The Wolf Of All Streets - Big Trouble Ahead | What Does Bitcoin's Fall Mean For The Markets?

Starting point is 00:00:00 Is Bitcoin's drop a canary in the coal mine for all markets? Does that mean there's big trouble ahead for global markets because it's a sign of lowering liquidity? Well, that's what Bloomberg has to say in one of their articles. I think I can push back on that, but going to discuss that and much more. We're going to hopefully have met a lawman, James Murphy. I'm waiting for him to show up. Otherwise, I've got a bunch of news to discuss with you guys. Let's go. What is up, everybody? I'm Scott Melker, also known as the Wolf of Wall Street. Let's go. I'm going to go ahead and tell you about our amazing sponsor today to start the show. Of course, it is Lumarin. I've told you guys about them a million times, but I think when we see the attacks on self-custody, what's happening right now with the United States government and governments beyond, decentralization is becoming more and more important and becoming

Starting point is 00:01:21 self-sovereign, becoming more and more important. And Lumarin, and of course, their Morpheus AI that they're building, allow you to do that, effectively allow you to control AI agents in a completely decentralized manner with your own private keys from your wallets. But more importantly on Lumarin, you can, without having to buy miners or even have a deep understanding of how Bitcoin mining works, you can buy Hashrate, participate, completely decentralized from all around the world. And if you have not listened to my podcast from about 11 days ago with Ryan Condren from Lumarin, you should because he explains why this is so important because, spoiler, Bitcoin mining is not decentralized, and Bitcoin is not that decentralized,

Starting point is 00:02:07 and this is how we get there and actually become government-proof. So guys, it's right down there, scrolling by, up in the thing. Please go check out Loomer. Now, we got a lot to talk about today. I'm going to bring James on in a second, but first, I just want to show you the market. Obviously, a decent little bounce up, 1.5% on Bitcoin in 24 hours. But of course, Solana and meme coins, the second people get a whiff of any decent news or the hope that we could be bottoming, they rush right back into memes, which to me means there's more pain to come because it just can't be that easy to win in the casino. To the topic at hand really quickly, just to address it before I jump into a conversation with James, Bitcoin slump

Starting point is 00:02:51 triggers warning of trouble ahead for global markets. The largest digital asset is trading around the two-month low. Bytrees Morris says Bitcoin is a canary in the coal mine. So the implication here is that Bitcoin's drop is a signal that all markets are going to drop. I just think we're in a halving cycle, had extreme froth in the crypto market, and prices are dropping as a result. I think there's nothing new here. Every single time Bitcoin goes up or down, we get new narratives. But the notion that Bitcoin is somehow leading global markets to me is nonsense. So I don't think it means much for markets. Anyways, let's bring on James right now. Good morning, sir. How are you today? I'm fantastic. It's great to be with you, Scott. It's a little early for me. I'm in Las Vegas. It is literally dawn.

Starting point is 00:03:48 But nevertheless, I am excited to be on with you this morning. You're supposed to be awake until this time in Vegas. Well, the younger version of me, that might have been possible. Yeah. So listen, there's a lot I want to unpack with you because it's been a big couple of weeks here. Obviously, we haven't spoken about consensus and the SEC and the battle there. I don't even know if we've talked about Custodia and their ongoing lawsuits for their Fedmaster account. Man, there's a lot. And these attacks on self-custody that seem to be coming from everywhere. So you choose one. Let's start with your favorite.

Starting point is 00:04:30 I'll tell you what, Scott, what is funny is I've only been on social media for two years. And my thought literally was, what am I going to talk about after this ftx thing you know has wrapped up there's nothing a lawyer really can speak to in crypto and boy did i ever get that wrong i mean the action that is going on uh is incredible and you know many many people have been calling for an offensive against the SEC. And by golly, we have one now. There are three cases filed in Texas against the SEC focused on what is, I think, rightly perceived as overreach by the SEC in trying to regulate every single digital asset, no matter what its characteristics may be. And so I think that's a good thing. I think that's a good venue. And of course, so ConsenSys has filed their lawsuit against the SEC seeking a declaration

Starting point is 00:05:41 that Ethereum is not a security. And it's funny, when the Hinman emails came out, I was on with you and I said, boy, can you believe how absurd it is that internally at the SEC, they were saying, hey, Bill Hinman, don't say Ether is not a security because you never know. In the future, we might decide to call it, to say it is a security and pursue enforcement on that changed theory. And here we are, apparently. So it's interesting. It's an unusual move for the lawyers to file a declaratory judgment action in response to receiving a Wells notice. The purpose of the Wells process is to give a defendant a chance to talk the enforcement staff out of their stated intent. And their stated intent is we are going to recommend

Starting point is 00:06:41 to the commissioners that they authorize an enforcement action against you. Here's some of our theory against you. Now you get to submit a memo to us explaining why we're wrong. And that memo will be submitted with our recommendation to the commissioners and maybe you'll convince them, but that is rare that that works once you're at the end of an investigation and the enforcement staff has concluded they've got you. Typically, the commissioners will authorize something. So if you don't want to fight, that's kind of your last clear chance to do a settlement. So Ethereum didn't settle.

Starting point is 00:07:28 They didn't submit a Wells submission. They just sued. And what I love about it is they clearly had that lawsuit teed up, right? Because it was the day they got the Wells notice. So it's like they were waiting. They knew it was coming and they had their response planned and they just filed at the second that Wells notice finally hit. That's exactly right. Very quick, same lawyers who represent Coinbase in that case in New York are representing ConsenSys now so that it's the same

Starting point is 00:07:57 actual lawyers, not just the same law firm. And so they know all about these issues. And you're right, they were ready to go when the wells came in. And it's a very aggressive move. And you know, my expectation is the SEC does not like that venue. So they're going to try to get that case dismissed as early as possible. And we'll see what happens. Is that just a PR move? I mean, can the consensus really make the courts deem that Ethereum is not a security? It seems like they just like effectively they erased the bad press of the Wells notice by filing this and everybody paid attention to the fact that they were suing the SEC, which just seems like a brilliant stroke of genius, regardless of what

Starting point is 00:08:48 the outcome is or how long that'll take. Well, the issue here is whether the claim is ripe at this point. Is the giving of a Wells notice sufficient to trigger the right of a defendant to seek a declaratory judgment that Ether is not a security, as well as the claims related to the MetaMask wallet. And it's unclear, but it's an aggressive move for sure. And I do believe the SEC doesn't like this venue and will try to dismiss on the grounds that it's premature. The claim is not yet ripe. And what that means is we, the SEC, get to decide what venue is going to entertain this dispute? The SEC has no motivation to declare Ether either, right? They just want to keep with the Gary Gensler, pretend you didn't ask the question strategy and just let it remain extremely vague as they have.

Starting point is 00:09:59 I would imagine the statute of limitations on going after the actual ICO of Ethereum or the launch would be in effect, right? I mean, they can't go after them now at this point. It's been over 10 years or so, right? Maybe nine years, eight years? That's right, about 10 years. So we only have bits and pieces from this complaint as to what exactly is at issue. And there's been a lot of dispute on Twitter about what it means, what we've seen. But what it says is that the SEC was investigating sales of a number of securities, including Ether. And it says that Ether is a security.

Starting point is 00:10:53 And a lot of people are pushing back very hard on Twitter, but it says what it says, all we can go by is what's in the complaint. And what they said is we are investigating certain trades in securities, including Ether, which had no effective registration statement and did not have the benefit of an exemption, which means it was essentially illegal to trade if there's no exemption. It's unregistered, no exemption.

Starting point is 00:11:21 So they're looking at trades going back to 2018. I say that based exclusively upon the allegations in that complaint, which were drafted up by the Wachtell Lipton law firm, which is a very, very high end group of smart people there at that firm. Yeah, makes perfect sense. Let's move on to some of the other topics. We have this sort of outright attack on self-custody of late. We had an FBI letter, the IRS releasing their guidance, effectively saying that everyone is a broker, even self-hosted wallets. This seems like the next venue right now for them to come after crypto. What I find ironic is that we had a huge swath of Bitcoiners that celebrated the SEC and said, everything's a shit coin, everything's a security, celebrated the government going after everything. And now this is obviously the worst case scenario for Bitcoiners if any of this happens. And somehow they effectively ban self-custody. And Elizabeth Warren has a bill with 20 senators already supporting it that basically makes self-custody. And Elizabeth Warren has a bill with 20 senators already supporting it that basically makes self-custody legal. Well, you know, policy decisions like this

Starting point is 00:12:33 are supposed to be made by Congress, not by agencies of the executive. And what we're seeing is a lot of actions by executive agencies, not just the SEC, but the Fed, the Treasury, IRS, etc., where they're just making policy that really has tremendous effect on, you know, things we care about like self-custody. And it's not appropriate. And we keep asking for Congress to do something, but it's sort of dysfunctional. You know, it is so evenly divided and there's so much misunderstanding, I guess would be the best way to put it, but outright hostility to anything having to do with crypto. I think you have to reach the conclusion that this Operation Chokepoint 2.0 whole-of-government effort to strangle crypto in the United States is real. And people need to recognize that and they need to call their congressmen and senators and get activated on this because, you know, rights once lost are difficult to recover.

Starting point is 00:13:56 Yeah, that train only goes in one direction. Typically, yes. Yeah, we've seen that over and over again. I mean, speaking of Elizabeth Warren and Senate, Typically, yes. that because of her past statements, this is all about a CBDC. This is all about getting ahead of inevitable central bank digital currency so that the government can control the money and control the future in that way, which is even more nefarious and terrifying, I think, than my own views on this. Because as an eternal optimist, I'd like to believe all these senators just don't even understand what self-custody means or the implications at the IRS of attempting to make a bunch of self-custody wallets do KYC and AML, which is literally impossible. But do you think that there really could be something more sinister behind this?

Starting point is 00:15:00 They don't view it as sinister, by the way. They think a central bank digital currency is a good thing. So sinister for us. Well, I don't view it as sinister by the way they think a central bank digital currency is a good thing so sinister for us well um i don't know there's logic to the idea in that if you are planning on rolling out something that is going to give you really comprehensive surveillance powers over americans and what they do with their money, if that is your intent, then you don't want a viable alternative out there, you know, like crypto blockchains, where people can just opt out and swap, you know, value peer to peer and, and customer to merchant, et cetera, and opt out of your CBDC. If, if total surveillance of, you know, American citizens is your goal, then you can't have an

Starting point is 00:15:56 alternative. And one thing I would say, Scott, is the worm has really turned pretty quickly because in the 1990s, there was a statute called Graham Leach Bliley that was passed with bipartisan support. One of the purposes of that statute was to protect the individual financial privacy of Americans and both parties agreed that that's a good thing. Of course. Freedom. Now, there's a, it appears to be a majority that think it's not a good thing. And in order to get the bad guys who are engaging in money laundering or financing of terrorism, what we really need to do is not focus on the bad guys, you know, and surveil them, but rather let's surveil the whole of

Starting point is 00:16:47 the American populace. And when we get all of that data, we'll be able to sift through and find the bad guys much more effectively. That theory is what is at play now, and it violates the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. And it seems like only a minority now in Congress really care about that protection of our privacy that's right there in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Yeah. And we obviously have, as a part of this attack on self-custody, the Samurai Wallet case. Those guys were a big gratuitous in their inviting of Russian oligarchs to utilize their service. Right. We've seen the tornado, tornado catch mixer, the programmer for tornado cash in Europe. He's, I believe, still in jail. So we know that there's an attack in general on self custody. But also this tends to bring the argument that code is supposed to be free speech, right?

Starting point is 00:17:46 And so do you think this could literally become a First Amendment case that goes to the Supreme Court? A lot of people believe that it could because a lot of this simply is code. These are not companies. These are not individuals looking to profit. It's simply exercising your First Amendment right to free speech to utilize some of these things. So I think the samurai guys have been public that that's one of the arguments that they intend to make. And, you know, the issues, are they somehow taking custody of digital assets that get mixed? I'm not an expert, not an engineer, full disclosure.

Starting point is 00:18:31 Exactly how that works. But it sounds like who's really got custody there is one issue. But you're right. They're going to try that First Amendment argument. It may be that there is a model of what they're trying to do that might work. But I mean, the mentality here is so strong throughout the government that you've got to do, you know, KYC on anybody who accesses your software, which is a new idea, you know, very new. And whether that's going to work, I don't know. But I'll tell you, typically, when people are prosecuted by the government, typically they're convicted. I mean, the numbers are very, very high conviction rate. And that's why so many people plead guilty

Starting point is 00:19:26 before going to trial. It's a sad truth, but when you go into court and the government is against you and has all of the resources of the FBI to investigate every aspect of everything you've ever done, you're really, really up against it. So it's helpful, you know, for the community to step up and submit amicus briefs as some of the players did on Tornado Cash. And I think we might see more of that.

Starting point is 00:20:02 But to your point about the samurai guys going on Twitter and inviting Russian oligarch, you know, this is Scott. This is an example, as is the Doquan thing. You know what? Maybe hire a decent lawyer. And then once you've hired them, follow their advice. And Doquan just didn't do that either. Sam was apparently the worst

Starting point is 00:20:26 client ever for his lawyers. Yeah. So yeah, public service announcement, you don't know better. Hire a lawyer who knows this space and then follow their advice. Which is shut up. Yeah. But speaking of people who hired good lawyers and did follow their advice, CZ's trial proves it pays to cooperate. He obviously paid some large fines, but four months. Right. And not only did the guy get four months, but it seems like quite literally everybody is on his side, which I find really astounding. For all the things he's accused of and apparently is pleading guilty to, you would think that the community sentiment would be that this guy's a criminal, but it's literally like, man, we can't wait to see you back in four months. We've supported you the whole time. You're the good guy. Really an incredible, by the way, I like CZ, but really an incredible just PR slash listening to your lawyers campaign. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant across the board, both the legal strategy and the PR strategy. Just to use a market analogy, the bid

Starting point is 00:21:36 from the government was three years. We probation office in where he was prosecuted came in with a recommendation of five months that didn't really get as much attention. But my guess was, it's going to be close to five months, you know, and it turned out to be four months. And I think the letters, the hundreds of letters that he submitted about what a philanthropist he was, were effective. And the judge said so at the sentencing hearing to depart by a month from the probation office's recommendation. So I think one point here is the effective lawyering came not at the sentencing, but rather what he pleaded guilty to. And people need to understand he did effective anti-money laundering compliance process, policy and procedures kind of procedural claim. That's what he pled guilty to.

Starting point is 00:22:57 And his lawyers pointed out in their briefing, nobody's ever gone to jail for that, ever, you know, for failure to implement policies and procedures, while the indictment, you know, had a lot of information about the really... They had these guys on WhatsApp chats and texts saying that, you know, let's let the Americans, you know, do anything you can effectively to let the Americans stay, you you know let them use the vpn they had it all there right and and more of like evade you know iran evading sanctions and all of that stuff you know the specifics about what was done through that platform was in the indictment but he didn't plead guilty to any of that stuff so the effective lawyering uh by a guy named bill bur at Quinn Emanuel was, here's what we're going to plead guilty to.

Starting point is 00:23:48 People typically don't go to jail for that. I think this was the same thing that they got Arthur Hayes for, and he got home confinement at a really nice home. He played a lot of tennis, he told me, and just had to be home at night. The one wrinkle to this that's a little bit interesting is there is a rule with the Bureau of Prisons. So the judge does not decide where somebody goes to serve their sentence. It's the Bureau of Prisons that does that. And it's a little known fact that if you are not a U.S. citizen under the policy of the Bureau of Prisons,

Starting point is 00:24:27 you're a higher risk category than you might otherwise be. And so, therefore, a foreign national is supposed to be not eligible for minimum security imprisonment. So, he could go to a medium security prison, which is not nice. I've been there. I've visited prisoners. People who think that they're really nice prisons are sadly mistaken. Go visit one and see for yourself. It's really, really unpleasant. So you would think that they'd make an exception for this billionaire, but they may not, you know, as a matter of policy. And he would find himself in a medium security prison, which is not going to be a pleasant experience. Yeah, I totally agree. And, you know, you said the ask was three years.

Starting point is 00:25:20 But if we zoom back a year when Binance started to get in trouble and remember the conjecture of what was coming from the DOJ after the SEC, there were people who thought he was going away forever, right, based on what we saw. So it was even brilliant just to get it down to where three years was the worst case scenario. So, you know, just a really crazy path. Exactly right. And another takeaway here, Scott, is there's a real upside to not stealing money from your customers. You know, from a PR standpoint, if you're going to steal money from your customers, you're going to spend a lot of time in jail. If it's sort of like, well, it's technical and there are no like U.S. victims per se. The government would say we're all victims because there was money laundering, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Well, yeah, true. But you don't

Starting point is 00:26:11 have thousands of people saying, you know, with pitchfork saying the son of a bitch is stealing my money. He needs to go away for good. Yeah. There's one last story before I let you go that I want to ask you about, which is you may have seen Roger Ver, Bitcoin Jesus charged with evading almost $50 million in taxes. This is a tough one for me to unpack. Once again, I see a lot of Bitcoiners celebrating this, celebrating the government cracking down on him because obviously Roger Ver ended up supporting Bitcoin Cash, even though he was one of the most prolific early Bitcoiners. He supported the fork and Bitcoin Cash, then he bought Bitcoin.com to pretend that that was actually about Bitcoin. And it's really a Bitcoin Cash website. But really

Starting point is 00:26:57 interesting when you dig into this, because people might remember or might not, but it was really the Wild West with Bitcoin in the early days. And he renounced his citizenship in 2014. And this stems back to him not telling them how much Bitcoin he had in 2014, when Bitcoin was a non-asset, not on anyone's radar. It's pretty hindsight right now to care about Bitcoin from 2014. Of course, there was potentially some evasion in 2017 when he moved some Bitcoin from companies he held that were in the United States. But this is a guy who is no longer a United States citizen and is now in 2024 getting attacked for Bitcoin he was holding in 2014 that nobody cared about at the time. This is a very strange, nuanced case for me. And I think if you're going to celebrate the United States government going after this guy, then watch your ass. Yeah, no kidding. So we've got a law here in

Starting point is 00:27:51 the United States that says if you want to really exit and renounce your citizenship, you got to hand over 10% of everything you own to the government. It's not really an attack. It's just the government is going to confiscate 10% of what you own. So if you don't sell everything you own, it has to be valued in some way. And so he had a lot of Bitcoin when he renounced his citizenship. And one argument is if he had sold it, it would have dumped the market. And by how much? Nobody knows.

Starting point is 00:28:28 Go back in time and figure that one out in a time machine. It's hard to do, nearly impossible. But it's scary for those people who have renounced their citizenship over the last decade. The government can come after you 10 years later and say you did the math wrong. He hired very reputable lawyers, from what I understand, to advise him on what he had to do and how to do it. But you don't know anymore, Scott, whether to believe everything you see in indictments, you know. But should this guy be going to jail or should like, should he say, I'm sorry, and pay the $40 million in taxes or whatever it was?

Starting point is 00:29:13 But by the way, it wasn't at the time. So it's absurd, right? This was not worth, this was not $70,000, $60,000 Bitcoin when it happened. But why is this a crime rather than a you screwed up your taxes pay them you know yeah you know i i believe there's an intent element there just like tax evasion you know this is evasion of the law uh and you didn't comply with the law and if you intended to fool the government by saying, well, this is what I have, but you've got actual Bitcoin, not in your name, but in a company, and then you transfer the

Starting point is 00:29:52 Bitcoin from the company to yourself later and have not disclosed everything appropriately, then yeah, they can prosecute you. Right. They're saying falsified as tax form, that I get, if it was with intent, right? Yeah. Why would they want tax form that I get if it was with intent. Right. Yeah. Why would they want to do that, Scott? Why would they want to put him in jail? Well, to send a message like all the other messages that are being sent right now. You should be fearful of dealing in cryptocurrency and not checking that box on your tax return and thinking you can get away with, hey, I'm self-custodying these assets. They'll never know. Don't do that. Comply with the law, or they will come for you and make an example of you. And I think that's what we're seeing.

Starting point is 00:30:41 I mean, 10 years later to go after this guy and get spain to arrest him and and all of this stuff um this is they're making a point yeah i got into crypto in late 2016 but i remember 2017 all of my wall street friends and stuff looking at it and the consensus was that this was the wild west nobody even cared about taxes in it i always paid my taxes if the irs is listening i always reported my taxes i also had barely any money in crypto back then but that you know the government didn't know how to handle this and this was 2017 right you don't really need to report it it's like uh you know going to a casino or something and these aren't real assets they They haven't classified them. There's

Starting point is 00:31:25 still no wash sale rules. You know what I mean? It's just really hard in 2024 to punish someone for a consensus view from 2014 or even 2017. Yeah, that's exactly right. And what they're going to need is some sort of evidence in email or somewhere text where he knew what he was doing was not okay and did it anyway. And with that, without that, you're absolutely right. I mean, it was an unknown, confusing, vague situation back then. And you hire lawyers to give their best estimate of what the right course of action is at the time. And you need to follow that once you receive that advice. So if he departed from the advice he got from the lawyers, that too would be a problem.

Starting point is 00:32:19 Yeah. This doesn't sit well with me. It kind of is like the samurai situation because Roger Ver was a very outspoken expat. And there's a guy with heavy libertarian leanings, really believed in Bitcoin for the reasons that people should probably believe in Bitcoin from the very beginning. There's a guy who said after the U.S. government literally renounced its citizenship and continued very vocally on that tack for a long time. So probably drew a hell of a lot of attention to himself. And like you said, makes him the perfect person to scare everyone from doing the same thing in the future. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Anything else we might've missed here? That's a, well, let's talk about John Deaton a little more

Starting point is 00:32:59 because we have the, uh, we have the opportunity. Like I said, he thinks he can win. I think he can win. I know you think he can win. And I know it's not really, really announced yet. But James and I are throwing a party May 30th in Austin, Texas, for anybody who's going to be at Consensus or anybody who just wants to come party in Austin, Texas on May 30th. You don't have to be at Consensus. A fundraiser for John.

Starting point is 00:33:23 We're still working on all the details. I know Anthony Scaramucci is going to support it as well. And we're working on, I think, a pretty heavy guest list of heavy hitters who have all made their donations. But we believe this is a really, really important fight. It sure is. You know, freedom is on the ballot. Financial freedom is, you know, an inextricable part of the big picture of, are you free in this country? And so having the right to spend your money, invest your money in the way that you think is best is essential to a free society. You earn the money. You should get to decide how you spend it. And so innovation should be promoted in this country. It has been for over 200 years. It's what's made us great. This is a great country, still is, but feels like we're starting to lose

Starting point is 00:34:21 some rights that are fundamental. And John, as you know, is such a fighter. I just can't wait to see him. Can you imagine him up in the Senate and he's just not going to take the bullshit? He's going to speak the truth and he's going to fight for people who are contending with the same circumstances that John had growing up, which was extreme poverty and extreme levels of violence in the neighborhood, in the school that he went to. He remembers. He doesn't forget where he came from. And so he's got a real feeling for the people, you know, at the bottom who are asking themselves, where in the hell did the American dream go? John fought his way out and he is exhibit A of what is possible in this country. Became a United States Marine and a lawyer and a successful lawyer, but he doesn't

Starting point is 00:35:22 forget where he came from. And so this is an unusual race where you've got someone on the Republican side that is fighting for the votes and the trust of the people who are on welfare, the people who are being affected the most by this unrestricted illegal immigration, where government services are being taken away from Americans, you know, who use shelters and food banks, et cetera, and these benefits and the help that they really need is being taken away to give, you know, to new arrivals who came here illegally. That's not fair. And so John is going to be a really, really unusual voice in the Senate for the people at the bottom who really need a helping hand to get up and to

Starting point is 00:36:16 experience the American dream. The podcast will come out on Sunday, but like the sly, sneaky smile on his face when you mentioned debating Elizabeth Warren, which he believes will happen at least twice. He said she's never backed down from a debate to her credit. She's done it every single cycle. It will happen probably at least twice, sometimes up to five times, he was hoping. But, you know, the pleasure he gets

Starting point is 00:36:41 from the very idea of getting to stand on stage with her with no filter is worth any amount of money you could possibly pay. Also, exposing, even if you didn't believe he could win, which I do, spending money to further expose her hypocrisy and the insanity of her incumbency and her positions that have changed. I mean, you're talking about literally the person whose entire stump speech, Elizabeth Warren, for years was, I can't believe no banker went to jail after the great financial crisis. I'm anti-banks. These people should be punished. And now we have evidence that literally Jamie Dimon and JP Morgan are writing her bills.

Starting point is 00:37:21 I mean, and then you saw her on the Senate floor with Jamie Dimon giving him questions that she fed and smiling while he says that Bitcoin should be banned. I mean, she's the perfect example of someone who may have actually been well-intentioned and completely just drowned in the swamp. And he could beat her. And he's going to point every one of those things out for all the public to see with the little bit of money that we can all give them. That's right. And, you know, the congressional oversight theater, you know, where she feeds the questions to Gary Gensler ahead of time and suggest the answers before a hearing, you know, and then they go through this, this theater of this is oversight, I'm asking you some tough questions that I prepared you on is just really offensive to the

Starting point is 00:38:13 whole structure of the Constitution of the separation of powers, the responsibility of our people in Congress to hold the executives accountable. It's just a big joke to her. And they're all in it together. And if you're in the club, Jamie Dimon and Gary Gensler and Elizabeth Warren, you're good. Everything's fine. But if you're not in the club, like Crypto, like Caitlin Long, then you're in trouble. You're in for a real honest-to- God fight. And so, yeah, I can't wait until John exposes all of that stuff. Well, everybody should come to Austin. You can hang out with myself, James and John, you know, right. And and and others. So I think it's going to be an incredible event to get in early because I have a feeling we're going to be busting out the doors. James, thank you so much, as always, for your perspective and for waking up early in Vegas. Now you can go back to the craps table.

Starting point is 00:39:08 Either that or back to bed. So yeah, it's always great being on with you. All right, everybody. All right, man. Thank you so much. And everybody follow Metamalaman, of course, on that. One of the best to do it. I can't believe you've only been in social media for two years. You're like a seasoned veteran. All right, man. Thank you again. All right. All right, guys. Well, Dan, the chart man's not here today. You may have seen the thing he's been talking about endlessly is that marijuana would eventually get rescheduled. And I saw him literally like doing bong hits on X talking about marijuana being rescheduled. So I don't know if he's missing because he's actively trading marijuana stocks or just because he's celebrating, but he is not here today. I will

Starting point is 00:39:48 be back tomorrow with the Friday Five, Nathaniel Whittemore, guys, and on X for Spaces in about 30 minutes. Thank you. See you all tomorrow. Oh, Market Mavericks this afternoon with Gareth and Mike as well. See you then.

The Wolf Of All Streets - Big Trouble Ahead | What Does Bitcoin's Fall Mean For The Markets?

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.