never met the guy. So I met him a couple times. Yeah. It's crazy.

So I was there and all my friends who are working all these, like, congressmen, like they usually hang out on the side of the room of the hearings. they all just beeline right at me. Like, these are your people, aren't they, right? I'm like, these are not my people, but it's not my guy. So, yeah, I'm seeing like from back in the day when like no one was doing this stuff, you know, I was there during the SBF days too. Like, holy crap, that's another different story that you and I kind of talked about a lot as well. And then, yeah, now it's more on the kind of market side.

And now I'm in New York as well and D.C. going back and forth. So, and I had a Miami sit in between two. So, like, it's kind of seen the different phases of crypto. How would you describe this phase now? versus is this like peak crypto activity in DC? Was it more active, maybe, I don't know, post-SbF? Like, what's the vibe now? And like how would you kind of like name the flavor

of whatever's going on in Capitol Hill with crypto? So we were, no one gave a crap about us at all for like years. Again, like everyone would just crap on me all the time. And I was like, but 2020, when the COVID happened, 2021, that's when I started getting a call to being like, hey, Captain Crypto, we'd love to talk to you about this crypto fame. What the hell is it? And that's kind of where my role came in just being like, and everyone calls lobby as kind of like a dirty term. But like my job is more is like, let me explain why XRP and Bitcoin are two different things.

So that was kind of the conversations back then. Your job was to just explain things to regulators who were too old to get it themselves. Exactly. And usually they would kick it over to the staffers too, which is a unique area of crypto. Since there's no like lines drawn stuff, they would usually kick it over to the 25, 28 year old staffer and say, you handle this. So the cool thing is like you're kind of like working with staffers who have a lot of power. But at the same time like you have to really know this stuff and they're a lot more tech savvy than the 80 year old center. So there's pros and cons. But like staff have a lot more leeway and a lot more power candidly than most issues I would say.

It's because of like the boundary lines just aren't there yet. So since doing that, I would see the vibe right now is not as hype as it was when SPF was throwing money in DC and saying like, hey, we're going to have reception. And Shaquille Neal's going to be there. And Tom Bray is going to be there. And everyone's like, I don't know what FTX is. but I'm in. Like, that sounds awesome because D.C. is a, it's just like that.

It's a kind of a gossipy high school town. But at the same time, there's actually now like, oh, like, this is serious. They're big boys now. 2024, the election cycle, it changed everything. I mean, in terms of just people like, oh, wait, these guys actually have a lot of power here. And the fact that we've taken, going up against the banks, we've gone with the casinos, we've gone against some pretty entrenched incumbents and we've beaten them every time. It's kind of like crazy.

Like, people in D.C. are flabbergasted. And again, it's not just like throwing money in packs. Like, it's a lot of, like, it's a lot of, education, like the right people, foot traffic, and media like you guys as well. I mean, like we'll probably come to us later on, but the amount of times like the bankless podcast has come up and like, you know, party conversation in D.C. He's kind of crazy, but it's happened several times. So it's a weird world, but vibes are high.

We'll see what happens with Clarke, though. It's been a take that I've had that crypto lawyers are kind of just like a different breed of lawyers. They're just so hardcore and savage, just like in the best ways. people have, it's been my take. It was like, crypto lawyers are just generally just a bar above the rest. And I think maybe that extends itself to D.C. Like, you said, like, it's not just throwing money around.

Like, is the crypto lobby uniquely competent for its, like, how does it punch above or below its weight class versus others? Yeah, I mean, I guess the good example is, so, like, when you're a hill staffers, like, you're like, you're taking me at 25 years old, I would cover financial services, health care, tax, and trade. So, like, all day you're doing these meetings. these are tough meetings on tough issue areas. And the fact that you're supposed to like, you know,

like attain all this knowledge after the fact when you're doing so many different meetings throughout the day, it's tough. So it's a lot of repetition and it's a lot of meeting these people. Like if you're going to go into the weeds with someone on crypto for the first time ever and you bring up defy, like good luck. Like that's going to be so difficult for them to grasp in the 30 minute conversation. So it's a lot of repetition.

It's a lot like, you know, just canily having the conversations with the staffers. But I'd say the banks, what they do is they bring a lot of these, you know, the old school vives to. So they would bring like suit and ties to every single meeting. It's really stuffy. They want the congressman always there. And they really feel like they have to, like, talk to the congressman. And especially as a staffer, it's kind of like, hey, like, we don't care about you.

We're talking to the congressman. We're talking about community banks. And it's the same issue they've been hearing for the past 50 years or credit cards or whatever. Pick an issue. Whereas crypto, it's so new. And it's kind of like, hey, this is a very unique space. A, there could be a lane for you to make a name for yourself or kind of find your niche within this area, like self-custody or defy or, you know, Dau.

Or, you know, pick a lane. Like, this is all brand new territory, which is cool for people in, like, in politics, because this is like, oh, I can actually work on something that has substance and, like, is the first of its kind. And it's real. So I think that that's the, like, more intriguing value of it as well. And then lastly, see, I would say it's kind of, at least for crypto, we're different. So, like, we would do like, we wouldn't do like the stuffy receptions at like, you know,

some like, you know, stuffy hotel or, you know, club nearby the capital. It'd be like, oh, let's just go watch like Diplo or whatever. And like Miami at a, like, conference, like side events. And like for DC people, it's so rare. Like when they go to consensus or they go to permissionless, like, they always are flabbergasted being like, oh, like, this is like, there's a lot of people. It's a real industry. And like, they're young and exciting. And like, I like this energy.

Whereas the banks, it's just stuffy, Palm Beach, all that stuff. And it's like, yeah, we don't want that. So I think it's kind of like different vibes from the banks. Yeah. Interesting. So why was SBF able to penetrate politics so well? And so far from what you've been saying, there's a lot of vibes of just like, if you can do well, in the high school cafeteria, you can do well in Capitol Hill.

Like, if you have those, it's the same skill set of just like, can you navigate a social situation? But why was SBF able to do so well in 2021 and 2022 in D.C.? Because, like, I don't know, I don't think SBF would seem to that cool. No, exactly. So back in like 2021, D.C., it was probably about, I'd say, dozen or so lobbyists. You know, when I first worked on the issue in 2017, it was like five, like three. So it was so small. Like there's a blockchain, digital chamber commerce, coin base, and a few,

others, A66C as well. But when SBF came in, he brought a crap ton of money with him, which he would throw at all these bomb side events. Again, like, we crypto didn't have the money to throw around for these cool receptions or cool DC events or cool educational briefings. And the difference, too, is that Sam also came off of that perception at the time was the altruistic perspective that really resonated with a lot of Democrats and candidly with a lot of Republicans, too, because you're like, well, how could this guy who's five foot four, you know, possibly trying to hurt anyone? Yeah, he's come from good parents or, you know, they had a good narrative spin up.

And narratives in D.C. drive everything candidly. And so when we saw that, it was at first, we're like, okay, you know, FTC's new player in town, that's fine. You know, oh, they want to take it to the entire spotlight. That's nothing new. It happens in crypto all the time. But it's when they started lobbying on stuff,

that's when we were like red flags all around. And they were pushing for some CFTC exemption authority. They pretty much would have screwed over defy. They were probably centralized exchange regulation for defy. And you guys come to this super well. But when that conversation was happening about two, three years ago behind the scenes, it was groups like Coinbase

and other centralized exchanges who said like, hey, like we would benefit from this but we're going to stand the D5 camp because like what's good for all this is good for all of us and that's how we should do it not what's good for one part of the sector

and like SBF snapped which like at that moment he yelled at my boss for the blockchain association at the time started like really throwing out some darts on Twitter and you could tell us at the time we didn't know

it was having FTCS behind the scenes but like you could tell us there was a stressful situation here but it was more of all right there was like said like why no one really knew why he snapped, but in order to explain that, you could assume that, like, there is a looming shadow behind SBF that's really motivating him. Exactly. And at the same time, like, it was more also

that one decision where, like, I would give point based a lot of credit here, but it's like that there was a time where there's an opportunity maybe to try to put their weight behind a bill that would have benefited them, but not benefit DFI. And them, as well as many other folks, including pretty much everyone, said, like, no, we actually believe DFI is important here. And we should employ these regulations that would actually not make it, you know, at all possible the United States, we should not make that of any thing. So, like, this is where we saw the FTX whole scandal blew up, but it was the altruistic narrative as well just coming off as like this really innocent type behind a person, because how would he, you know, defraud millions of people? He

would never do that. So, okay, so, like, after the tide ran out and SBF and FTX and everything they touched was shown to be like swimming without swim trunks, like, how embarrassing was that for the people who like got into Sam's circles? Like, how, what was the cleanup in DC like. Oh, dear, so bad. I mentioned the old podcast because like it was like the week before it blew up. It was like Eric Voorhe is on your podcast as well as SBF and I remember like like like

Patrick knows, but we were playing actually like you know, beer paw with a bunch of like Hill staffers because we're always having a good time to someone's birthday party and like it came up and we were just talking about how SBF was full of crap. And it's about we were hearing everyone else else around the table's protective. But it's how DC is. It's a small place. It was kind of fun having your podcast directly involved as conversations

because everyone's a view of SBF at that time before it all came out was starting a sour. So after it, it wouldn't happen. The problem is that everyone took the money. So, you know, Democrats, Republicans, they all took the money. You know, both sides tried to claim that, you know, oh, the Democrats took more money. Republicans took more money.

But at the end of the day, like, as people were just trying to pass this bill to benefit him and try to get some, like, at least some barrier, at least from the ACFTC, and he failed. So it was really bad because every single thing was tied to us as an industry, you know, whether you're a coinbase, you're wearing a mute, whoever, and you're going in to meet with Democrats or Republicans. It's like, hey, I don't want to be seen near you guys

because it's all the corruption narrative and angles and stuff. And the worst thing I think people will realize this, a lot of people who took SBF money, they spent it. I mean, because it's campaigns. They had it, they had to spend it in the middle of the season. So what they had to do is they had to fundraise more money from other donors, whether from the constituents or elsewhere, to pay off or pay back the FTCS and creditors.

Did everyone pay it back? I need a check. I believe most did, but like that's paid back. You imagine the most like till between your legs are you trying to raise money from your constituents in your local community, knowing that it's not going to your race or their cause, it's going to pay back, like, the FTCS creditors.

Like, that's a whore. And they wouldn't say that out loud. They were, that was just like kind of what was happening behind the scenes. Yeah. And that's again, that's both sides of the aisle. Both sides took money.

Yeah. And like, it just like forever stand it. But like, you know, credit to Fairshake and all these other groups that really stepped up in 2024 because they didn't let that deter them. And that, like,

we had material effects on 20204 election. That's now scaring a lot of people right now in 20206. So it's crazy watch. Like, yeah, FTCX and SBF especially, destroy things. And again, last time was, SPF was on the Hill all the time. I would see him on Capitol Hill in the hallway

almost on a daily basis and receptions and events. Like he, more than any CEO in crypto I've ever seen, he was in D.C. more than anyone else. Why do you think he was there? Was somebody over his shoulder telling him, like, Sam, you need to go to D.C. Or was he, like, self-motivated for the identity

or the opportunity? He knew he needed to be in D.C. Again, whether it be more existential crisis with his company or more just because, like, he felt like that was kind of like the right time, my place. It's unclear in my opinion, but like they hire a DC team after they decided be in DC. It's like SBF was there and he started hiring people after that. So I'd say it was his push. Okay. So after the whole FTX SBF thing was the rise of Elizabeth Warren and her

anti-crypto army? Yeah. What was that like? Because it was Elizabeth Warren, you can kind of see the pattern of just like, well, she did the same thing to the banks. And so now she's just kind of carrying that same pattern forward of like cuddle them until they bend the knee and then pay the democrats a bunch of money a protection money right like it's a racket but then then there was a bunch of other things that happened like around elizabeth warren there was the joe kent versus pool together proxy battle and joe kent was this like ex warren staffer who went after pooled together the most beloved innocent defy protocol on like this frivolous lawsuit there was like this the mark cohetes letter and like that and that was with the Silicon Valley Bank thing.

There's just like a bunch of proxies around Warren. And I've never really gotten to the bottom of that. Obviously, Warren was explicitly anti-crypto. She said so. But then there were a bunch of like loosely affiliated but not directly related proxies around Warren. And that's the more interesting thing. What happened there?

I mean, like this, I guess we did the whole DC-Telaw situation. But like this is a good example. And I type back, you know, to the things just mentioned earlier, like, to the Clarity Act that just happened now, we had like a bunch of housing groups, the AFL-CIO, and a bunch of other's random progressive groups come out against the bill, even though in the most part, if not all the times, like, they're not touched by it. And you kind of realize, like, who's pulling the strings?

Like, is this more of a progressive thing, trying to get their Democrat-leaning groups to push their cause? But like, or is it the banks? Like, is it Wells Fargo? These groups that have been lobbying publicly against stable-coin yield, are they going through the housing groups because they had to make up for their past sins in years prior? and they're telling them, hey, we need Joe to come out against the crypto regulation bill because that's our beneficiary.

You know, I've seen, like, the American Gaming Association has been going through the Mormon Church to go against prediction markets. Like, there's all, you mentioned proxies, but like, this is like, I mean, crypto the same thing. It's doing it wrong. But, like, the good thing about crypto Twitter and about kind of just Twitter generally is, like, it's a lot easier when you're in the information's out there to dissect of, like, who's sponsoring who and who's coming behind the scenes here, who? Because sometimes, like, you know, 10 years ago, the Democrats wouldn't take a single

meeting with the banks. And now, like, it's kind of weird to see a lot of Democrats join the banks on these arguments. But, like, that's where they had to go through proxy groups and stuff like that. Even FTCX, after that happened, I'd say half Democrats offices would bar any crypto meetings. And so you had to go in through, like, other groups to have, like, just even one educational conversation with a staffer because they refused to meet with crypto. So, like, this is how you're saying this is actually just normal. This is actually just how the game works. It's sort of, like, sort of, but like take things like Mark a Hodas letter. He mentioned that. So Silvergate. So he was a short seller.

Can we go and do the backstory on that? Yeah, we deal with this. I was like, I guess we were in the day. So, like, you know, this happens a lot on Capitol Hill. I mentioned your staffers. You get so much information. You're doing so much work on different policy issues all day, nonstop.

And so with some groups come to, they do sometimes like, hey, we pre-wit a letter for you on this really important issue that your senator or boss cares about. All I got to do is make a couple tweaks and, you know, get your colleagues on board or send it to whoever. It'll come from, you know, Senator Warren. It'll come from, you know, whatever, you know, you know, representative. but that happens a lot in D.C. So external parties

prep some comms and messaging and they deliver to the staffers saying this is what your, this, your congressman believes, here are some comms that might interest them. Yeah. And again, like sometimes these things are really legitimate. Like, hey, like there's some, like, there's fraud

at this potential company or there's like, you know, there's something happening that's really suss. Other times, it's like, hey, my competition's doing this. I don't like this. Please do this nasty letter to scare everyone. Because I remember, I remember months ago, years ago, we were talking about when Elizabeth Warren would do a letter, everyone's freaking out. And then now it's kind of which is a nascogram.

You're just like, okay, whatever. Like, it's fine. I can just mean anything. So it's a lot of that. So like Mark Kohotis, for this one example, for Silicon Valley Bank, was a short seller. And I'm sure there's plenty of others doing this too. But he was shopping his letter around.

I said it to you guys because I got from my source as well. But, and she led the letter, like word for word from the short seller on Silicon Valley Bank. And then what, like two weeks ago or afterwards, it like goes under. And of course, this guy has been, you know, you look at his Twitter, he was mad crapping SBB for months. So I'm sure he made a pretty penny on it. Was there actual concerns?

I'll leave it to the lawyers to decide. But like, it's, for me personally, it was more of like, this is crap. Like, this is just like, how is this Warren doing the bidding of like this one short seller who's going to make a crap ton of money on this thing? And to the benefit of who? Like, who's like the broader constituency that benefits? I can tell you it's not a lot of people.

It's just a very few. So, again, so this market guy had a short position on Silicon Valley Bank. Allegedly. Allegedly. Allegedly. Allegedly. And goes into the Warren office

with some comms, a drafted letter. And then we heard those comms from Elizabeth Warren. Like, not allegedly. Like, we did hear that. Like, she read out the letter, as you said, word for word.

And like damning Silicon Valley, Silvergate, like all of those. And then anyone who had a hypothetical short position probably did very, very well. Do we know if like the Warren office was, like, pissed in hindsight, or was this, like, I mean, what do we know about, like,

how was this manipulation or, like, what do we know about that? That's a question, I mean, I leave to lawyers and a lot of stuff, because, again, like, this stuff happens all the time. And, like, does it happen all the time? Yeah, this, well, again, it depends the issue. Again, like, sometimes are real issues.

Sometimes it's just, like, someone trying to spin a narrative to benefit themselves. But this is where, like, Twitter comes into play here. Like, the transparency of information is so much better because as a hill staff at the time, it's just the people who would come in, meet with me every three-minute slot. And if they were able to create a scenario being like, hey, there's really bad things happening. We wrote a letter to go after said bad thing.

Please, like, you know, help our cause out. Oh, also we live in your district or whatever. Or state. Like, that's usually like, you know, oh, I want to help this like situation out. But yeah, and like this is the job of the representative to represent their constituents. And like, hey, like some of my constituents are under threat being bullied, need assistance. And I'm their representative. That's why they elected me. And so like, let me come to their aid, I'm there here. I'm trying to be their hero. So that's the carrot to do it in the first place, but that can just be manipulated, it sounds like. Or some people could try to dress it up as a wrong situation or something that benefit them shortly. And again, like, if you're someone who doesn't

have access to information, like, as, you know, transparently, you're going to probably even believe them or like, you know, you do a little more research. But like at least now it's so different where it's like, now you go on Twitter and it's like, who's like, Mark a Hottis? It's like, oh, this guy's a short seller. Oh, this guy's probably a red flag here of like, this guy's definitely pushing me on this or lobbying me on this issue for his personal benefit and not for the benefit of like, oh, there's actual concern here. So again, like, just highlight him. This happens all the time. We saw like ICE and CME had a letter on hyperliquid two weeks ago, and they were saying to the CFTC and the head of the agriculture committees, hyperliquid could be involved,

could be involved in like sanctions violation and money laundering. Again, they didn't have any evidence, but they're just trying to throw it out there. Right. And like, they could hypothetically be involved with that. And that's how DC works. And it's all, it's all, you have to say. Yeah, and at least, you know, in some administrations have you seen, that's how it kicks off the investigation process. And the investigation process could lead to a story about investigation. And that's just enough to short the prize or whatever. And like, that's, you know, at least the upside again, is the transparency with information flow now is so much better than it was when I was working on the hill 10 years ago, five years ago. So like, it's better a lot now. But like,

you really have to do your research. Otherwise, like, people are trying to manipulate the system for that. Yeah, there seems to be just a huge gap between just like high context. and low-context people, and especially with crypto, because crypto's so confusing, that if you are low-context crypto person, you could be told anything from somebody with high-context who's also manipulative,

and that can, that there's the optionality there seems very rich. Exactly. And again, like, these aren't even coming from the direct competition. This comes through proxies usually half the time. And again, like,

AI is going through this right now. Like, the anthropic battle is fun to watch, but they're going through all proxies that the other person. Cal Street Polymarked hitting each other too. Oh no, I bet that one is so much national teeth. The last thing I'll end on though is that crypto really grew up recently

because for years you couldn't get crypto degree on anything, you know, just like with different sectors or CEOs, but like we are now at the point at least in D.C. where it's like we have bigger threats facing us and they are pushing any crap they can narrative-wise to try to stop the Clarity Act or tried to get their way with certain permissions. And like Defi, you know, Central Exchanges, market makers, token projects. Like everyone across the board's like,

yeah, we are all in this together. So like, let's buckle up. Let's, you know, go behind the trades or ride behind certain causes and make sure these red lines are there. Because, like, yeah, we're at crunch time right now. And all these other folks are just like trying to nitpick one at the other. But for crypto and the lobbying stage right now, we are at the big time, right, center stage. How powerful is the crypto lobby right now?

It's pretty powerful. I mean, when I started, again, I guess I said 2016, 2017, three or four lobbyists, maybe. Right. And now I think it's probably 200 probably. It's still a lot smaller than the banks have, but we've been the banks at their own game several times, and we're winning. So, like, it's kind of...

And a part of that is just because we're newer, younger, more adaptable, more flexible, to new strategies on D.C. and Capitol Hill? Not necessarily, because, like, you have the banks have had relationships to these guys for, like a decade, centuries in some cases. And then they can also say, like,

hey, that mom-and-top bank, they keep your town alive in rural Nebraska. If yield goes through, that small town, Nebraska won't have any lending whatsoever, because that bank's going to go away. which is complete BS. Yeah, that doesn't sound right. That doesn't pass.

That's how they say. So, like, we've been in them at their own game. And, like, we also, I think COVID changed a lot of lobbying now, you know, into the world going a lot more remote. But it's also more just like, hey, like, I'm going to tell you my, at least how I do it. It's like, here's my information. I'll tell you I'm no I'm biased. Like, here's where I believe is the non-biased view.

And you can fact check me. You can go on Twitter. You can go, like, research it, going to pressure research service. Like, you can fact check me and compare it to anyone else. But, like, at least I'm going to tell you the information. and you'll see that we're not looking for a carve-out. We're not looking for the special circumstance here. We're just looking for regulation.

And this product is getting regulated is very different than the 1930s called for. So like, you know, it's, and they're like, yeah, it makes sense. Like, yeah, like that's how it should work. So, like, that's kind of like how these conversations go. And, you know, it's a lot of fear monitoring, but I think it's getting better.

But like the bank lobby right now, the last thing I was saying is, too, is like Jimmy Diamond, we just crapping on the Clarity Act this weekend. Like, he pivoted from, like, the banks have now pivoted from the yield issue because they know they've lost that issue. and they know from the drafters who made that amendment,

they said, this is done. Like, hey, this is the yield amendment, and ain't going to move anywhere. So the banks realize they're not going to get 60 votes in the amendment to change it. So now Jamie Diamond and all these other CEOs are saying, oh, it was an AML issue. Even though it was like 70 pages where the AML stuff in there,

they're now saying the narrative is there's no AML or no BSA or banksy or CEAC requirements, no can know your customer. So we had killed the bill entirely. So that's a new strategy. And it's like, and anyone in D.C. now knows, like through like social media and good news report, And it's like, hey, that's crap.

Yeah, if we just know you all pivoted from yield to this, because you want to kill the bill because you didn't give what you wanted. So it's just one big game of chess. It is. Which probably makes it pretty fun. It's never-born. Yeah. Well, so who is playing on the crypto side?

So we have Coinbase. We have Ripple. You're there representing Wintermute. Who are the players that constitute the crypto side of the board? Yeah, I would say it's, I mean, most companies have presence in D.C. one way or another, like I would highly recommend to companies, like if you're large enough to hire someone in-house to watch your priorities, like this is definitely a good space to be in. Obviously, AI is not taking those jobs away anytime soon, and the information flow is great. And also, like,

I mentioned Twitter a lot as a being an important tool, but guess what? Like, people are not taking bill text edits from Twitter. Like, that's just not the reality. They're going to lawyers. They're going to people in D.C. The people that trust. So it's Coinbase, ACC, Ripple, blockchain association on the trade association side, digital chamber. I mean, fireblocks has got good team, or it has team. Hyperliquid has a full team now recently. Salon of Policy Institute, same side. Hedera. I mean, it's pretty much like, if you think of most major crypto companies, they've kind of now gotten the memo, like, if you're not on the, you know, places in DC, you're going to be on the menu of DC pretty soon. So who's representing Ethereum?

I got consensus over there. So they got, actually pretty good, Bill Hughes is great over there. And they also have a bunch of the other projects that they've sponsored that they have representatives in DC as well. So, like, the decentralized foundation as well has been great. So there's a lot like other trade associations or individual groups benefit the Ethereum as well. But like they're definitely hard. Like I met with Ethereum back in 2017 like on this stuff and they were hugely helpful for like the dropping of the bill. So okay.

The L1s aren't going after each other anymore, right? That's just like a bygone era. That's a good thing in DC. It's weird. Like we're all enemies like, we're competitors in the marketplace. But in D.C. We are all friends.

Like there's an L1 group and it's like all the L1 lobbyists from all across spectrum. We're all coordinating. I'm like, hey, what's good for us is good for us entirely. and we'll compete about it outside D.C. So it's only when someone comes into D.C. And it's like, I want to carve out my business or make my thing the best thing, which that's what Sam did.

And when he did that, everyone's like, yeah, screw you, dude. Like everyone just... Yeah, and I suppose the more tight-knit the crypto side is, the more, the stronger the stick is for anyone to defect, where if you go off and do your own thing, you have the rest of the crypto lobby who you just pissed off. And the more unified, the body of the crypto lobby is,

like the less incentive there is to defect. Yeah. And again, like, is that how it works? Yeah. It's like, again, like, you get credit to like blockchain association, crypto council for innovation. It's like coin center too, D5 education fund. And I can't really like Coinbase too.

Like, you know, Coinbase could be the big dog. You know, at some stages, Coinbase could have been like, hey, we do anything we want. Maybe you say otherwise, screw you. But no, they've been like, A, been there since day one. But B, they've also been like really rallying the cause and also like sticking up for things like D5 that may not directly impact them or benefit them.

but at the same time, like, benefit everyone else and all rise and tides lift all ships here. And yeah, we have bigger faces, you know, forces of face here. And we're winning. I suppose there are questions that I can't ask you, but you can't really answer, which is like who on the crypto side in D.C. really sucks. Like who really grinds your gears?

Who's annoying? But I suppose you can't, you don't want to answer that because why would you? I'd say this, like, you know, I was at Trade Association, you know, a blockchain association in five years. And there was always groups where it's like, you know,

groups can agree with it, but one person said no. And, you know, I'm not going to say any names, but like, you probably would know who they are through crypto Twitter because they're always contrarian to everything. And so, like, I know, and then when word kind of got out, they're always contrarian, they're always different. Then they're kind of view gets little minimalized because everyone knows they're kind of always contrarian. So like it's, and usually it's for the good of the industry, though. So like they always, they do usually have a good point. But I'd say the, the adults have entered the room recently, like this past like two years. And everyone knows like, hey, like, we are all, like, on the target here.

So, like, we got to unite here. That's what the banks are doing. Like, the banks don't all agree on the yield issue, but they're all united because they understand they have to. Because that's how the game works. That's the equilibrium for the strategy. I see. Exactly.

So the Democrats lost, last election. Potentially, it could be argued. Like, I don't really care what the answer is, but like could be argued because of the crypto issue and because of our success in D.C., the Democrats lost. To what degree has that changed the ways of the Democrats? Democrats moving forward? Like, did the, have the Democrats realize that going up against crypto is, like, a losing battle? Or are they kind of just, like, licking their wounds and they'll be back when they have a little bit more momentum? Like, what's the, what do you think the Democrat relationship to crypto will be in the 2028 election, for example?

I mean, the new Democrat, it's most generational in new Democrats side. And Democrats have had this kind of weird issue where, I mean, we're seeing this play of the regime where it's like that old guard just didn't want to retire, didn't have term limits or whatever. So, like, the old guard that is the old way of the world, for. multitude of fronts, including crypto, is usually against crypto. And at least in Democrat circles, you're allowed to be the committee chair as long as you want. Like, the Republicans have a rule at six years. So after six years, if you're top of the chair, you're out, a new person, doesn't matter if you're a minority and majority. Democrats, you can be in those seats for life.

And again, those seats of committee chairs, they decide what bills get votes on, what bills don't get votes. So for us, we know for a fact, that's why we're saying, like, Democrats, if they win, it'll be Elizabeth Warren and Maxine Waters, which kind of stinks because, like, Maxine Waters actually, like, I met with her. and Jesse Jackson. It was weird. That was weird.

It was 2019. It was the day when Erinuson, the token tax on me after the second time. And Maxine Waters invited me and Warren Davidson to talk to her

about the crypto regulatory bill. And for two hours, we talked to her and the civil rights leader for some reason. He was there. Up till midnight about crypto regulation,

and she actually had a really good conversation and, like, really engaged. She got close to SBF, like really learned of the issue, about close to Jeremy Aller and a few other companies. And then when after SBF,

now this whole saga happened, it was very much supplanted, like, okay, now she's like against because she just got, you know, she got scorned. So like that's why we're kind of saying the Democrats take over. We're not too optimistic about clarity chances next year just because it doesn't seem like they have the same weight. But I would say the Democrats on the newer side are understanding that either A, crypto is a force to be reckoned with or be like, hey, like we kind of screwed up here on the crypto side in 2024, underneath Gensler. And I think it's okay to break ranks and say that. Like we can say that aloud.

And that's again, for a lot of policy issues, you can't do that. But like Gallego and Senator Alsabrooks going against Elizabeth Warren, that's crazy. And I remember you doing this live stream one time. It was the Genius Act. Lizzie Warren's posted up in front of the desk where every senator has a castor vote. Yeah, and she just like looks like this. Exactly. So what happened?

You'll watch this. So like one or two senators, like the first ones who'd go make that vote to Chris and Gillibrand and a few others, they get a little flack. But the second that like two or three senators and Democrats tried pass Elizabeth Warren, sign the vote, you know, is about. 15 more come afterwards. And that's kind of what is. It's the ones who are the ones you take guts to take the first step. So we got to give Gallego

and also Brooks like a lot of credit. Like they took a lot of gutsy steps here. And I think it also shows Elizabeth Warren's power just not what used to be. Yeah, that was the question I'm getting to. It's like to what degree

was Elizabeth Warren's investment in the anti-crypto movement a like political mistake on her part? Oh, totally. I mean, like, they're mostly carrying Gary Gensler's water here. Like, Gensler's basically told them all like, hey, I got this.

and obviously did not get this. And then Gensler would do, like, I mean, there should be movie script about this stuff one day because the stuff that's happened in D.C. is nuts even for D.C. standards. Like, my favorite story was when the SEC sued Coinbase, the day of they were testifying in front of House Agriculture Committee. And that was so political.

The timing was so nefarious. And it was such a slap to the face of also the hill, but also Coinbase saying, how dare you go in front of Congress? Oh, also, we're going to hold off on, like, filing this. until the day before he go in front of Congress. And it was so backhanded crap. Like that's the kind of stuff that, A.

Why would they do that other than just to insult them? That's it. That's the whole thing is just like, hey, you guys are going to be busy, so we're going to sue you on your busiest day when you're our home. That or they're trying to send a narrative message of like, oh, you think you can like, you know, this is what the narrative would be like, oh, you can buy Congress or you think you just go to Congress and get around us? Like, I got another message for you.

Boom, subpoena. Like, and that's just, again, that's just one example of the guess. But Gary Inzor, who is not even Congress. He's an unelected bureaucrat. So like, so he's making a statement beyond his scope about doing that. And he was, of course, purposely wrecking the entire, like, narrative and flow of the entire hearing, which is on purpose. Again, that was the very political move. But they also kind of showed where the SEC at that time was at.

They were just doing things for political purposes. And they thought, like, they can dunk on this and be fine with it. And especially after FTX, they're like, well we have free pass now. So the American people were back us up every single time this happens. But like in D.C., even just like the Democrats who are against us, like, and I would talk about it after the fact and be like, too, what the like that? Like that was just a bad move to make. And he kept doing it

like multiple times. And you covered so well on this podcast. But it's like after a couple times, like dude, it's like a vendetta at this point. Like this is just, this is ridiculous. It's getting to this kind of stage. And it's more of like, you know, what's next Gary Gensler Minute video going to be like about schooling us now. So it's like it's also. kind of a reaction from that time in a phase. I mean, you could say the Trump administration and their actions in the crypto space is a complete opposite inverse reaction, but like, that's what happened. Like, they fired the gun, and that's the results we're dealing with right now.

Why was Gary Gensler who he was? What do we know about why he did the things that he did? Yeah, it's tough. Because, man, I met Jay Clayton before the ripple lawsuit and I was working to the hill and, like, you know, folks in mixed opinions about him in the crypto industry, of, you know, I thought you're getting a straight treat with with us, but, you know, that's a different story every other time. But for Gensler, you know, it seemed like it was more of a personal vendetta, but more of also when the crypto industry started attacking him after of all his actions. And again, like, he was taking me, like, this is well recorded. Like, he was taking dinners with FTX. He was doing multiple means with FTX.

He was having sit down to Sam personally. Like, there are multiple instances where even on the lobbying side, you could argue that they were getting a little more special treatment or special FaceTime than other companies would have. And again, of course, spending money in D.C. does that and gives you that access sometimes. But, like, I don't think he got enough flack for the amount of times he was doing things. A little outside of the scopee, I would say with the SEC,

again, doing dinners with FTX, moldal times. It was a red flag for me personally. But regardless, like, he stuck into that one mold and, like, just decided to go against it so hard. And my favorite against her narrative, though, was Prometheus.

And you covered Prometheum so well with Capul. Yeah, that was such a, that was such a crap. issue and then we were texting the member during the hearing and you know like I'm sitting behind Kaplan he's getting these notes on these lawyers during the hearing of what to say and like trying to read off the page and like it's coming every talking point is directly from Gary Gensler and it's directed from Maxine Water's staff and it's just like he just keeps repeating the same three sentences over over again it's like dude like someone who this guy new content here because this guy

really doesn't hold it up here and in the Republicans especially were able to dress it down like look this Prometheum is just coming up as this like they'll abide to the SEC and kiss the ring and say their narrative and try to be the counter industry example. But guess what? Everyone in the industry knows their crap. And they're not doing what it's actually legit. So I thought like when they start laying to those other like kind of proxies and the proxies were not holding water, it's like it's kind of obvious. And I'm glad like again, like folks like you guys like really covered it well because folks in D.C., like Hillstaffers were listed your podcast and were like, yeah, I don't think this guy knows he's talking about.

Oh my God. Okay. So between Prometheum being like, like, like 99% a Gary Gensler front just to like parade here. Here's my point. And this value is my point versus like being a legitimate company. It sounds like it was all just a front. At that phase, I mean, I, there's some. We don't know what we don't know. There's some folks in Democrat.

I mean, I listen to some podcasts. Like Lee Reiner's with Duke University. He's been talking about Prometheum ever since like day one. So I'm not sure he's an advisor or something. But he's usually a Democrat witness for a lot of. hearings. And I listen to his podcast. You mentioned something that Prometheum's doing two weeks ago. So I guess they're still kicking and doing something. Again, so I apologize. I'm a lot out of the loop on what they're doing now. But I haven't heard their name before that. I think they're irrelevant at this

point. Right? They are irrelevant. Yeah. I don't think there's anything. And again, like, they just came off as like, like, they just didn't look good. And that hearing especially, like, even their own Democrats were attacking Prometheum, were like, yeah, like, Richard Torres, God bless him. Which is like, this guy's full of craft. So. And like, and again, and all the senators, or congressmen, they all saw. called in the lawyer passing the notes. So it's like they all saw it. It's,

it was so stupid. Do lawyers don't pass notes during hearings? Is that, that's an anomaly? Only if you're like really screwing up usually. Or you're just like really overpaired. But like, yeah,

he was the Democrat, he was only the minority witness. So he was the only witness holding the, as he's talking points. And he just got dressed down completely. So. Is Elizabeth Warren going to change tune with crypto? Like has she learned her lesson or is she going to try again?

No. She's, she's still, she doesn't pivot. She never does. She never. But I think everyone in DC, most people in DC have realized

like she's always anti-something and not really for something my CPB. So it's like, it's always something being for the common man but every single time interaction and say otherwise. Or if she's like against a company,

it's usually of the benefit, as we're kind of saying, it mentioned with the coas example, he's usually at the benefit of another company, it seems like. So like it's, and it seems like that's improved. Who happens to be her donor?

I don't know those links there, but I'm sure a good reporter could probably make some links there and I'm sure there might be some anomalies. But again, I don't know if anything on that. that front, but it's worth checking out. But she's not going to pivot.

But someone who did pivot, though, is Sherry Brown. He's running for Senate again. We ousted him in 2024. He was Elizabeth Warren's spot, exactly. Yeah, he was the secondhand man to Elizabeth Warren's anti-grypto army. He was like the lieutenant. Yeah, and he was a guy at the time who could decide what bills came, you know, got through. And there was a stable coin bill three years ago on his desk with Senator Toomey from

Pennsylvania. And it was like, if both him signed off on it, we could have had a stable coin bill done three years ago. And he was the force said, no. And so Farshake and others are like, all right, screw it. Like, we're going after this guy. Like, he just killed the stable coin bill. And so that's, you know, and he lost his seat because of crypto and other factors too.

But like, we got breaking right out. He is going for election after gaining kicked out. And now this time he is, sorry, crypto people. I'm pro crypto now. And we'll see what happens. Like, hypothetically, if he does win, which I hope he doesn't, just because, like, I've seen how he pivots like that. I don't trust that.

But if he does, he would be Senate agriculture chairman. Like he's not going to be, so it'll be Elizabeth Warren and him if the Democrats win the Senate in charge of any... And you don't trust post-pivot, Sherard? I don't trust post-pivot during election cycle while potentially trying to court crypto money. I see. I see.

Okay. Okay. All right. Let's talk about Trump. Because Trump has, I'm sure, materially impacted the perception of the crypto industry in politics. Maybe you could just talk about, like, what the DC reaction to Trump's, like, personal business involvement to crypto has been. This is like another scene of the movie that I should write. I mean,

I was at the crypto ball. And again, it was like a bunch of all the, like more DC people than crypto people. But like, it was a nice party, all its stuff. Like halfway through the party, people were like, look at their phones. Like, what's like, do we like, you know, do we go to war or something? And it's everyone talking about the Trump meme coin. And everyone's just like, what the hell is this thing? So I guess, you know, maybe some people knew about that in the room. But overall, like, it was in the middle of the actual ball itself. People have no idea what's going on. And the immediate reaction was like, what the hell? So. And that's because the meme coin was built by like one of his affiliate businesses, not actually him, but the crypto ball was actually

president Donald Trump doing a pro crypto thing. And so those two things were asynchronous to each other, right? Asynchronous at all. Yeah, no one knew, at least like, I mean, I didn't know like anything what's going on. But like that, I'd say most people had no idea what was going on. And all of a sudden, like, we get the news, mid ball. And I think everyone's kind of like crap. And literally I actually stopped like You know, people we actually called early. The boss at the time of CEO, Mrs. Smith's like, if you have a call at 9 a.m. tomorrow morning, we have to talk about this.

So, yeah, like, that was definitely caught a lot of people off guard. We're really financial. Same thing. Because I think a lot of people in D.C., for us, it's like, it's a different crowd of people. Like, it wasn't the people that we dealt with like, you know, Krakken or Coinbase or Binance. You know, it wasn't like the people,

I mean, it's kind of like not the typical U.S. policy or lawyer type you're dealing with or even business types. It was just a whole new, like, a cast of character. So again, like, I know some people with crypto are in those spaces. I'm sure they're going to get a lot of scrutiny. And when Democrats take over the House or Senate, they're definitely going to get a lot of pull in front of hearings and get testifying and stuff.

I mean, it'll be leading to nothing probably, but it's not helpful. I'll put it that way. I'm sure we're kind of seeing that with the ethics provision would be Clarity Act. Yeah, yeah. But in terms of just like the Republicans' ongoing commitment to crypto, like for the 2020-eat election and beyond, do you think it's been impacted? Not as much because I say like most. Republicans to kind of realize like this is the new way like this like this is happening like this is

this is this space is happening this is taken off now you might disagree with some things here and there but like overall this is happening whereas like the older generations like I don't think this should be a thing and so we've kind of gotten past that stage now of survival I guess the question I should ask or I want to ask is to what degree is Trump's conflict of interest staying inside like this is a Trump behavior this is a Trump business conflict of interest it happens to involve crypto let's not indict the crypto industry as a whole, or is it kind of like spilling over and being like, you know, crypto is just full of rifts and scams and I don't like the whole damn thing. Actually, it's not as bad as I thought it would be. I mean, they're going to shape everything in D.C.

Like when Treasury wants like a, or when Gary Gunsler wants like, or, you know, picking regulator, but they want to have like a narrative out there. They go to the Wall Street Journal, financial times. And that's why a lot of times when those publications come out of articles, the crypto industry is like freaking out. Like, what the hell? Who said this? And it's usually like a plant from a regulator or an interest party that wants to try. to give a message of like, hey, this is why we need changes authorities for, you know, D-Fi because North Korea is using crypto and they're hacking crypto, so we need more changes authorities. Oh, and by the way, Treasury tomorrow's can propose new same authority

request. It's like, it's so like gamified. But once you've seen like how it works and the system works, then that's where you kind of, we're kind of, thank God for Twitter, thank God for you guys. Like, you know, think of for kind of newer media, kind of being able to break that mole a little bit. But overall, it's, it's a little tougher to kind of see like how the viewpoint is. I would say, but most Republicans are pro-crypto. It's just more the Trump, worldly financial narrative is causing a lot of problems, but it's more of the hook of Saudi investment getting involved.

Like that story, that dropped a couple months ago. Like, that really kickstarted everything to move forward. That's a national security thing, which I would say is, like, just totally legitimate. Yeah, like that's where you, that's like real national security stuff. Whereas beforehand, it was kind of like, hey, like bad actors, your backers stuff, whatever.

This is kind of like, hey, like, that's probably concerning to both sides of all. But for the Democrats, though, now we're taking a crypto regulatory bill and we're throwing in a bunch of ethic provisions on the executive branch. And that's going to cause a lot of tension right now. In 2024, emerging markets generated over $15 billion in annual yield for investors, with yields ranging between 10 to 40%. These are some of the highest, most persistent yields on Earth. The problem, defy can't access them.

Bricks changes this. Built on Mega-Eath, Bricks takes emerging market money markets and solve them carry and turns them into composable primitives you can access straight from your wallet. While defy investors earn 3 to 6% on stable coins and T-bills, institutions have been harvesting 10 to 50% yields backed by sovereign monetary policy. Bricks connects these worlds with institutional gray tokenization, local banking rails, compliance across jurisdictions, and real-time stable coin settlement. Bricks does the heavy lifting so Defi can finally access real collateral and structured

products on top of real world yield. Even the best carry trades can be within reach. Bricks brings DeFi's promise to the emerging world and brings the emerging market yield to your wallet. Let the yield flow with Bricks. Some exciting news. We are launching a new podcast to help people figure out the crypto cycle, how to navigate it. The best crypto cycle investor I know, his name is Michael Nato. He runs the Defi report.

This is the guy that sent me a sell alert before the 10-10 price drop happened. His cycle analysis has been absolutely on point. I've been following him for years. And this year, we started recording weekly podcast episodes. Each one we get into his portfolio, what he's holding, the market structure, entry targets, fair market value of Bitcoin and Ether, and where we are in the cycle, there's new episodes that are released every Wednesday. They're 30 minutes.

They're short. They're punchy. I think this crypto cycle is harder to navigate than most. So let's do it together. Go subscribe to this podcast. Search the Defi Report. Wherever you get your podcast, YouTube, Apple, Spotify, or find a link in the show notes. There's a new episode waiting for you now.

Are we going to get Clarity Act passed? So I'm at 45%. I know Alex Thorne went on your podcast said 70% I'm at 45 Okay So what's happening right now So we're waiting for We're waiting for the two bills

The agriculture version and a banking version To merge so like there's differences of like Ancillary asset definitions And like all these are kind of small You know two or three words But they mean like the world for the legal world Like you know again like should or would Very different implications

And you got to make sure like those language Is really tight enough So they're working on that right now The goal from Lemos is that She wants to have a vote announced Before July 4th And then have a vote before end of July which would end up in the best case in the area

being like September time frame potentially this gets signed a law. There's a lot of stuff happening in D.C. That's the unfortunate parts. And like, you know, the Iran... Outside of crypto, there's a lot of stuff happening. So the Iran situation is not, you know, helping things out. We don't have full text yet from banking an ag,

but we will soon. And we don't have language yet on ethics. And like, the camps are different so much. But the Trump camp went from like no ethics whatsoever to saying we are open to having dialogue with Democrats to find a path forward. So there is, a softening on those sides here

but it's getting tricky and we really haven't seen proposals yet and candidly again like you have to really sift out with Democrats are here just to try to get like election point wins against you know Trump corruption crypto grift or whatever and which ones are actually trying to get this done and like actually try to get a crypto regulatory framework in place because they also know that if this doesn't happen this year

it could be like 2028, 2030 when this would get done because it likely won't happen with a Democrat or Democrats in control of one of the chambers at least at this stage. It'll probably be another two years at least. Yeah. Yikes.

Yikes. Say clarity gets passed or is just like behind us. What is work for crypto on DC like after that? Like after clarity, what is there to do next? I mean, it's going to be probably a lot of defense, unfortunately, because again, just like look at the reality with Democrats. It's a lot of defense. And again, it's going to be a lot of like lumping in sins of one industry actor take, you

know, probably worldly financial and apply it to the rest of the industry. they were trying to say that if Worldi Financial got an OCC charter, no one else in crypto should get another OCC charter because now we have questions with the OCC charter as a whole. So it's kind of stuff like that where we're going to be playing a lot of defense on. It's going to be the tax bill as well. So tax, actually, I think there's a going to be hearing next week actually in ways and means. So things like like like kind of exchange, mark to market to minimis,

like these are huge half proposals that we've been working on for years. That's kind of now coming to precipice. It'll probably won't get done this year. They're going to try. but it's going to probably be the next tax bill. We're going to see a tax provision there on crypto would be huge. And then lastly, it'll be defy. So the EU right now, no one's like being able to touch defy.

And in the United States for years, it's been like, hey, look, this is a small market. Let's do central exchange regulation first. And then we'll touch defy. But like, we don't know the risk parameters fully yet either. And the EU is now trying to tackle defy regulation. So they're going to probably mess it up. The UK is trying to tackle it too. The UK is after I do UK as well now.

So I do a lot, Congress and Parliament. And Parliament's kind of going through a whole, like, shift recently. It's kind of weird. They've kind of recognized everyone's leaving the UK, a lot of people that leave in the UK, and they're trying to onshore firms. So, like, there's always arguments we hear, you ask, oh, we're going to leave the United States. I mean, but we're a good example. They actually offered United States.

And they came to the United States average Trump won saying like, hey, like, this is the number one market. We're here to play. And the UK side, I'm dealing with them being like, they're trying to pass some owners regulations, very similar to what the Democrats are proposing in Biden regulation era. And they're now saying, like, oh, we realize these are bad now. Things were explaining it. by the way, don't leave the UK, please.

And I think there's been a little turnaround there. So I keep an eye on the UK. And yeah, and keep it on on Defi. Like, that's going to be a huge issue. And that's a answer that no one really has done well yet. So for the next staff are listening here, if they want to, like, that's a new territory to look at from all. It's a wide, wild west right there, Carbath.

What about privacy? Is privacy a subject on Capitol Hill? Yeah. So I'll loop in, like, self-custy and privacy into Defi as well. I mean, like self-custy has been about my old boss war. Davidson, like that's now his new mantra has been self-custry protection, because we've seen that been targeted by both Republicans and Democrats. So I'd say self-custody, watch that for sure, and then privacy, which is happening in a little renaissance. It's kind of the horseshoe one.

So you have like the most progressives and the most conservatives, they really do meet in the middle on privacy of all issues, and they're against the national security hawks, and that's a larger delegation. But as time has gone on in the past 10 years, we've seen the banks now going to go Democrat side for some reason. Republicans are now more on the tech side. And privacy is now starting to become more mainstream versus the national security. you know, hawk angle here, not the majority,

but like it's growing. So it's coming from younger members. So like hopefully the younger generation kind of encourages privacy here because as you and I both know, like it's so different now this digital world and for all of us. So my understanding has always been privacy

is going to be the hardest thing to fight for for crypto. It's the thing that offends the nation's state the most. But maybe that's just not true for Congress. Like it offends like OFAC, treasury, some like deep state stuff where, like, you know, the representatives

don't really have the same incentives as Treasury does or as OFAC does. So is Congress more amenable to individual privacy than maybe the whole of the government as a whole? Yeah, so, I mean, the regulators, like you have more incentive

to get as much data as possible because, hey, it helps you do your job better and you don't care what expense largely. Because in your job, your remit, is to do that one thing. You're trying to fight crime. You want to do whatever you can to fight crime. that means, you know, infringing on civil liberties potentially to go after the bad guy and their job remit.

Like, they got to go to the bad guy here. So, but I think we've seen that been abused by the governments and other entities and third parties so much. The hacks as well. Right. But the American people are kind of done with it. The problem is that. So Congress might align with the American people more than other parts of the government. Yeah.

But it's kind of like, I hate to make this analogy, but it's kind of like the gun issue. It's like whenever there is like a, a instance, there is like a crime or something bad that has. happened. There was an impulse to say, like, what can be done to prevent this? And that's where you have the law enforcement, you know, the group saying, like, well, we have had access to everyone's, you know, search into data. We had no VPNs. And then like, we could have solved this crime or prevented it. I see. And at least at some point, hard decisions were made to be like, hey, encrypted is, encryption's fine. Hey, VPNs are fine, although we're seeing that being now talked about elsewhere in other jurisdictions being banned. So, like, these are really

tough, tough lines to draw here. And you have to decide, like, hey, if you're going to take a line, and something bad happens, like, are you going to own up to it, or are you going to, like, fold? And like, that's where Congress does fall a lot. So, yeah, it's a bad analogy. I hate to make that, but, like, it's, I get it. I get it. It's tough. So, Ron, all the questions that I've asked you are questions that I know to ask you. There are the questions that I don't know to ask you, but I'm sure uncover something really juicy. Is there just a good story that you can tell about just like what it's like to be on DC, the sex drugs, rock and roll side, side of DC policy.

What else is out there? I mean, it's D.C. It's all bad. But, you know, it's like, everyone calls it like the Hollywood for ugly people or like the high school for adults. Like, you know, it's a very small world.

Everyone knows each other. Like, the bank lobbyists are like some of my good friends and some of the crypto lobbyists who were the skeptists did me crap years ago from being Captain Crypto are now crypto lobbyists.

So it's weird to see how this world works. But I'd say, like, you know, the thing about crypto that's always has the cool factor. Like, it's weird. It's like, you know, like finance is not cool issue. Like, foreign affairs is cool. Like, that's what everyone wants to do in D.C.

It's foreign affairs. But, like, crypto kind of broke the mold. And we were seeing a little bit with, like, AI a little bit. And there are, all these other organizations will try do things to make things cool. So, like, they'll, Spotify will bring in Diplo to talk about, like, music rights. And, of course, for Guarned staffers who don't get any, like, benefits whatsoever, make low salary to see a Diplo concert. And then him talking, like, halfway through about, like, privacy rights or a musician rights, like that's sometimes it moves needles in DC.

It's like stuff like that. So it's a weird. Is crypto's edge being cool to the staffers? That's our angle. It kind of is because it's weird. So the guy, so for example, the staffers I worked with in 2016,

one's now like Jill Brand's lead staffer on crypto. The other ones now at the SEC Task Force doing D5 stuff. And then like another one's now like the lead lobbyists are like a large company in DC. Like it's so now like these people are major power players. They know like how this world works. They don't have to learn about like a tech stack or anything like that. And a lot of the congressmen, like, they'd all defer to them.

And they should because it's a tough issue. And like, you're not going to talk to 85-year-old setter about defy. So, like, you know, it's the people who, like, make DC run on this issue because it's so complicated are these people like one layer below? And like, they are bipartisan, sharp as attack. And they've, they don't, you don't hear their names a lot. But like, I wish you guys did. But that's their discretion to say if they want to be known or not. But like, it's a weird, small world.

And we all know each other. So it's a weird fun place to watch. but I love it. But crypto's the same way. Like, crypto's so small and like it's cool to see people like in D.C., Miami, New York. So that's what I'm living for. Yeah, even though crypto is like this industry of protocols and code, it's for some reason just hyper-social. And I think for some reason, whatever reason that's true,

that has served us, that phenomenon has served us very, very well in D.C. It has. And like, it's weird, like even being New York, like Jeremy Allerick goes the same gym as I do. It's weird like seeing him making him like a little nod here. But like in the same way we have as camaraderie too. So like I get stopped all the time

I have my winter meat shirt on but like people just walk around. So I think yeah, so you had our event the other day. But it's like cool to have this camaraderie that I see a lot of industries just don't have. And I think a lot of people see that with the crypto industry like from the outside and being like,

hey like we all my viewers sell the different sects or the XRP army or whatever. But like to the outside people we're just kind of all friends. And like I like that energy and I like that ethos. And I think that's why we've worked so well combined together when tanks get tough like right now.

And the personalities, man. The personalities are wild. I think it's like a reality TV show sometimes, especially with like in like Boer, he's an SBF. It was a perfect example of like that was like a nerdcrum for us in D.C. Because we love to hear that stuff. Amazing. Amazing.

Ron, those are all the questions I have for you. Thanks for coming on and just telling me in the Bankless Nation what it's like on your neck of the woods. It's a weird world, man. I appreciate it's listening. And thanks again for having me. Cheers. Bankless Nation. That's it.

Thanks for being with us as we continue West. This frontier is not for everyone. but it is for us, and we're glad you're with us on the bankless journey. Thanks a lot.